« Shane Bond: A purist's delight | The case against Howard »
June 20, 2010Posted on 06/20/2010 in Cricket through the decades
To each its own
From Alan and Philip Sutherland, Australia
A Test average of 39.04 for Victor Trumper - not great by today's standards but during his time, he was arguably the best batsman around
© Getty Images
It is easy for those of a romantic disposition to fall for an imagined idea of a yesteryear, to dream of the great Ranji and Victor Trumper, or of SF Barnes and Tibby Cotter, and think it a Golden Age. Equally, for those of a more hard-nosed nature, it is easy to believe that with modern professionalism we are amid an even more lustrous age than has ever been seen before.
The ever-present media, in all its 21st century diversity, can easily mistake cricketers for deities and thus lead us to the conclusion that those who’ve played the game previously were never as good as those are who play it now. Yet, is this really the case? Cricket history has a habit of repeating itself, whether it is by independent tours, player strikes, financial problems or political troubles. And so too, as early as about a century ago, one saw a precursor of the media coverage we have today. In 1915, during the dark days of World War 1, Australian newspapers made ample space to headline the death of the aforementioned Trumper. Thousands turned out for his funeral, which for the time was remarkable.
It is easy to overlook the role that cricket played in an early Australia. The colonial outposts were collectively challenging England long before the Commonwealth of Australia existed. By the time of national federation in 1901, Trumper was beginning to make his mark and by 1903 he was arguably the best batsman in the game. He certainly was so on a wet “sticky dog” wicket that could have doubled for a mud-wrestler’s paradise.
Any age however, like any team, is not the sum of one player. Over a twenty-year period, entire careers can grow, flower and fade. Modern cricket crams so much into one year’s calendar, it is hard to imagine today the lengths that cricketers of previous generations went to in order to join a single tour. Who today practices on a slow boat to the UK? Cricketers of a century ago never played with a modern bat, helmet and space-age pads, to roped-in boundaries on a flat, rolled wicket. If Trumper did, he may well think the fun of it all had been taken from him. As it was, he saw himself as an entertainer, which along with the state of the pitches helps explain an average of only 39.04, which today would make him fairly ordinary indeed.
Well may we say that there are lies, damn lies and statistics that are considered out of context. The only problem is that context is a hard thing to pin down. Cricket changes (rather more slowly than we often imagine, but changes nonetheless) and we forget or simply arrive in this world too late to see much that has gone before. Lovers of the game who did see a particular era might easily be expected to wax lyrical about its virtues and with some cause. For if one looks closely at the best of any era, one is struck by how good it is and that helps explain the continuing attraction of the international game for over 120 years.
Taking a representative snapshot of the best players from periods of twenty-years length, (with the exception of the first and the last, which must be longer and shorter respectively), one can see a consistency in quality of players, to a point that it is hard to argue that one is much better than another.
The following lists are in batting order with a 12th man. The 84 players include at least one representative from each Test-playing nation and one from outside the Test world - the legendary Philadelphian swing-bowling all-rounder Bart King.
1877-1899: C.Bannerman (Aus), T.Hayward (Eng), K.Ranjitsinhji (Eng/Ind), W.Murdoch (Aus&Eng), FS.Jackson (Eng), WG.Grace {capt}(Eng), H.Trumble (Aus), J.Blackham (wk)(Aus), C.Turner (Aus), G.Lohmann (Eng), F.Spofforth (Aus); JB.King (USA).
1900-1919: J.Hobbs (Eng), H.Taylor (SAf), V.Trumper (Aus), E.Tyldesley (Eng), S.Gregory (capt) (Aus), A.Faulkner (SAf), C.Macartney (Aus), W.Rhodes (Eng), T.Ward {wk}(SAf), SF.Barnes (Eng), A.Cotter (Aus);C.Fry (Eng).
1920-1939: H.Sutcliffe (Eng), B.Mitchell (SAf), D.Bradman (Aus), G.Headley (WI), W.Hammond (Eng) W.Armstrong {capt}(Aus), J.Gregory (Aus), W.Oldfield {wk}(Aus), H.Larwood (Eng), W.OReilly (Aus), C.Grimmett (Aus);L.Constantine (WI).
1940-1959: A.Morris (Aus), L.Hutton (Eng), V.Hazare (Ind), A.Melville (SAf), F.Worrell {capt}(WI), C.Walcott {wk}(WI), K.Miller (Aus), R.Benaud (Aus), R.Lindwall (Aus), H.Tayfield (SAf), F.Trueman (Eng); M.Donnelly (NZ).
1960-1979: S.Gavaskar (Ind), B.Richards (SAf), G.Chappell (Aus), G.Pollock (SAf), K.Barrington (Eng), G.Sobers (WI), Mushtaq Mohammad (capt)(Pak), A.Knott (wk) (Eng), R.Hadlee (NZ), D.Lillee (Aus), B.Bedi (Ind);B.D’ Oliviera (Eng/SAf).
1980-1999: G.Greenidge (WI), M.Crowe (NZ), V.Richards (WI), S.Waugh (Aus), A.Border (Aus), Imran Khan {capt}(Pak), Kapil Dev (Ind), I.Healy (wk) (Aus), Wasim Akram (Pak), S.Warne (Aus), M.Marshall (WI);I.Botham (Eng).
