25 greatest batters of all-time

[Ab Fan]

For the first time in history, here I have compiled the 25 greatest batsmen the game has ever seen.

Matches Limit- 30 tests

1. Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Garfield Sobers
4. Brian Lara
5. Viv Richards
6. Jack Hobbs
7. Greg Chappell
8. Wally Hammond
9. Ricky Ponting
10. Len Hutton

11. Sunil Gavaskar
12. Jacques Kallis
13. Kumar Sangakkara
14. Virat Kohli
15. Steven Smith
16. Javed Miandad
17. Rahul Dravid
18. Steve Waugh
19. Allan Border
20. Herbert Sutcliffe

21. AB de Villiers
22. Adam Gilchrist
23. Matthew Hayden
24. Graeme Smith
25. Virender Sehwag

Country-wise:-

Australia- 8
India- 5
England- 4
Windies- 3
South Africa- 3
Pakistan- 1
Sri Lanka-1

Discuss!

 

[shamaan]

For the first time in history, here I have compiled the 25 greatest batsmen the game has ever seen.

Matches Limit- 30 tests

1. Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Garfield Sobers
4. Brian Lara
5. Viv Richards
6. Jack Hobbs
7. Greg Chappell
8. Wally Hammond
9. Ricky Ponting
10. Len Hutton

11. Sunil Gavaskar
12. Jacques Kallis
13. Kumar Sangakkara
14. Virat Kohli
15. Steven Smith
16. Javed Miandad
17. Rahul Dravid
18. Steve Waugh
19. Allan Border
20. Herbert Sutcliffe

21. AB de Villiers
22. Adam Gilchrist
23. Matthew Hayden
24. Graeme Smith
25. Virender Sehwag

Country-wise:-

Australia- 8
India- 5
England- 4
Windies- 3
South Africa- 3
Pakistan- 1
Sri Lanka-1

Discuss!

No inzy or younis khan

 

[anikrc1]

Watching from 96. Among the batsman i have seen and considering only retired players
1. Lara
2. Sachin.
3 steve waugh
4. Ponting
5. Sangakara
6. Kallis
7. Dravid
8. Graeme smith
9. Pietersen
10. Inzamam
11. Hashim amla
12. Sehwag
13 De villiers
14. Damien martyn
15. Younis khan
16. V V S laxman
17. Saeed anwar
18. Gary kirsten
19. Michael clarke
20. Alstair cook
21. Adam gilchrist.
22. Yousuf
23 md azharuddin
24.Justin langer.

Among current players steve smith should atleast replace steve waugh from top 3 by the time he retire and kohli has a decent chance to go to top 5.

 

[Mamoon]

Kohli should be in top 10 if not top 5. He has done more than enough across formats already, and he still has 5-6 years left.

 

[Ab Fan]

No inzy or younis khan

Misses out by a whisker just like many other players who are in their league.

 

[anikrc1]

Kohli should be in top 10 if not top 5. He has done more than enough across formats already, and he still has 5-6 years left.

he is behind steve smith of his own generation.

 

[therealAB]

is this for test only [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION]

 

[Ab Fan]

is this for test only [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION]

Overall but depending on era.

 

[therealAB]

Overall but depending on era.

When do ODI's start mattering. I'm guessing post 1980

For me, test cricket:

Bradman
Daylight
Sobers
Hobbs
Smith
Hutton
Tendulkar
Headley
Lara
Pollock
Border
Kallis
B. Richards
Chappell
Gavaskar
Sutcliffe
Sanga
Viv
Waugh
Barrington
Dravid
Weekes
Ponting
Javed
Walcott

 

[Bhaijaan]

Bhaijaan's Top 25 Greatest Test Batsmen ever :-

1. Sir Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Sunil Gavaskar
4. Len Hutton
5. Ranjitsinhji
6. George Headley
7. Vijay Merchant
8. Garfield Sobers
9. Greame Pollock
10. Wally Hammond
11. Barry Richards
12. Brian Lara
13. Greig Chappell
14. Jack Hobbs
15. Viv Richards
16. Allan Border
17. Hanif Mohammad
18. Clyde Walcott
19. Allan Border
20. Rohan Kanhai
21. Herbert Sutcliffe
22. Geoffrey Boycott
23. Everton Weekes
24. Vijay Hazare
25. Ken Barrington




I personally do not like rating beyond Top 5 or 10 because the margin gets quite thin down there. Someone's 25th ranked cricketer would be Someone else's 11th ranked cricketer

Also, this should allow fans to understand how not having a solid claim to greatest in your era has a huge impact on your overall standing as a cricket. If you are a weak contender / do not belong in Top 3 in your era as a batsman, then in overall terms, you are going to fall wah beyond Top 25 batsmen/bowlers in history of cricket because weightage is more in terms of where you stand within your era. You may habe great numbers but if you are #5 today then you cannot be put over someone with lesser numbers of older era if he was #1 or #2 in his. That's the impact your aura/stature carries.

