Bowling versus the strong counties in 1921

Last March I wrote and briefly analysed a table of first-class against the “strong” counties (the “Big Six” plus Essex and Hampshire) in order to see how much English bowling in the 1920 season was affected by the extremely poor batting of the weak counties, and how much it was affected by the radical difference between English and Australian pitches.

1920/1921 was notable in that at Test level that winter in Australia, English bowling proved dreadfully weak, despite the fact that the county averages suggest English bowling to be strong. This contrasts strongly with the late 1940s or late 1980s when comparably weak English bowling was accurately captured by county figures (in the late 1980s, of course, one would need to exclude overseas fast bowlers less affected by rigged conditions via covering).

My analysis of the results for 1920 bowling against the “strong” counties suggests that the failure of English spinners in Australia was due to inability to cope with radically different pitches on which it was much more difficult to spin the ball, whereas the leading pacemen possessed Wisden’s archetypal “false reputations” from bad batting of the weak counties.

In this post I will do the same for the 1921 season, to see to what extent the trends noted for the 1920 season were persistent. Given that the 1921 season was exceptionally dry — which as the last two Tests demonstrated enormously helped the touring Australians — one might expect that the spin bowlers would show less effect from pitches than in the wetter season of 1920 because conditions were generally less favourable. With the pace bowlers, one would not expect any significant difference.

In the table below spin bowlers are shaded in gold, and as for 1920 only bowlers who bowled minimally 1,000 balls (166.4 overs) against the “strong” counties have been included, with the exception of Cecil Parkin who was England’s most successful bowler in the Tests and really needed to be included.

Bowling in 1921 Against Strong Counties (Qualification 1,000 Balls or 1 Test):

			O	M	R	W	Average	5 w/i	10 w/m
Mr. E.R. Wilson	Yorkshire		223.1	103	333	28	11.89	2	0
A. Morton	Derbyshire		189.2	64	372	26	14.31	3	1
W. Rhodes	Yorkshire	1	544.4	185	1,079	64	16.86	4	0
C.H. Parkin	Lancashire	4	107.2	20	352	20	17.60	2	1
F.E. Woolley	Kent	5	568.4	180	1,380	75	18.40	7	3
Mr. C.S. Marriott	Lancashire		170.4	53	353	19	18.58	1	0
R. Kilner	Yorkshire		220	81	388	20	19.40	1	0
E.H. Bowley	Sussex		169	34	530	27	19.63	0	0
H. Howell	Warwickshire	1	271.1	57	755	38	19.87	3	0
Mr. J.C. White	Somerset	1	334.2	105	656	32	20.50	4	1
Mr. H.A. Gilbert	Worcestershire		273	60	696	33	21.09	4	1
G.G. Macaulay	Yorkshire		348	74	933	44	21.20	2	1
E.R. Remnant	Hampshire		204	49	573	27	21.22	2	0
T. Rushby	Surrey		262.1	79	582	27	21.56	2	0
Mr. N.E. Haig	Middlesex	1	595.1	168	1,510	69	21.88	5	0
F.J. Durston	Middlesex	1	563.5	126	1,580	72	21.94	5	2
Mr. J.W.H.T. Douglas	Essex	5	325.2	58	998	45	22.18	4	2
J.W. Hearne	Middlesex		267.4	58	773	34	22.74	1	0
A.P. Freeman	Kent		444	106	1,300	57	22.81	3	0
H.W. Lee	Middlesex		285.2	67	845	37	22.84	0	0
C.W.L. Parker	Gloucestershire	1	393	136	895	37	24.19	3	1
L.W. Cook	Lancashire		738	163	1,800	73	24.66	4	0
A.S. Kennedy	Hampshire		753.4	172	2,004	81	24.74	5	0
W.E. Astill	Leicestershire		444.3	105	1,190	48	24.79	4	0
A. Shipman	Leicestershire		195	16	746	30	24.87	2	0
G. Geary	Leicestershire		169.4	27	424	17	24.94	2	0
J.W. Hitch	Surrey	1	336	64	900	36	25.00	1	0
W. Bestwick	Derbyshire		242.4	50	706	28	25.21	3	0
A. Waddington	Yorkshire		334.5	68	1,018	40	25.45	3	0
H.A. Peach	Surrey		319	88	795	31	25.65	0	0
E. Robson	Somerset		238.2	61	652	25	26.08	2	1
Mr. V.W.C. Jupp	Sussex	2	428.3	88	1,365	52	26.25	4	1
Mr. P.G.H. Fender	Surrey	2	537.5	93	1,881	70	26.87	5	1
M.W. Tate	Sussex		452.1	118	1,209	44	27.48	2	0
E.G. Dennett	Gloucestershire		367.5	85	996	35	28.46	2	0
P.T. Mills	Gloucestershire		299.5	85	801	28	28.61	0	0
Hon. F.S.G. Calthorpe	Warwickshire		331.2	77	889	31	28.68	0	0
T.L. Richmond	Nottinghamshire	1	603.5	92	1,985	69	28.77	2	1
Mr. A.E.R. Gilligan	Sussex		429.5	66	1,434	49	29.27	3	0
J.A. Newman	Hampshire		631.4	119	1,994	68	29.32	5	1
F. Barratt	Nottinghamshire		467.2	121	1,254	42	29.86	4	0
A.L. Howell	Warwickshire		170	14	630	21	30.00	1	0
J.H. King	Leicestershire		235	35	741	24	30.88	0	0
W.E. Benskin	Leicestershire		246.2	23	900	29	31.03	2	0
F.A. Pearson	Worcestershire		240	48	808	26	31.08	2	0
J.R. Gunn	Nottinghamshire		386	108	937	30	31.23	1	1
G.C. Collins	Kent		287.2	32	959	30	31.97	1	0
W.J. Fairservice	Kent		396.5	85	1,034	32	32.31	1	0
J.D. Tyldesley	Lancashire		350.2	36	1,267	39	32.49	0	0
G.R. Cox	Sussex		380.3	105	948	27	35.11	0	0
S.J. Staples	Nottinghamshire		464.5	107	1,382	39	35.44	2	0
Mr. J.G. Dixon	Essex		356.5	42	1,348	37	36.43	2	0
C.N. Woolley	Northamptonshire		276.3	59	774	20	38.70	0	0
Mr. G.A. Rotherham	Warwickshire		321	47	1,007	26	38.73	0	0
R.K. Tyldesley	Lancashire		297	54	873	22	39.68	1	0
W.G. Quaife	Warwickshire		261.1	32	882	21	42.00	0	0
A.E. Thomas	Northamptonshire		312	74	853	18	47.39	0	0
T.F. Shepherd	Surrey		167.2	33	503	7	71.86	0	0
J.V. Murdin	Northamptonshire		281.5	28	1,173	15	78.20	1	0

What is striking is that spinners who failed entirely against the Australians are in fact more prominent at the top of this table than they were for the 1920 season. This does imply that even in such an exceptional English summer as that of 1921, spin bowlers bowled under conditions entirely unlike those in Australia. However, one could argue that — for English spinners — Parkin, Rockley Wilson and especially Kilner were not by any means awful in Australia, and that the results reflect relatively little. Further argument in favour of this is that I had doubts over whether to colour certain players in gold, because many old English “spinners” were actually bowlers of virtually medium pace who did not rely on flight.

England’s weakness in pace bowling is particularly apparent here. Only Harry Howell, whose record in 1920 suggested he was flattered by bowling against many awful batting sides, averaged under 20 against “strong” counties. The key pace bowlers who defeated the Australians late in the season, Michael Falcon and C.H. Gibson, again bowled too little for inclusion, as did George Louden who was viewed by several Australian batsmen as the best bowler they played against. In fact, although Douglas and Louden were almost certainly the best opening attack in county cricket, they were in harness just three times in Essex’ 26 games — two losses against Middlesex and a win against Gloucestershire. The fact that these amateurs were tested so poorly clearly shows serious problems, although it was plain that none of them would ever be able to tour Australia.