<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Time to compare

September 8 2016 at 10:02 AM
Just Grazing  (Login Justgrazing)

 
This current Yorkshire team has earned the right to be compared with the team of the early 60's and if we go on to win this year then that comparison will be increasingly favourable.

Truly, these are two superb teams though the environment in which they ply their trade is very different as in the 60's the counties were in much greater control of such as fixture planning and player access. On field the batsmen had to be technically more proficient but now the bowlers seem to be constantly faced with flat decks. Now we have to contend with an ECB that seems to be the greatest threat to cricket in this country and players called for England duties which vary between playing the occasional game and making sandwiches and drinks but nevertheless missing huge swathes of county matches.

We had some truly great players in the team but would they have withstood the training regimes that have raised fielding standards to such a height? Are we looking through rose tints when we remember Tony Nick, Bob Appleyard and FST terrorising batsmen up and down the country?

Apart from the fielding there seem to be three major differences between the teams in that we always had a balanced attack with 3 seamers and two spinners to provide the variety and cutting edge for all eventualities, Jimmy Binks was a superb craftsman behind the stumps and picked because he could keep wicket and probably most importantly, the 60's team always seemed to find a way to out-think their opposition and take wickets when causes seemed lost.

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:25 AM 

I really do not think you can compare the two teams. You can perhaps compare their achievements, but the game is so different today that comparison is not really possible.

So much more importance put on fielding, and bowlers batting.

FST was truly one of the greats, but was a real rabbit at batting. Who could you compare him with from today's team. Bressie?, FST may have got more wickets but Bressie is infinitely better at batting.

I think in those days we very strictly had 5 batsmen, 5 bowlers and a keeper, maybe one of the bowlers could bat a bit, but that was it.

Today we have 3 batsmen and 8 allrounders of varying degrees.

Also the rules were different then with uncovered pitches, different no ball rules and different lbw rules.

How would Freddie have faired in todays team we will never know.

I do think though, that todays team is a proper team and not 2 or 3 stars with 8 or 9 support players. I am pleased to say that each and everyone of our current team have at one time or another been match winners.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:36 AM 

I was too young to see or read at the time of the sixties teams exploits, derring-do and title successes but I have heard second hand from my parents and read lots about the era.

First I don't think Appleyard was part of that great 60s team as illness had forced his retirement. Second Binks would not just be the best stumper England had at the time but the best we have ever had at Yorkshire. But his batting ability would probably have seen him overlooked in the modern era. A huge mistake in my view.

Third I think Peter is fortunate FST is no longer with us as he was very serious and proud about his batting and scored a first class ton which in that team and that era should not be undervalued.

The sixties were different in terms of the match conditions, playing regs, overseas player absences, no central contracts lack of t20 and uncovered pitches. I may be a party pooper but I still think the 60s success would edge the modern treble and a lot was down to one man.

Whilst I admire and respect Gale as our current skipper I feel our current approach is to first avoid defeat and then work out how to win. DB Close had the opposite view where he would risk defeat to seek a win. With Closey in charge now I think we would be a better team without doubt. But Gale is still our best leader and much better than most other county captains

 
 
Old Feller
(Login Old_Feller2)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:38 AM 

FST would have been able to make it in this or any other era.
He was not a rabbit with the bat, not as good as Bresnan maybe but markedly better than Patterson, Brooks or Sidebottom.
With his ability to hit 6s - a relative rarity in those days - & given his outstanding fielding ability in any position, T20 would have been made for him.
But it is futile to compare different times, remember those who've gone before & relish those who are playing now.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 11:04 AM 

Rose coloured specs come to mind

patto's batting average 16.4 freddie's 15.56 brooks 16.95

15 i guess is better than rabbit standards though, so i take it back calling him a rabbit.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 11:09 AM 

I refer the honourable gentleman to my comment about different conditions, attitudes, regulations to provide evidence of why FST batting average was around 16.

 
 
Old Feller
(Login Old_Feller2)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 1:15 PM 

I guess Blackpooltyke never saw FST play.
I did & I've seen Patterson, I know who the better batsman is.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 7:23 PM 

Great, I love this sort of thread, we don't normally get round to them until the winter.

A couple of points to kick off: we talk about the sixties team as if it had one identity, but of course as we are looking at 1959-68 things changed. In that period we had the best opening bat, and the best opening bowler in the country (world?), but I'm not sure we had them at the same time.

Secondly, all rounders. There were certainly all-rounders in the sixties side. Illingworth was outstanding - ahead of any all rounder in the current side. Closey was not the bowler he had been in the fifties, but still took wickets, if only by sheer kidology. And Ken Taylor had some pretty valuable performances with the ball.