People often look at me with shock and disbelief when I call their favorite cricketer a mere Top 50 or 100 level talent. But if you actually analyse tha game, and this being a 150 years old game now, even if you are a Top 10 level talent in your era, compilation of all eras will push you quote down unless you were an absolute stand out and an icon beyond dispute.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Actually, being a Top 100 level cricketer for a team game played by thousands of cricketers over 150 years is a huge achievement.

If people actually put their mind into it, they will realize how some very stunning cricketers would end up ranked in 80s and 90s.

 

[Mamoon]

he is behind steve smith of his own generation.

No he is not.

In this era, performances all formats matter. Yes Tests still hold the most weight, but you cannot pretend that the other formats do not exist.

As de Villiers rightly said, the truly best players today are the ones who perform in all 3 formats, and that is why there are very few active cricketers who can walk into the world Test, ODI and T20I eleven.

Among the current players, I believe only Kohli (definitely) and Stokes (probably) would have that distinction.

Would you say that someone like Pujara is a better batsman than someone like de Kock because Pujara is a better Test batsman?

Not really. De Kock is a very good batsman in all formats while Pujara is not good enough to play white ball cricket, so it is very obvious that de Kock is a better overall batsman.

I love watching Smith bat. I started watching cricket in the late 90’s and I personally haven’t seen a better Test batsman. He has the perfect batting brain and temperament for the format and he is the only batsman who surprises me whenever he gets out before scoring a hundred.

However, across formats, Kohli is simply too far ahead. The gap between Smith and Kohli in Test cricket is quite small compared to the gap between the two in white ball cricket.

Smith has played some excellent ODI knocks but his overall body of work is very underwhelming. He has less ODI hundreds than Hafeez and Malik at this stage of his career.

Kohli was the cricketer of the previous decade and this era will be remembered as his era, not Smith’s.

 

[Mamoon]

When do ODI's start mattering. I'm guessing post 1980

For me, test cricket:

Bradman
Daylight
Sobers
Hobbs
Smith
Hutton
Tendulkar
Headley
Lara
Pollock
Border
Kallis
B. Richards
Chappell
Gavaskar
Sutcliffe
Sanga
Viv
Waugh
Barrington
Dravid
Weekes
Ponting
Javed
Walcott

I think ODI stats matter for players who made their debuts post 1990 and T20I stats matters for players who made their debuts post 2010.

That is why cross-era comparisons are so difficult.

Even today, Tests obviously hold the most value, but the truly best players are the one who excel in all formats. Very few players have the talent, skill and mental strength to do well in all formats. It is truly an elite club.

 

[Ab Fan]

No he is not.

In this era, performances all formats matter. Yes Tests still hold the most weight, but you cannot pretend that the other formats do not exist.

As de Villiers rightly said, the truly best players today are the ones who perform in all 3 formats, and that is why there are very few active cricketers who can walk into the world Test, ODI and T20I eleven.

Among the current players, I believe only Kohli (definitely) and Stokes (probably) would have that distinction.

Would you say that someone like Pujara is a better batsman than someone like de Kock because Pujara is a better Test batsman?

Not really. De Kock is a very good batsman in all formats while Pujara is not good enough to play white ball cricket, so it is very obvious that de Kock is a better overall batsman.

I love watching Smith bat. I started watching cricket in the late 90’s and I personally haven’t seen a better Test batsman. He has the perfect batting brain and temperament for the format and he is the only batsman who surprises me whenever he gets out before scoring a hundred.

However, across formats, Kohli is simply too far ahead. The gap between Smith and Kohli in Test cricket is quite small compared to the gap between the two in white ball cricket.

Smith has played some excellent ODI knocks but his overall body of work is very underwhelming. He has less ODI hundreds than Hafeez and Malik at this stage of his career.

Kohli was the cricketer of the previous decade and this era will be remembered as his era, not Smith’s.

Kohli is brilliant but don't think his test exploits have been anywhere close to deserve a top 10 spot. He is 31, so may find a spot in top 10 by the time he retires but currently top 15 makes a lot more sense. He has a few gaps yet to be filled in his career.

 

[therealAB]

I think ODI stats matter for players who made their debuts post 1990 and T20I stats matters for players who made their debuts post 2010.

That is why cross-era comparisons are so difficult.

Even today, Tests obviously hold the most value, but the truly best players are the one who excel in all formats. Very few players have the talent, skill and mental strength to do well in all formats. It is truly an elite club.

I'd agree, although t20 doesn't matter for me.

