The third best spinner of all time?

[kyear2]

Totally agree, no doubt for me Barnes was a spinner. All the evidence plus his own description, plus Bradman's point to this deduction.

 

[fredfertang]

Given that when he was 56 his bowling was described as "a little quicker than Alec Bedser" I'm struggling with the idea that you can put Barnes in this category.

 

[watson]

Given that when he was 56 his bowling was described as "a little quicker than Alec Bedser" I'm struggling with the idea that you can put Barnes in this category.

Barnes was also likened to Doug Wright by Bernard Hollowood, a fellow player at Staffordshire.

 

[Maximas]

Thing was, Barnes probably relied more in the magnus effect of the ball dropping and swinging in the air than turn, I just think he was so different to every other spinner/pace bowler who ever played that you can't classify him. In any case, he is probably the best of all time, so technically he isn't relevant to this thread.

 

[harsh.ag]

Shane Warne.

 

[Coronis]

Thing was, Barnes probably relied more in the magnus effect of the ball dropping and swinging in the air than turn, I just think he was so different to every other spinner/pace bowler who ever played that you can't classify him. In any case, he is probably the best of all time, so technically he isn't relevant to this thread.

I always thought of him as similar to O'Reilly. I believe someone posted somewhere that Bradman didn't consider O'Reilly a legspinner, but that might also be pure rubbish.

 

[kingkallis]

Where is Hugh Tayfield?

 

[watson]

I think that it needs to be said before this thread goes any further - Warne and Murali are the two greatest, and best, spin bowlers of all time.

It is possible to contend that assertion and suggest another pair of spinners, but gee wizz the counter-argument needs to be better than merely good. Good luck making a coherent case for whoever you propose.

 

[harsh.ag]

I think that it needs to be said before this thread goes any further - Warne and Murali are the two greatest, and best, spin bowlers of all time.

It is possible to contend that assertion and suggest another pair of spinners, but gee wizz the counter-argument needs to be better than merely good. Good luck making a coherent case for whoever you propose.

Sydney Barnes. Coherent case can be made in a quite rational manner. Both Murali and Warne don't have to be in the top 2 for everybody.

Personally I would have Murali and Barnes ahead of Warne. And I would definitely understand somebody having Warne and Barnes ahead of Murali.

 

[the big bambino]

I don't think its clear by any means that Warne and Murali were the best spinners ever. Hollowood compared Barnes' break to Wright and O'Reilly but he also mentioned he bowled at about Barlow's pace. He was an opening bowler. That reminds me. I have a picture to upload.

 

[Dan]

TBH I rate O'Reilly ahead of Warne, but the intended purpose of the thread was clear enough. No need to send it spiralling off with pedantry on that regard, IMO.

"If Warne and Murali did not exist, who is the greatest spinner?"

 

[harsh.ag]

TBH I rate O'Reilly ahead of Warne, but the intended purpose of the thread was clear enough. No need to send it spiralling off with pedantry on that regard, IMO.

"If Warne and Murali did not exist, who is the greatest spinner?"

Sydney Barnes. In his own words, he spun the ball, and didn't require a googly like O'Reilly. Even if you are a slightly quick bowler, if you spin the ball, you are a spinner, I think.

 

[kyear2]

Agreed.
Warne and Murali has to be the best. Modern pitches and Longevity ect puts them.comfortably ahead. Especially for those who say that Headley didn't play enough to be seen as the best after Bradman, O'Reilly just didn't play enough to be seen as the best IMHO. Apparently a great bowler and legit top tier ATG.

 

[Marcuss]

In the CW ATG XI exercise both Barnes and O'Reilly were picked in the 3rd XI ftr.

 

[Migara]

O'Riely should be. Chandra would be the next. To my knowledge only bowler that Viv Richards failed to intimidate.

 

[Burgey]

Where is Hugh Tayfield?

Dead, I'm afraid.

 

[Migara]

Shane Warne.

 

[harsh.ag]

LongHop, could you open another thread which has more options like Sydney Barnes, Jim Laker, Wilfred Rhodes, Johnny Wardle, and an 'Other' option. If we are doing it, might as well do it right.

If you don't mind, could you also title that thread, "The best spinner of all time excepting Warne and Murali".

 

[Satyanash89]

LongHop, could you open another thread which has more options like Sydney Barnes, Jim Laker, Wilfred Rhodes, Johnny Wardle, and an 'Other' option. If we are doing it, might as well do it right.

If you don't mind, could you also title that thread, "The best spinner of all time excepting Warne and Murali".

Tayfield, Rhodes and Laker definitely deserve a mention, but I don't think anyone can say with certainty that Barnes was a spinner, no one really knows what he really bowled. Accounts vary wildly, and the best thing would be to exclude him from the discussion. Calling him a spinner would be cheating imo, he was in a category of his own

 

[kyear2]

If your stock delivery is a leg break and by your own declaration he spun the ball, it doesn't matter the.speed. Bradmam compared him to O'Reilly as a rival and when I saw O'Reilly and Underwood bowl They too at times approached medium, but we have no difficulties calling them spinners
From everthing to his grip to the point he made about not needing a googly, points to the conclusion he was a spinner. For me at least.