My side? Automatic choices: Boycott, Close, Illingworth, Trueman, Root, Bairstow, Sidebottom. We need another opener and I'd go for Lyth, ahead of others on his catching. I'd love to get the even better Phil Sharpe in too, just imagine those two in the slips with Closey at short leg. Sharpey doesn't quite make it however. Third seamer? The best is Tony Nick, though he does nothing for the strength of the tail or the fielding.

Then two difficult questions. I'd go for a second spinner rather than another seamer, and I'd pick Rash ahead of Don Wilson, particularly given the tail. His fellow spinner would have a few things to say about Adil's more profligate overs however. And I'd want Binks but obviously modernists could have another batter (Gary Ballance) or another seamer/ all-rounder (Tim Bresnan ahead of Richard Hutton)

Had to leave out some favourites from each side like John Hampshire and Patto, but would pay my sub to watch that side. And do today's lads deserve to be spoken of in the same breath, yes, without a doubt.


    
This message has been edited by Idle_man on Sep 8, 2016 9:34 PM


 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 7:34 PM 

Nice one Idleman.

Hard to disagree with your analysis although I would perhaps have Brooks in the mix ahead of Tony Nick. We could class him as our overseas player too.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 8:01 PM 

Are we talking if the players of the 60s played today or as they were then? If the latter then the current side would win with ease. 50 years a long time. Sport improves.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 8:10 PM 

1. Boycott
2. Lyth
3. Root
4. Close (c)
5. Bairstow
6. Illingworth
7. Rashid
8. Bresnan
9. Trueman
10.Binks (wk)
11.Sidebottom

Which just shades it 6-5 in favour of the moderns. And what a team! (I didn't see much of Tony Nicholson, by the way, so Bresnan was an obvious choice for me.)

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 8:23 PM 

That's three teams with ten in common and only the third seamer role up for debate.

Of course we could always omit Binks and give the gloves to Bairstow to give us room for another bowler.....

Would Illy bat above Bresnan and Rashid??

 
 
Guest
(Login jakesgrandad)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 8:37 PM 

I was brought up on the 60's team and watched them whenever I could. mostly at Park Avenue. I suspect that as most of my age group I am biased towards the past.

I am not getting into the respective merits of individual player but cannot let the comments of FST's lack of batting prowess go unchallenged.

Whenever Fred came to the wicket there was a real buzz in the crowd. He was a brilliant entertainer and played to his adoring audience. When Fred hit the ball it stayed hit and I once saw him hit the ball into the football ground, a huge hit (the only other player I saw do it was Chris Old).

He was not just a hitter but could play a bit too. You do not score first class hundreds unless you can play a bit (did he not score 2 hundreds?) The game then was 3 days not 4 and there was less time at the crease and most sides did not want nine ten jack hanging around and taking precious time, the requirement was quick runs or get out and that was exactly what Fred did but when he was called on to play a 'proper' innings he could do so.

A Fred story concerned his rivalry with Johnny Wardle in the batting stakes. Each of course thought he was the better batsman and felt he should be higher in the order than the other. In a game against Northampton Johnny was ahead of Fred and riled Fred about it. Frank Tyson was playing for Northants and bowling very quickly when Johnny got to the crease. He clearly did not fancy it and he proceeded to play Tyson by backing away to leg and leaving his bat in front of the stumps. He managed to edge one for 4 and shortly after was clean bowled by the Typhoon.

Fred was next in and passed some remark about the batting order as he passed Johnny walking off, only to have his stumps flattened by Tyson's first ball.

Johnny was waiting at the pavilion door, a huge grin on his face reminded Fred that he had scored 4 and asked Fred how many he had got.

Fred's reply was succinct and straight to the point.......'Couldn't stand up 'cos I slipped on that pile of sh*t tha left at t'crease'

True or not, it's a good Fred story


 
 
WS55
(Login WibseySimon55)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:49 PM 

First up it must be said that in terms of the pleasure they give in watching them they CAN be compared -- no matter how much the game has changed.

For me it's a dead heat on that count. In fact I enjoy this team now more than the team of the 60s -- but only because I can spend more time watching them (not tied to school holidays) and because, as a grown up, I can afford little pleasures like beer at the ground, and hot meals in the Long Room when its freezing cold. So that's not much about the character/quality of the teams then.

I did see a lot of Nicholson, and for a balanced pace attack -- movement and control -- I'd want him in. Him or Patto (I'm that much of a hard-core NLOP man) -- probably Nicholson for a 3-day game on an uncovered pitch, probably Patto if we were playing today's game.

Lyth or Sharpe as second opener is another tough one. Lyth shades it perhaps as a quality batsman (perhaps ... and Sharpe was more reliable), and Sharpe was the better slip catcher (by a margin, even though Lyth is top flight).