I couldn't really be bothered including ODI's, it gets too difficult. Bevan is a top 10 AT bat in ODI's and was truly revolutionary, but it is very difficult to compare him to someone like Younis, who is not a top 10 test bat by any means but would commonly be viewed as > Bevan

 

[Harsh Thakor]

My 25 greatest batsmen overall in order of merit(Including 1st class cricket)

Jack Hobbs
Sachin Tendulkar
Don Bradman
Viv Richards
Brian Lara
Gary Sobers
Walter Hammond
Virat Kohli
Steve Smith
Barry Richards
Javed Miandad
Hutton/Gavaskar
Graeme Pollock
AB Devilliers
Greg Chappell
George Headley
Denis Compton
Everton Weekes
Ricky Ponting
Alan Border
Rahul Dravid
Hashim Amla
Graham Gooch
Zaheer Abbas

Jack Hobbs on top because of phenomenal first class record of 197 centuries and 61237 runs,with half his run sscored in the most adverse conditions.Tendulkar 2nd for scoring 100 International centuries and over 33000 runs overall.Miandad high considering great record in ODI cricket and same case with Kohli and Devilliers or even Hashim Amla.Zaheer Abbas at 25 because of phenomenal first class and ODI record,scoring over 100 centuries and averaging 47.62 in ODI's.In 1st Class cricket better than Tendulkar,Lara or Viv while in ODI's 2nd to only Viv in his day.Included Barry Richards because of super performances in WSC Packer cricket and staggering feats in 1st class cricket.


Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.

Bradman
Lara
Sobers
Tendulkar
Gavaskar/Hutton
Steve Smith
Hobbs
Hammond
Greg Chapell/Graeme Pollock
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Miandad
Kanhai
Kohli
Steve Waugh
Kevin Pieterson


Bradaman's undisputedly at the top.Lara 2nd for single-handedly bearing brunt of such a weak team and so many mmamoth scores.No great batsmen singlehandedly turned so many games.Smith's record speaks for itself but lower because faced weaker attacks than Hutton or Gavaskar.

 

[Ab Fan]

My 25 greatest batsmen overall in order of merit(Including 1st class cricket)

Jack Hobbs
Sachin Tendulkar
Don Bradman
Viv Richards
Brian Lara
Gary Sobers
Walter Hammond
Virat Kohli
Steve Smith
Barry Richards
Javed Miandad
Hutton/Gavaskar
Graeme Pollock
AB Devilliers
Greg Chappell
George Headley
Denis Compton
Everton Weekes
Ricky Ponting
Alan Border
Rahul Dravid
Hashim Amla
Graham Gooch
Zaheer Abbas

Jack Hobbs on top because of phenomenal first class record of 197 centuries and 61237 runs,with half his run sscored in the most adverse conditions.Tendulkar 2nd for scoring 100 International centuries and over 33000 runs overall.Miandad high considering great record in ODI cricket and same case with Kohli and Devilliers or even Hashim Amla.Zaheer Abbas at 25 because of phenomenal first class and ODI record,scoring over 100 centuries and averaging 47.62 in ODI's.In 1st Class cricket better than Tendulkar,Lara or Viv while in ODI's 2nd to only Viv in his day.Included Barry Richards because of super performances in WSC Packer cricket and staggering feats in 1st class cricket.


Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.

Bradman
Lara
Sobers
Tendulkar
Gavaskar/Hutton
Steve Smith
Hobbs
Hammond
Greg Chapell/Graeme Pollock
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Miandad
Kanhai
Kohli
Steve Waugh
Kevin Pieterson


Bradaman's undisputedly at the top.Lara 2nd for single-handedly bearing brunt of such a weak team and so many mmamoth scores.No great batsmen singlehandedly turned so many games.Smith's record speaks for itself but lower because faced weaker attacks than Hutton or Gavaskar.

Did you forgot to add Viv Richards or left him from test cricket ranking?

 

[therealAB]

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION] how is Hobbs > Bradman in 1st class. Played in similar eras and Bradman averaged 40 more

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Did you forgot to add Viv Richards or left him from test cricket ranking?

My sincere apologies.In great anxiety or in great hurry forgot great Sir Viv Richards in my test match best 25 list..My revised list here .Sorry again to everyone.Placed Viv just below Tendulkar,considering scores in WSC Supertests.Noses Hutton and Sunny because of great strike rate which won games.

What is your opinion of my rankings overall and in tests only?

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards)

Bradman
Lara
Sobers
Tendulkar
Viv Richards
Gavaskar/Hutton
Steve Smith
Hobbs
Hammond
Greg Chapell/Graeme Pollock
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Miandad
Kanhai
Kohli
Steve Waugh



Bradaman's undisputedly at the top.Lara 2nd for single-handedly bearing brunt of such a weak team and so many mmamoth scores.No great batsmen singlehandedly turned so many games.Smith's record speaks for itself but lower because faced weaker attacks than Hutton or Gavaskar.

 

[Ab Fan]

My sincere apologies.In great anxiety or in great hurry forgot great Sir Viv Richards in my test match best 25 list..My revised list here .Sorry again to everyone.Placed Viv just below Tendulkar,considering scores in WSC Supertests.Noses Hutton and Sunny because of great strike rate which won games.

What is your opinion of my rankings overall and in tests only?

