Phillip Hughes

[Dare]

He played 4 Test Matches, averaged 70 and some consider him one of the best Opening Batsman of alltime (not me).

well them some know how to overrate a player based on a few good performances.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

come on though, barry richards then went to the counties (back when it was packed with good players) and absolutely flayed attacks. this is way before attacking bowlers like a lunatic was the norm, this is before ODI cricket was even played. he scored 9 100s before lunch. I think managed a 300 in a single day of first class cricket.

it's not over-rating in the normal sense, he was genuinely quite an incredible player and compared well against the best of that era. no, you can never say he's the best of all time because he never had the prolonged chance but I don't write off anyone that says he was up there.

 

[Dare]

well rating him actually makes sense because he has a long 1st class track record and did really good there. Because he played allot of 1st class cricket and actually performed he deserves hi due.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I suppose Michael Hussey should also be considered one of the alltime greats because he did exactly what Barry Richards did for a decade in murdering weak English county bowling but unlike Richards who averaged in the low 50's, Hussey averaged in the 70's & 80's. Even after 20 Tests, Hussey averaged over 80 with the bat, which is greater then Richards' average of over 70 in just 4 Tests.

 

[King Pietersen]

Let me guess, you rate Hussey higher than Graeme Pollock and George Headley as well?

 

[aussie_ben91]

...I was being sarcastic.

But atleast Pollock & Headley played more then a handful of games.

 

[King Pietersen]

Good. Richards was a far better player than Hussey. He may have only played 4 Tests, but it's his First Class record that's amazing. Playing in the 60's, 70's and 80's he played 339 games scoring over 28'000 runs, with 80 Hundreds at an average of 54.74. If it wasn't for the Isolation, Richards would be up there as one of the greatest opening batsmen of all-time. It's the same with Pollock, if he had the chance to play Test cricket throughout the isolation period he'd have scored thousands of runs and considering his FC record, his average wouldn't have dipped too much either.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Are you serious? Could you imagine how high the first-class averages would've been for all of the modern greats like Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Kallis, Dravid, Hayden, Pietersen, etc if they all played in a weak domestic competition for their entire career? They would be all averaging over 60 and some touching almost 70. Tendulkar, Ponting and Lara would probably all have over 200 first-class centuries by now if that was the case.

His first-class average isn't all that amazing for someone who is considered as someone who could've potentially been the greatest Opening Batsman of alltime. Neither is Pollock's.

Should Neil Harvey be considered one of the alltime greatest batsman? Shortly after Sir Donald Bradman retired, Harvey was averaging 106 after 9 matches, could you imagine the pressure and expectations, King Pietersen? After 24 Tests, Harvey was averaging 65. Harvey always averaged over 50 until the latter end of his career. His career spanned 15 years. Yet Harvey is easily overlooked because he didn't finish with a 50+ average but what's to say that the same thing wouldn't of happened to Graeme Pollock or Barry Richards? I mean, as you said, Harvey did average over 50 in first-class cricket (probably would've ended up with a similar, if not better average had he played more domestic cricket) and did play a similar amount of first-class games. So what do you think now?

 

[King Pietersen]

I don't know enough about Harvey to comment but I seriously think you should read some stuff or watch some videos about both Pollock and Richards before you make comments. It appears to me that you base all your arguments on stats and stats alone. Barry Richards is one of the most highly rated batsmen by all that played with him. Graeme Pollock rates Richards alongside Sobers as the 2 greatest players he's seen play, played with or played against. He is described by Mike Proctor as 'the perfect batsman' and was his choice as someone to bat for your life. Greg Chappell rates Richards as the most technically correct and complete batsman he's ever seen.

Christopher Martin Jenkins sums Barry Richards up perfectly. "It's the style more than the achievements with Barry Richards, and his ability to score runs on difficult tracks in difficult circumstances that put him way ahead of everyone around him". Ali Bacher rates him as one of the best players the worlds ever seen.

In 1970 in his only Test series, against Australia, he was 94* at lunch on the first day at Durban, and went on to make 128 in what was described by a few Aussies that played, and by Graeme Pollock as a fantastic innings. After that innings people were saying he was easily the best in the world, which when you're playing in the same side as Graeme Pollock is 1 heck of a compliment. He would have made a comfortable hundred before lunch if it wasn't for the loss of Bacher's wicket, and then abit of time delaying from Bill Lawry.

In the hour after lunch on that first day, Pollock and Richards put on over 100 an hour, not by slogging either, was just skillful strokeplay and brilliant timing. Forget 100 runs in a session, these 2 made over 100 in the first hour of a session. That's how good they were. Richards made 500 runs in that series, in what was his debut series, and apparently was getting better and better, more and more confident as the series went on.

Richards FC record was superb as well. If it wasn't for him playing 4 extra years beyond his prime he'd have finished with a superb record. Here are his figures after his first season, and ignoring those last 4 seasons.