The one man from the past I'd really like to have in is our current 75-year old President. As a lad I could even be pleased to see Boycott out if Jack Hampshire was coming in next.

I'd like a fourth seamer; Illy and Rash give strength in spin, with Root an option too, so you don't need Close's bowling (either his medium pace or his off spin). His batting wouldn't get him in to that top five, and Illy/Bres/Rashid are three genuine all-rounders, don't need a fourth. I know its heresy not to have Close as captain when on offer. But I think Illingworth did the job superbly after Close. So I'd have Illy as captain, Bairstow keeper (have to admit Binks was better), making room for Hampshire and my Patto/Nicholson pair.

Boycott
Sharpe
Root
Hampshire
J Bairstow (wk)
Illingworth (c)
Bresnan
Rashid
Trueman
Nicholson/Patterson
Sidebottom

For a three-day game, 6 ancient, 5 modern; for a four-day, 5 ancient, 6 modern. Seems right.
The moderns have a majority in the bowling/all-rounder end (and they have to perform in the batsman-biassed world of today); the ancients provide the majority of the top order (they had to perform in the bowler-friendly 60s). So that seems right too.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:55 PM 

Illy frequently batted at 3 for Yorkshire, but Rash and Brezzy are superb also, of course, and I've put the dashing Adil between the more solid other two. Incidentally, I see Illy performing much the same role as Patto with the ball, able to dry up runs for long periods.

Leave out Binks and give Bairstow the gloves? Never, never, never. You might as well leave out Trueman and give Lyth the new ball!

 
 
WS55
(Login WibseySimon55)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 10:59 PM 

Yes, ThirdUmpire, Illy would bat ahead of Bresnan and Rashid. And Binks surely above Trueman, Dave.
(Thanks for the Trueman/Wardle story, Jakesgrandad. It's a new one on me, and as you say, even if it isn't true, it ought to be happy.gif )

 
 
Guest
(Login Tyke1950)

Re: Time to compare

September 8 2016, 11:37 PM 

I'm glad WS55 spoke so well of John Hampshire.
He was the most pleasing of batsmen to watch; not always reliable, particularly early in his career but, when set, extremely powerful. His straight drive was as scintillating as anything seen in the game today.
I remember a game at Bradford in the late sixties when Sobers scored a magnificent 80 odd only to be upstaged by an innings from John Hampshire that was even more eye-catching. At his best, he was the most entertaining batsman in English cricket.
He was also a very good fielder and useful leg spin bowler, taking five wickets in an innings in a couple of occasions.

Like WS55 I'm a big Patto fan but, on balance, I think Nicholson was the more accomplished bowler. He had just a little more nip and on helpful surfaces was more likely to take substantial numbers of wickets. Patto has the edge as a batsman - not difficult. Nicholson was a dreadful fielder; lumbering enough to make Patto look like Arkle!

Phil Sharpe was the best slip fielder I've ever seen. Lyth is as good in the slips as anyone in England at present. As a batsman Phil Sharpe could be frustratingly sloppy but when focussed was hugely reassuring. His England record is surprisingly good, albeit in a short career. He was a very fine cutter and puller but Lyth's cover drive is one of the loveliest strokes in the modern game. It's quite a close call but I'd opt for Sharpe.

Blinks to keep for me but it would be a travesty to deprive Bairstow of a place in the side. I wish Dewsburian were still active on the site, so he could advocate for him with all his old eloquence.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: Time to compare

September 9 2016, 12:39 AM 

All the players we have named (and many others) gave Yorkshire supporters huge pleasure. And are still giving. This present team is a joy to watch, no less than the 1960s juggernaut. More of a smile nowadays, perhaps, professionals who are relaxed and happy in their work. Secure in their work too, which was an issue back then, with even the biggest stars on one-year contracts only.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: Time to compare

September 9 2016, 7:41 AM 

Interested by WS55's selection. I too considered leaving out Close, as his bowling was limited by the sixties. I think I was just scared of meeting him in some sort of afterlife. Quite right too that Raymond Illingworth could captain the side, but he'd be very different, more astute than Closey, less inspirational and original. And though he was regular captain at the age of 52, he very rarely did the job in the sixties, because Fred was vice-captain and a very good stand-in for Close. In fact we had the best three captains in the country in the side.

So who are we putting in charge? Brian Sellers or Martyn Moxon? Now there's a much easier question.

 
 
Guest
(Login WhiteroseDave)

Re: Time to compare

September 9 2016, 7:45 AM 

"And do today's lads deserve to be spoken of in the same breath, yes, without a doubt"

I love this comment from Idleman. Ultimately it's impossible to make direct comparisons between eras but the above sums it up for me (as someone who wasn't around in the 60's) In 20, 30, 40 years time I'll be talking about this current team the way people look back and talk about the team of the 60's.

 
 
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk