Pick The Roar's greatest Ashes XI of all time: Jack Hobbs vs Herbert Sutcliffe

Sutcliffe for me. He was fabulous. Mind you Jack Hobbs was no slouch either!

My original picks for the opening slot were Sutcliffe and Morris; so I have gone Sutcliffe here. Tough call, and seems that Hobbs will win this one.

I was aware Hobbs was one of Wisden's 5 cricketers of the 20th Century helped in large part by his overall first class career, but I tried to be objective and just base my decision on the Ashes with the stats provided. But like I said in my original comment, if Sutcliffe has had a couple of very decent not out scores, that average might be largely inflated and not paint the full picture.

Hobbs is still in the argument to be England's greatest ever batsman, so he's the one for me here. In my team I had Hobbs and Morris, so it looks like I'm a bit out of touch with the consensus.

Agreed. I picked Hutton in my greatest Ashes team and then agonised over Hobbs or Sutcliffe. It's interesting too, as I rate both so highly and would put both in my "best team of all time". But for the Ashes team, I eventually picked Hobbs over Sutcliffe. And then I felt bad. But that was going to happen either way.

Hobbs was also well known for giving others a chance. He was happy to give away his wicket (or at least start taking risks) when he had done his job as opener. He wasn't one for batting on and on and on for the sake it. Of his 199 FC centuries, he only went on to 200 runs 16 times (and only once in Tests). Also, Hobbs was a gun fielder - unofficial records credit him with more run outs than anyone else in Tests.

:happy: Know what you mean. But we are listening. However, I think you may have moved the wrong bead on the abacus - I calculate his average vs Australia after subtracting the 364 as 48. (Not that I would put as much weight on that argument). Or are you referring just to 1938? -even then, two centuries in four Tests wasn’t bad. As noted he averaged over 50 in four out of six series, was the top scorer on either side in two, topped the England batting in four, mostly against better bowling than Hobbs and Sutcliffe faced. So you may prefer Hobbs and Sutcliffe, but can’t see how they are streets ahead.

An amazingly difficult decision. I have gone with Hobbs

Hobbs was great but as there was little between them in their stats I'm being romantic , in a sense, by going for Sutcliffe just to keep the Yorkshire tradition going.

These two are unlucky to have drawn each other for this exercise. The greatest opening pair in history with a record 87.81 over 38 innings. https://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/jack-hobbs-and-herbert-sutcliffe-the-greatest-opening-pair-in-test-history-3197

Extremely tough call. One of the greatest opening partnerships of all time. They were my votes for openers

Hutton's average was boosted massively in 1938 thanks to one innings Dave. Take that out and he was down to just over 36. A bit like Alistair Cook in his last Ashes series. He averaged a tad over 50 in 9 innings but take out his 244n.o and his average plummets to 16.5! I'm also not sure the bowling was that much better that Hutton faced, certainly the pitch where he scored 364 would have negated the best bowlers the game's seen. He was certainly a fine opener, but I asked myself which of these guys, Hobbs, Hutton or Sutcliffe could I easily leave out of my "best of" team and Hutton was my answer. I couldn't drop a bloke who averaged more than 60 in his Test career and I couldn't leave out the highest first class run scorer and a bloke who played good Test cricket till the age of 50. I'm now in the talking to myself phase of self-isolation. :happy: :happy:

Sutcliffe has the better figures on paper but I’d go with Hobbs, taking into account his record before WWI - when wickets were much dodgier - the runs/wicket average was about 26 in 1900-14, compared with about 35 in the 1920s, ie about 25% less. In his initial years 1908-1914 Hobbs was aged 26-32 and averaged even better than on the easier wickets of the 1920s, when he came back aged 38. So missed some potentially peak years. He was the stand-out batsman of his time almost in the way Bradman was later, and in a way Sutcliffe wasn’t. I’d go with Hobbs and Hutton for my two openers.

Not sure how you can say either of these guys streets ahead of Hutton Paul – topped England averages in four of six series he played and topped the batting for either side in 1938 and 1950-51. Averaged 65 over his first five Ashes series – brought down by one poor last series, aged 38. Faced much tougher opening bowling than Hobbs and Sutcliffe.

Both should have been included in the best Ashes XI. They are streets ahead of any other opening bats, IMO.

Didn’t have a clue, so went with the better average. This is possibly unfair though, as a few decent “not out” scores can quickly inflate averages.