2000- Tamim Iqbal (Bang), A.Flower (Zim), S.Tendulkar (Ind), B.Lara (WI), K.Sangakarra (SL), J.Kallis (SAf), A.Gilchrist (wk) (Aus), A.Kumble (capt)(Ind), D.Steyn (SAf), G.McGrath (Aus), M.Muralitharan (SL); R.Ponting (Aus).
Certainly, there are differences in the above lists. Early batsmen were usually right-handed. Today’s era is littered with left-handers. Kumar Ranjitsinhji is the lone early sub-continental player and he had to represent England, encountering not a few objections to his right to do so in those less-enlightened times. Twelve others from the sub-continent appear later, including three who were more than sufficiently regarded as captains.
It’s possible, of course, that the current 20-year period will conclude with others having come to the fore. Tamim Iqbal’s inclusion is based on expectation, given his age and probability of continued improvement. However, as much as the current list may yet improve, it’s difficult to see how it deserves to be regarded as the very best of all.
Eras are unique and each can have its own attraction. If one prefers fast-bowling, the eras of Lillee, Hadlee, Marshall, Imran and Wasim would hold particular attraction. Yet, equally, wouldn’t one want to see, if one could, the great SF Barnes’ guile at one end and Tibby Cotter’s slingshots at the other?
Posted by: ted at June 20, 2010 9:54 AM
just finished a book on early aussie cricket 1880 1915.trumper used no rubber on his bat handle or gloves if he can help it as he would lose his touch.he also scored 300 runs in 180 minutes in a club match for paddington.dont forget he scored 13 centuries ina tour of england.i understand times are different but great players would be great in any era end of story
Posted by: Ron at June 20, 2010 11:43 AM
Before taking out Tendulkar out of the '90s , you may want to check how he did. Tendulkar was THE player of the '90s. Can't leave him out.
Posted by: Avi Singh at June 20, 2010 11:47 PM
Tamim Iqbal ahead of Rahul Dravid?? WHAT A JOKE
Posted by: N.R.NANDURI at June 21, 2010 12:34 AM
We can't and shouldn't compare players of different eras.It's a futile exercise. For instance, how can one compare Don bradman who played in 30s and 40s with Viv richards or Gavaskar who played in 70s and 80s or Sachin tendulkar or Brian lara who played in 90s and 00s ? Or can we say Jaques kallis is a better all-rounder than Gary sobers ? People start looking at the statistics and judge players, which is absurd. If statistics is the only yard-stick to judge a player's greatness, then Don bradman would never be in the top list. We'll have to search for his name in the list of great players which would be ridiculous. How can one compare the AURA of Viv richards with Gavaskar's ability to grind the bowling attacks or Tendulkar's perfect balance and technique with Brian Lara's magical ability to achieve the impossible. All great players have one thing in common. The ability to excel in all conditions against all kinds of attacks.A GREAT PLAYER WOULD BE A GREAT PLAYER IN ANY ERA. PERIOD
Posted by: Mark at June 21, 2010 3:55 AM
Nice One! Though ,of course you have missed a no. of Champion players. (A.Shrewsbury,J.Briggs & C.Hill,A.Maclaren,T.Richardson & L.Ames,D.Nourse & E.Weekes&R.Harvey &&??). To give proper dues to these & others, I'd have broken up the era's this way.
1877-1895,
1896-1914,
1920-1939,
1946-1959,
1960-1969,
1970-1979,
1980-1989,
1990-1999,
2000-2009,
Of course a few great players would d'ble up. It's nice to recognise ALL these & a few more, which I think & hope eventually the ICC HoF will recognise!
Posted by: redneck at June 21, 2010 5:18 AM
an interesting read and very unbiased! however i think anyone taking andy flower or tamim iqbal over ricky ponting in their playing XI are a few cents short of a dollar (regardless of future predictions he isnt going to surpass ponting as a test player! infact if you were looking for a token bangleshi i would take shakib over anyone else) also courtney walshes overall record - he had the most test wickets of any bowler before warne, mcgrath, murali and kumble popped up in the mid 90's and more longlivity as a bowler than his other fearsome west indian collegues!
Posted by: Shavi at June 21, 2010 7:10 AM
No pakistanis 1940-1959? How can the exclusion of greats such as Fazal Mahmood and Hanif Mohammad be justified?
Posted by: CricketPissek at June 22, 2010 1:15 PM
it's hilariously ironic how people criticize the author on his selections when the title is "To each its own"
Posted by: Graham Thomas at June 27, 2010 12:32 AM
A well put together observation fellah's . Aptly titled , and respondents should take note . For those who have a deep and abiding interest in Cricket it gives them a chance to look at your team compositions , and should they so desire , the opportunity to choose teams of their own choice .The World teams are so rich , both historically and present , with talent that many different compositions will be made . It is an interesting project for which I thank you .
Posted by: Rayhan at October 17, 2010 3:52 AM
I think it is a bit premature to put Tamim up there. Maybe this decade but certainly not the last. But Andy Flower was awesome. For a player in a team like Zimbabwe to average over 51 is quite spectacular.
The Inbox will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing.
- The Brown Headley
- Andre Adams' international career
- Matt Coles - future England star?
- Give MS Dhoni his due
- The County Championship - why we should be excited
- An unassuming man called Rahul Dravid - Part 2
- The man behind The Wall
- What the BPL failed to do for Bangladesh cricket
- Memories of a great Test
- The myth of ‘bowling in the right areas’