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards)

Bradman
Lara
Sobers
Tendulkar
Viv Richards
Gavaskar/Hutton
Steve Smith
Hobbs
Hammond
Greg Chapell/Graeme Pollock
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Miandad
Kanhai
Kohli
Steve Waugh

Sehwag & Younis < Miandad

Again, where is Jacques Kallis?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Sehwag & Younis < Miandad

Again, where is Jacques Kallis?

Sorry apologize for error on Javed ranked below Sehwaga and Younis..Infact you are correct.I will change.


Kallis is statistically great but not the best to win or turn a game-a cut below Rahul Dravid.Very close though with the best.

Any view otherwise of my rankings?Disagree with your rating Greg Chappell above Sunny as the latter opened the batting and was a better master in all conditions?If you scale the teams both played for then Gavaskar faced the greater pressure.Gavaskar was more proven on turning pitches and in condition s where the ball moved in the air in England.In general in top 100 lists experts have rated Gavaskar ahead of Greg.Why did you place Hutton ahead of Sunny?

Overall Viv is ahead of Lara being more impactful at his best in tests and ODI's .Combining ODI's Viv is ahead who was head and shoulder above everyone in ODI's and only a whisker below Lara in tests.In peal era Viv was next only to Bradman in tset cricket,including Packer cricket.Viv is almost an equal of Sober and Bradman as a cricketer.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards and minor corrections)

Bradman
Lara
Tendulkar
Sobers
Hobbs
Gavaskar/Hutton
Viv Richards
Steve Smith
Hammond
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chapell
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Kohli
Miandad
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Kanhai
Steve Waugh

Tendulkar above Sobers because he faced more diverse challenges and more pressure even if Gary was more the match-winner.Record of Steve Smith speaks for itself.Promoted Gavaskar/Hutton ahead of Viv in tests considering they opened the batting and attacks they faced.Same case with Jack Hobbs.

 

[maddgenius]

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards and minor corrections)

Bradman
Lara
Tendulkar
Sobers
Hobbs
Gavaskar/Hutton
Viv Richards
Steve Smith
Hammond
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chapell
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Kohli
Miandad
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Kanhai
Steve Waugh

Tendulkar above Sobers because he faced more diverse challenges and more pressure even if Gary was more the match-winner.Record of Steve Smith speaks for itself.Promoted Gavaskar/Hutton ahead of Viv in tests considering they opened the batting and attacks they faced.Same case with Jack Hobbs.

You think Ponting was a better test player than Waugh and Border?

 

[Hitman]

You think Ponting was a better test player than Waugh and Border?

I think he was.

 

[NishanKonar]

My list of Top 25

Bradman
Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards
Sunil Gavaskar
Brian Lara
Greg Chappel
Jack Hobbs
Len Hutton
Graeme Pollock
Neil Harvey
Barry Richards
George Headley
Alan Border
Steve Smith
Virat Kohli
Ken Barrington
Steve Waugh
Javed Miandad
Ricky Ponting
Rahul Dravid
Sehwag
Gordon Greenidge
Victor Trumper
Wally Hammond

 

[NishanKonar]

I think he was.

Ponting was prolific run scorer from 2003-06 when test bowling was at it nadir. Only time he faced quality pace attack was in Ashes 3005 - he had beloe par outing

Border & Steve Waugh had some epic knocks against top pace attacks in 80s & 90s like West Indies. They were definitely superior to Ponting

 

[Harsh Thakor]

My list of Top 25

Bradman
Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards
Sunil Gavaskar
Brian Lara
Greg Chappel
Jack Hobbs
Len Hutton
Graeme Pollock
Neil Harvey
Barry Richards
George Headley
Alan Border
Steve Smith
Virat Kohli
Ken Barrington
Steve Waugh
Javed Miandad
Ricky Ponting
Rahul Dravid
Sehwag
Gordon Greenidge
Victor Trumper
Wally Hammond

Great list Deeply Appreciate.Why Gavaskar above Lara who was2nd to Bradman in tests or even Sobers?Greg Chapell above Barry Richards or Jack Hobbs?Kindly clarify reason.

 

[maddgenius]

Ponting was prolific run scorer from 2003-06 when test bowling was at it nadir. Only time he faced quality pace attack was in Ashes 3005 - he had beloe par outing

Border & Steve Waugh had some epic knocks against top pace attacks in 80s & 90s like West Indies. They were definitely superior to Ponting

Plus their away stats

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Bhaijaan's Top 25 Greatest Test Batsmen ever :-

1. Sir Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Sunil Gavaskar
4. Len Hutton
5. Ranjitsinhji
6. George Headley
7. Vijay Merchant
8. Garfield Sobers
9. Greame Pollock
10. Wally Hammond
11. Barry Richards
12. Brian Lara
13. Greig Chappell
14. Jack Hobbs
15. Viv Richards
16. Allan Border
17. Hanif Mohammad
18. Clyde Walcott
19. Allan Border
20. Rohan Kanhai
21. Herbert Sutcliffe
22. Geoffrey Boycott
23. Everton Weekes
24. Vijay Hazare
25. Ken Barrington




I personally do not like rating beyond Top 5 or 10 because the margin gets quite thin down there. Someone's 25th ranked cricketer would be Someone else's 11th ranked cricketer

Also, this should allow fans to understand how not having a solid claim to greatest in your era has a huge impact on your overall standing as a cricket. If you are a weak contender / do not belong in Top 3 in your era as a batsman, then in overall terms, you are going to fall wah beyond Top 25 batsmen/bowlers in history of cricket because weightage is more in terms of where you stand within your era. You may habe great numbers but if you are #5 today then you cannot be put over someone with lesser numbers of older era if he was #1 or #2 in his. That's the impact your aura/stature carries.

