Page 3 of 3

Re: WG GRACE

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:29 pm
by westozfalcon
It's not all about statistics. Sure they play a significant part but you also have to consider a player's influence, stature and legacy. There's enough anecdotal evidence to suggest W G Grace is a cricketing great.

I sometimes think we live in an era where people think if you don't see something on TV or YouTube it never happened.

Re: WG GRACE

PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:26 pm
by Rik E Boy
WG Grace was a giant of the game in more ways than one. Yeah his average by today's standards was mediocre but compare his efforts to his contempories, he is almost Bradmanlike in his towering advantage over them. When WG started playing Centuries were a rare event. When WG was an old man he was still scoring more centuries than everyone else. His dominance of his period was very dominant. People used to come just to see WG play and not just in England.

WG might have excelled in gamesmanship (some might call it cheating) but his very presence legitmised Test Cricket when it wasn't the force it is today. WGs test record isn't in the best XI of all time but he deserves to be in the First XI of the last 150 Years. Read Simon Rae's excellent 'W.G. Grace' and you'll see why.

regards,

REB

Re: WG GRACE

PostPosted: Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:43 pm
by Rik E Boy
westozfalcon wrote:It's not all about statistics. Sure they play a significant part but you also have to consider a player's influence, stature and legacy. There's enough anecdotal evidence to suggest W G Grace is a cricketing great.

I sometimes think we live in an era where people think if you don't see something on TV or YouTube it never happened.


The Statistics actually back up the Greatness of WG. Looking up Statsguru for most career runs will reveal the following.

WG Grace begun his first class career in 1865. Of all the leading runscorers in first class cricket the closest to his era was R Abel who had his first match in 1881, sixteen years after WG. A list of the leading runscorers of all time shows very few players who played in the 19th century. WG's average of 39 covers a guy who started 16 years later as Abel averaged 35. The rest of his contempories do not appear on the list even the talented Arthur Shewsbury or WGs talented brother Fred Grace.

WG also claimed a shitload of wickets as well. There is a reason why the gates say 'The Great Cricketer'.

regards,

REB