Which is more overrated? ( Sydney Barnes vs Jack Hobbs )

[shortpitched713]

The one was a medium pace new ball bowler who contemporaries even compared more to spinners than seamers, but is considered for all time teams as a bowler.

The other feasted on anonymous new ball nobodies, while taking a claim as the supposed greatest opener of all time.

Obviously this thread is a bit tongue in cheek, because they were both great players... for their time. Just, which do you think gets more over hyped by modern readers/fans/historians, etc?

 

[Burgey]

Barnes, easily. Hobbs transcended eras, which alone proves his ATG status

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hobbs was averaging close to 60 in the pre war period where averaging 35 was a feat. No way can he be called overrated.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Syd Barnes.He ain’t overrated but has more asterisk in his ATG career than Hobbs.
Hobbs is the greatest ever.

 

[shortpitched713]

Seeing these days, so many "fast" leg spinners that is de rigueur in shorter formats, and having seen the one video of Barnes bowling, I just picture him as a spinner if you transported him to the modern day. Don't think he would miss a beat bowling in that sort of style, as a spinner for any team, in any format.

 

[Flem274*]

Did Afridi once clock a leggie at 130kph? Probs a radar glitch but it's probably a decent imitation of Barnes if true.

 

[ataraxia]

Shahid had a 134kph yorker iirc (not a leggie, I expect!), but was probs 124.

 

[shortpitched713]

Did Afridi once clock a leggie at 130kph? Probs a radar glitch but it's probably a decent imitation of Barnes if true.

As ataraxia implies, Afridi didn't do this on a leggy. Why are we assuming Barnes, Afridi, or anyone was going to be able to do something basically supernatural?

Spearing in leggies and quicker ones, is a very effective approach. As is bowling medium pace cutters with a short run, on a pitch that is giving significant grip and assistance, like the ones of old often did. We don't have to assume that anything supernatural is going on, to respect that value, even if it's doesn't make for as ***y of a story as a man being a "medium pace spinner".

 

[shortpitched713]

If you're going to do that style, it's much more natural to do it with the off-cut style delivery anyway instead of the leg cut, because your arm and follow through of action lends itself to it much more. Something like what Mustafizur does, but Barnes ( or indeed many of the more old school medium bowlers ) didn't look like they were trying to get anywhere near as quick.

 

[Flem274*]

Anyway I think you're underrating the effectiveness of whatever Barnes did on old timey decks. Think club or school cricket on grass if you played, or lunchtime hit arounds, and the cheap exploits we'd find on what we used as 'pitches'. Very good batsmen struggle against total bull****.

In real terms I don't think Hobbs ever faced athletes on a modern level. He faced hard mfers sure because world wars, but not the guys primed today with decades of generational learning to bowl fast. However it doesn't matter because it would be like judging Steve Smith based on whatever test cricket is doing in 2096. Hobbs was way better than everyone around him, which is what matters.

 

[shortpitched713]

Anyway I think you're underrating the effectiveness of whatever Barnes did on old timey decks. Think club or school cricket on grass if you played, or lunchtime hit arounds, and the cheap exploits we'd find on what we used as 'pitches'. Very good batsmen struggle against total bull****.

In real terms I don't think Hobbs ever faced athletes on a modern level. He faced hard mfers sure because world wars, but not the guys primed today with decades of generational learning to bowl fast. However it doesn't matter because it would be like judging Steve Smith based on whatever test cricket is doing in 2096. Hobbs was way better than everyone around him, which is what matters.

Agreed. I'd just slot him in the middle order of any team I have now, instead of as opener, imo. I think the skillset would translate better, given what I've read.

 

[mr_mister]

Barnes but only because Hobbs doesn't even have a Asterix

And I still Barnes was an absolute ATG too

 

[ataraxia]

the real question is if Hobbs needs to Getafix

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Barnes but only because Hobbs doesn't even have a Asterix

And I still Barnes was an absolute ATG too

* asterisk

 

[NotMcKenzie]

The one was a medium pace new ball bowler who contemporaries even compared more to spinners than seamers, but is considered for all time teams as a bowler.

Being a 'seamer' was still rather a new thing then. Before multiple new balls an innings, a fairly recent thing I believe at that time, the only method of moving the ball was spin whether you were slow or fast.

 

[shortpitched713]

I think Lohmann, and probably some others had used the seam before. But yeah, I do get your point.