People often look at me with shock and disbelief when I call their favorite cricketer a mere Top 50 or 100 level talent. But if you actually analyse tha game, and this being a 150 years old game now, even if you are a Top 10 level talent in your era, compilation of all eras will push you quote down unless you were an absolute stand out and an icon beyond dispute.

Great work.Any comments on my list overall and revised on test cricket?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Bhaijaan's Top 25 Greatest Test Batsmen ever :-

1. Sir Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Sunil Gavaskar
4. Len Hutton
5. Ranjitsinhji
6. George Headley
7. Vijay Merchant
8. Garfield Sobers
9. Greame Pollock
10. Wally Hammond
11. Barry Richards
12. Brian Lara
13. Greig Chappell
14. Jack Hobbs
15. Viv Richards
16. Allan Border
17. Hanif Mohammad
18. Clyde Walcott
19. Allan Border
20. Rohan Kanhai
21. Herbert Sutcliffe
22. Geoffrey Boycott
23. Everton Weekes
24. Vijay Hazare
25. Ken Barrington




I personally do not like rating beyond Top 5 or 10 because the margin gets quite thin down there. Someone's 25th ranked cricketer would be Someone else's 11th ranked cricketer

Also, this should allow fans to understand how not having a solid claim to greatest in your era has a huge impact on your overall standing as a cricket. If you are a weak contender / do not belong in Top 3 in your era as a batsman, then in overall terms, you are going to fall wah beyond Top 25 batsmen/bowlers in history of cricket because weightage is more in terms of where you stand within your era. You may habe great numbers but if you are #5 today then you cannot be put over someone with lesser numbers of older era if he was #1 or #2 in his. That's the impact your aura/stature carries.

People often look at me with shock and disbelief when I call their favorite cricketer a mere Top 50 or 100 level talent. But if you actually analyse tha game, and this being a 150 years old game now, even if you are a Top 10 level talent in your era, compilation of all eras will push you quote down unless you were an absolute stand out and an icon beyond dispute.

Great work.Any comments on my list overall and revised on test cricket?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards and minor corrections)

Bradman
Lara
Tendulkar
Sobers
Hobbs
Gavaskar/Hutton
Viv Richards
Steve Smith
Hammond
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chapell
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Kohli
Miandad
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Kanhai
Steve Waugh

Tendulkar above Sobers because he faced more diverse challenges and more pressure even if Gary was more the match-winner.Record of Steve Smith speaks for itself.Promoted Gavaskar/Hutton ahead of Viv in tests considering they opened the batting and attacks they faced.Same case with Jack Hobbs.

Any view [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] ? appreciate

 

[NishanKonar]

Great list Deeply Appreciate.Why Gavaskar above Lara who was2nd to Bradman in tests or even Sobers?Greg Chapell above Barry Richards or Jack Hobbs?Kindly clarify reason.

Gavaskar had better technique than Lara. Esoecially on difficult pitches. Plus Gavaskar played 2 epic 4th innings knocks ( Oval 1979 & Bangalore 1987 ) compared to 1 by Lara ( Barbados 1999 ). Lara was more fluent run scorer but most of his triples & doubles came on flat pitches like Antigua & Adelaide

I rate Greg over Hobbs / Hutton bcoz he played in more countries & better bowling attacks. Greg also played better than Barry Richards in WSC while facing West Indies quicks more often

 

[Bhaijaan]

Any view [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] ? appreciate

The two lists you have for first class cricket and test cricket seem very poorly thought out and inconsistent.

The two lists are actually contradictory if you bothered to double check.

Overall 4/10 for effort

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Gavaskar had better technique than Lara. Esoecially on difficult pitches. Plus Gavaskar played 2 epic 4th innings knocks ( Oval 1979 & Bangalore 1987 ) compared to 1 by Lara ( Barbados 1999 ). Lara was more fluent run scorer but most of his triples & doubles came on flat pitches like Antigua & Adelaide

I rate Greg over Hobbs / Hutton bcoz he played in more countries & better bowling attacks. Greg also played better than Barry Richards in WSC while facing West Indies quicks more often

Still see Barry's average in WSC cricket of over 79 and best scores of 207 and a match-winning 125 n.o.Not better than Greg?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

The two lists you have for first class cricket and test cricket seem very poorly thought out and inconsistent.

The two lists are actually contradictory if you bothered to double check.

Overall 4/10 for effort

Check my final list of test cricket?Saw that with corrections?Then again comment.thanks

 

[Harsh Thakor]

No he is not.

In this era, performances all formats matter. Yes Tests still hold the most weight, but you cannot pretend that the other formats do not exist.

As de Villiers rightly said, the truly best players today are the ones who perform in all 3 formats, and that is why there are very few active cricketers who can walk into the world Test, ODI and T20I eleven.

Among the current players, I believe only Kohli (definitely) and Stokes (probably) would have that distinction.

Would you say that someone like Pujara is a better batsman than someone like de Kock because Pujara is a better Test batsman?

Not really. De Kock is a very good batsman in all formats while Pujara is not good enough to play white ball cricket, so it is very obvious that de Kock is a better overall batsman.

I love watching Smith bat. I started watching cricket in the late 90’s and I personally haven’t seen a better Test batsman. He has the perfect batting brain and temperament for the format and he is the only batsman who surprises me whenever he gets out before scoring a hundred.

However, across formats, Kohli is simply too far ahead. The gap between Smith and Kohli in Test cricket is quite small compared to the gap between the two in white ball cricket.

Smith has played some excellent ODI knocks but his overall body of work is very underwhelming. He has less ODI hundreds than Hafeez and Malik at this stage of his career.

Kohli was the cricketer of the previous decade and this era will be remembered as his era, not Smith’s.

Any view on my lists?Appreciate Refer to my revised list on tests and original overall.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Bhaijaan's Top 25 Greatest Test Batsmen ever :-

1. Sir Don Bradman
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Sunil Gavaskar
4. Len Hutton
5. Ranjitsinhji
6. George Headley
7. Vijay Merchant
8. Garfield Sobers
9. Greame Pollock
10. Wally Hammond
11. Barry Richards
12. Brian Lara
13. Greig Chappell
14. Jack Hobbs
15. Viv Richards
16. Allan Border
17. Hanif Mohammad
18. Clyde Walcott
19. Allan Border
20. Rohan Kanhai
21. Herbert Sutcliffe
22. Geoffrey Boycott
23. Everton Weekes
24. Vijay Hazare
25. Ken Barrington




I personally do not like rating beyond Top 5 or 10 because the margin gets quite thin down there. Someone's 25th ranked cricketer would be Someone else's 11th ranked cricketer

Also, this should allow fans to understand how not having a solid claim to greatest in your era has a huge impact on your overall standing as a cricket. If you are a weak contender / do not belong in Top 3 in your era as a batsman, then in overall terms, you are going to fall wah beyond Top 25 batsmen/bowlers in history of cricket because weightage is more in terms of where you stand within your era. You may habe great numbers but if you are #5 today then you cannot be put over someone with lesser numbers of older era if he was #1 or #2 in his. That's the impact your aura/stature carries.

People often look at me with shock and disbelief when I call their favorite cricketer a mere Top 50 or 100 level talent. But if you actually analyse tha game, and this being a 150 years old game now, even if you are a Top 10 level talent in your era, compilation of all eras will push you quote down unless you were an absolute stand out and an icon beyond dispute.

Why Tendulkar above Lara in tests or Greg Chappell above Viv Richards ?How in the World Vijay Merchant above Sobers ,Walcott above Weekes or Hanif above Border?

Lara bore the brunt for a much weaker side than Sachin,singlehandedly won more tests,had a better strike rate and had many more mammoth scores .Was he not qualitatively more impactful?Greg had a better average even adding WSC supertests but Viv was the greater match-winner or more impactful.Greg never proved himself in India and was not Viv's equal against the moving ball or seaming conditions in England.Greg was technically better and was outstanding against better pace bowlers but of you scale Viv's domination Viv would nose ahead.Why is Viv such a unanimous choice for so many experts in an all time test XI abd why do so many even of later eras rate Viv at the top?

In performance Weekes was a notch above Walcott if you asess impact relatively .Merchant only scored 3 centuries and by that reasoning Barry Richards should be ranked around 2nd.Even adding 1st class cricket Sobers would rank ahead of Merchant.and in test cricket ahead of even Gavaskar o Viv.Sobers was a master in a crsis and in all conditions and never curtailed his strokemaking.Many ranked Sobers as the very best,like Chappell brothers.Border was the ultimate epitome of consistency and best performer overseas,conquering all conditions.By a margin overshadows Hanif Mohammad and is on par with Greg Chappell or Ponting.Staggering record in a crisis.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION] how is Hobbs > Bradman in 1st class. Played in similar eras and Bradman averaged 40 more

Wrong.More than half of runs scored by Hobbs were before the 1st world war as well as117 of his centuries.The wickets wee considerably more challenging in pre- war time.Hobbs has scored 197 centuries and 61237 runs,which is ahead of Bradman .I doubt Bradman would havbe surpassed Hobbs if he played in the same conditions.

 

[Ab Fan]

Sorry apologize for error on Javed ranked below Sehwaga and Younis..Infact you are correct.I will change.