Season	 	Matches    Inns	Not Out	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	Ct
1965	(England)	1	1	0	59	59  	59.00 	0	1	0	 
1965-66	(South Africa)	7	11	1	427	77  	42.70 	0	5	3	 
1966-67	(South Africa)	7	12	1	553	107  	50.27 	1	5	6	 
1967-68	(South Africa)	6	11	1	675	146  	67.50 	4	1	3	 
1968	(England)	33	55	5	2395	206  	47.90 	5	18	37	 
1968-69	(South Africa)	8	15	2	763	112*	58.69 	1	7	5	 
1969	(England)	20	31	6	1440	155  	57.60 	5	5	17	 
1969-70	(South Africa)	10	18	2	1172	169  	73.25 	6	3	9	 
1970	(England)	20	33	2	1667	153  	53.77 	3	12	15	 
1970-71	(Australia)	10	16	2	1538	356  	109.85 	6	3	10	 
1970-71	(South Africa)	1	2	0	207	140  	103.50 	1	1	0	 
1971	(England)	24	45	4	1938	141*	47.26 	2	17	34	 
1971-72	(South Africa)	8	15	1	1089	219  	77.78 	4	4	4	 
1972	(England)	19	33	1	1425	118  	44.53 	4	8	28	 
1972-73	(South Africa)	10	19	1	1247	197  	69.27 	5	5	9	 
1973	(England)	18	30	2	1452	240  	51.85 	5	4	35	 
1973-74	(South Africa)	12	18	2	1285	186*	80.31 	4	8	12	 
1974	(England)	19	27	4	1406	225*	61.13 	4	6	23	 
1974-75	(South Africa)	11	21	2	891	162  	46.89 	4	3	9	 
1975	(England)	19	32	5	1621	135*	60.03 	3	13	22	 
1975-76	(South Africa)	11	21	4	1051	159  	61.82 	3	5	12	 
1976	(England)	18	34	2	1572	179  	49.12 	7	3	32

Phenomenal record, and just superb consistency for an opening batsman, playing in England, South Africa and Australia. Not averaging under 40 once in 11 years, and 22 seasons is superb. In 1970 in Australia, in his prime, playing Sheffield Shield cricket, he averaged over 100, scoring 1536 runs in 10 games, with 6 hundreds. One of those hundreds, he turned into 325, all scored in 1 day, and they were 5 hour days back then, against a Western Australian side that included Lillee, McKenzie and Lock.

Also how on earth can you call the English county system of the 60's-80's weak? The side Richards played for, Hampshire had Barry Richards and Gordon Greenidge opening the batting. You had some of the greats of the game playing at that time. Botham and Richards at Somerset, then there were guys like Bob Willis, Robin Jackman, Sir Garfield Sobers, John Edrich, Garth McKenzie, Rohan Kanhai, Alvin Kallicharan, Derek Underwood, Andy Roberts, John Snow, Tony Grieg, Sarfraz Nawaz, Clive Lloyd, Mike Proctor, Bishan Bedi, the list goes on and on. There was tremendous depth in talent going around the County System around the time Richards was plying his trade.

This is all I've got to say on the subject. Richards may not have achieved a great deal at Test level, but that was not his fault. He was a tremendous batsman, that is held in tremendously high regard by all that have seen him bat. You just need to look beyond the statistics sometimes, and do some research, as it may open your eyes to the few greats of the game that don't have 30 Test hundreds to their names. The names that spring to mind, Richards, Pollock and Headley.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

I don't know enough about Harvey to comment but I seriously think you should read some stuff or watch some videos about both Pollock and Richards before you make comments. It appears to me that you base all your arguments on stats and stats alone.

yeah, I get tired of this "average this, average that."

what about actually watching a player.

YouTube - Barry Richards 129 Hampshire Vs Lancashire 1972

look at the hand speed, power and ease. like I said before, this was before ODI cricket, players didn't attack the ball like this then. this was the era of slowly build, single, single and he's belting sixes when he's in the 20s and taking the first ball of the day for four. he also played the world series stuff against lillee, holding, roberts, garner and still played with elegance and power. of course his numbers don't tell the tale of how good he was but that doesn't mean you can write him off.

compare all this to hussey who mugs about in the v and had about 20 tests before he was horribley exposed. (here's some stats for you by the way, only averages above 50 against 3 teams, one of them is bangladesh, england is another, and sri lanka is the other, which is only down to the absolute roads australia prepared to counter murali in that series)

 

[aussie_ben91]

Was that youtube clip suppose to be impresssive? The pace bowlers look like they are bowling 120kph tops (the wicketkeeper even stands up to the stumps) and spinners were bowling absolute pies. Wicket looks pretty flat aswell. With the shortness of the runups, no wonder why they used to get 120 overs in, in a days play. That clip looks like a typical 3rd grade game that you'd find throughout local Sydney.

Go watch Dean Jones bat. You'll probably like him, Dan. His got a bit've Pietersen about him. His statistics don't do him justice.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

so, you are prepared to argue Barry Richards is rubbish? also it likely was not flat as it's england, it was probably seeming and the balls don't look nearly that slow, it's just not shot from above which makes it look that way.

why do you keep ignoring the fact I'm also saying he was a pioneer, an opener batting a 100 runs before lunch? 9 times. Before the pinch hitter, before ODI cricket. I think you've backed yourself into a corner and you're reluctant to change your mind.

Richards was talented beyond belief, sorry, far more so than Hussey.

Also, would you rate pollock?

pollock score 64 centuries and 99 half-tons 54.67
Richards scored and 80 centuries and 152 half centuries at 54.74, and richards is widely have assumed to have played beyond his best years in the same counties

 

[aussie_ben91]

You can tell it's slow because the wicketkeepers are up the stumps and the ball delievered takes forever to get to Richards for him to play his strokes. I'm not saying his rubbish, played some nice shots but the quality of the bowling he was facing was garbage.

9 hundreds before lunch? Look how short the runups are! They were probably bowling 35-40 overs a session.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

well, it would also be before over-rates were enforced so I doubt it.

 

[King Pietersen]

First session only used to be an hour and a half as well, it's only recently that 2 hour first sessions have come in.