Kallis is statistically great but not the best to win or turn a game-a cut below Rahul Dravid.Very close though with the best.

Any view otherwise of my rankings?Disagree with your rating Greg Chappell above Sunny as the latter opened the batting and was a better master in all conditions?If you scale the teams both played for then Gavaskar faced the greater pressure.Gavaskar was more proven on turning pitches and in condition s where the ball moved in the air in England.In general in top 100 lists experts have rated Gavaskar ahead of Greg.Why did you place Hutton ahead of Sunny?

Overall Viv is ahead of Lara being more impactful at his best in tests and ODI's .Combining ODI's Viv is ahead who was head and shoulder above everyone in ODI's and only a whisker below Lara in tests.In peal era Viv was next only to Bradman in tset cricket,including Packer cricket.Viv is almost an equal of Sober and Bradman as a cricketer.

Kallis has 45 test hundreds, that's not a joke. Calling him statistical great is ridiculous. He has won South African team who are not known for producing spinners a test series win in India and Pakistan. Plz respect the cricketer.

He is actually a top 10 material. But because he was boring and didn't had the X-factor, you can put him in top 15 but not including even in top 25 and that too in test cricket, that's terrible. I disqualify such lists on that basis alone. Kallis literally walks into every all-time XI made in the mdoern era.

Very hard to seperate Gavaskar and Chappell, probably ODIs got me Chappell higher. If I make a test list, I will have Gavaskar just on par with Chappell.

 

[Majid Khan]

Great list overall , and can’t dispute the quality of those batsmen. But there’s a part of me having watched the struggles of Pakistani batsmen over the years that has a lot of admiration for the calibre of batsmen that Inzamam, Mohammed Yusuf and Younis Khan were as their test records will also confirm.

If given the availability of all these 25 batsmen for the Pakistan team , would I replace either of Inzamam/Yusuf/Younis trio at their peak with Jacques Kallis, Rahul Dravid, Mattew Hayden, Adam Gilchrist or even Alan Border ? Not sure I would and that’s not just me being patriotic or as a fan of these players , yes they had some flaws as batsmen like all these great batsmen do, but they were damn good batsmen.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Kallis has 45 test hundreds, that's not a joke. Calling him statistical great is ridiculous. He has won South African team who are not known for producing spinners a test series win in India and Pakistan. Plz respect the cricketer.

He is actually a top 10 material. But because he was boring and didn't had the X-factor, you can put him in top 15 but not including even in top 25 and that too in test cricket, that's terrible. I disqualify such lists on that basis alone. Kallis literally walks into every all-time XI made in the mdoern era.

Very hard to seperate Gavaskar and Chappell, probably ODIs got me Chappell higher. If I make a test list, I will have Gavaskar just on par with Chappell.

Generally any opinion on both my lists?Appreciate.

 

[SL_Fan]

Wrong.More than half of runs scored by Hobbs were before the 1st world war as well as117 of his centuries.The wickets wee considerably more challenging in pre- war time.Hobbs has scored 197 centuries and 61237 runs,which is ahead of Bradman .I doubt Bradman would havbe surpassed Hobbs if he played in the same conditions.

That's just bogus. Obviously past legends of the game should be respected for the early contributions they made to the game. However it was a completely different game back then. Apart from Bradman who was just an absolute statistical freak and also proved his mettle during Bodyline, rest of the top Test batsmen from the bygones were hardly ever tested to be rated ahead of top modern-day batsmen. This old is gold stuff is nothing but pure conjecture.

Not many might be aware but up till around the mid 1930s or so LBWs were also disallowed anytime the ball pitched outside the line of off stump and the umpires were known to have been very lenient on pad play as well.

Hobbs kept it simple, playing straight and making sure he got his pads in the way too [the lbw law was less strict in his day]
- Steven Lynch

Hobbs combined classical play with effective defence—including protecting the wickets using his pads—against the ball unexpectedly moving towards the stumps.
- Swanton, E. W.

His pad-play was controversial: it removed any possibility of dismissal but was regarded by some cricket authorities as negative and unsporting.
- Leo McKinstry

The stricter LBW rules and umpires getting tough on pad play only came about after Hobbs had already retired. Bradman on the other hand as his strike rate which is estimated to be around the 60s shows (as opposed to Hobbs’ which was estimated to be in the 40s) he much preferred to keep the scoreboard ticking along. So that would probably help explain why Hobbs did okay on sticky wickets whereas someone like Bradman did not.

 

[SL_Fan]

If anything it's the bowlers from the bygones that deserves some extra credit. The gentlemanly gameplay, style of gameplay, inferior fielding levels, the laws and umpires etc very much favoured the batsmen. Sticky wickets were a rare occurrence and for the most part any advantages of bowling on uncovered wickets didn't amount to much at all overall.

 

[SL_Fan]

 

[Majid Khan]

It’s actually quite fascinating to think that a batsman who has scored more runs in a calendar year in test cricket than anyone else in nearly 150 years of test cricket, and who scored more test centuries in a calendar year (9) than anyone else - who scored 6 test of these centuries in 4 tests which no one else has managed , yet is still not good enough to make it to the Top 25 all time greatest batsmen according to many.

What could be the reason? Perhaps he wasn’t consistent enough , not that a test batting average of 52 would indicate that.

And on top of that he was the most stylish and elegant batsman of his era.

 

[therealAB]

Wrong.More than half of runs scored by Hobbs were before the 1st world war as well as117 of his centuries.The wickets wee considerably more challenging in pre- war time.Hobbs has scored 197 centuries and 61237 runs,which is ahead of Bradman .I doubt Bradman would havbe surpassed Hobbs if he played in the same conditions.

Wrong. Even adjusting for that averages in the 10's were 25 ish, making Hobbs about 120% better than the average. In the 30's averages were 35 ish, Bradman being 170% better than the average. All the contemporaries say Bradman was better. Bradman would have beaten Hobbs record by heaps if not for WW2, which was significantly more disruptive to FC cricket than WW1

 

[Ab Fan]

It’s actually quite fascinating to think that a batsman who has scored more runs in a calendar year in test cricket than anyone else in nearly 150 years of test cricket, and who scored more test centuries in a calendar year (9) than anyone else - who scored 6 test of these centuries in 4 tests which no one else has managed , yet is still not good enough to make it to the Top 25 all time greatest batsmen according to many.

What could be the reason? Perhaps he wasn’t consistent enough , not that a test batting average of 52 would indicate that.

And on top of that he was the most stylish and elegant batsman of his era.

Because he was not good in many countries(Aus, SA, Ind, SL) and outside that period was mediocre. 25 best is a very low number if we are considering players from last 100 years. We can't think of more than 5-6 names from each era. Even here I have prioritised recency excluding a lot of older era players who would be as good as the ones not in top 15.

If I make a top 50 list, then Inzamam and Younis will be included so would the likes of KP, Clarke, Amla, Greenidge and the likes of Compton, Barrington, May, Gooch, Headley, Lloyd, Flower and many more.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Please come here [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=318]Hasan[/MENTION] 123 Plead your most insightful analysis.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Best 25 batsmen ever in only test cricket in order of merit.(revised list with Viv Richards and minor corrections)

Bradman
Lara
Tendulkar
Sobers
Hobbs
Gavaskar/Hutton
Viv Richards
Steve Smith
Hammond
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chapell
Headley
Ponting
Weekes
Border
Dravid
Sangakaara
Kohli
Miandad
Younis Khan
Compton
Sehwag
Kanhai
Steve Waugh

Tendulkar above Sobers because he faced more diverse challenges and more pressure even if Gary was more the match-winner.Record of Steve Smith speaks for itself.Promoted Gavaskar/Hutton ahead of Viv in tests considering they opened the batting and attacks they faced.Same case with Jack Hobbs.

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]. Love your analytical feedback

 

[Bhaijaan]

It’s actually quite fascinating to think that a batsman who has scored more runs in a calendar year in test cricket than anyone else in nearly 150 years of test cricket, and who scored more test centuries in a calendar year (9) than anyone else - who scored 6 test of these centuries in 4 tests which no one else has managed , yet is still not good enough to make it to the Top 25 all time greatest batsmen according to many.

What could be the reason? Perhaps he wasn’t consistent enough , not that a test batting average of 52 would indicate that.

And on top of that he was the most stylish and elegant batsman of his era.

If the poll was about best batsman during a calender year, Yousuf would definitely make Top 10.

But judging his overall career, in which he averages 31 in Australia, 33 in India, 26 in South Africa, 33 in Sri Lanka, for a player who was finished as a test cricketer barely 75 tests into his career, would obviously have a huge bearing on his overall standing in a game you already mentioned is nearly 150 years old.

Taking all the players into consideration, over that many years would realistically push him way back. He probably would not make a Top 50 list either.

Haneef, Miandad, Younis are definitely ahead of him.

Yousuf was a great talent who underachieved. He most definitely should have retired convincingly as Pakistan's greatest batsman ever by a mile going by his talent and style.

 

[jeetu]

Among retired test players i'll go with
[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]NO [/td][td]Player [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]1 [/td][td]DG Bradman (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]2 [/td][td]SR Tendulkar (INDIA) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]3 [/td][td]BC Lara (WI) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]4 [/td][td]GS Sobers (WI) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]5 [/td][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]6 [/td][td]IVA Richards (WI) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]7 [/td][td]GS Chappell (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]8 [/td][td]WR Hammond (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]9 [/td][td]AR Border (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]10 [/td][td]L Hutton (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]11 [/td][td]SR Waugh (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]13 [/td][td]JH Kallis (SA) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]12 [/td][td]KC Sangakkara (SL) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]14 [/td][td]R Dravid (INDIA) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]15 [/td][td]KF Barrington (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]16 [/td][td]RT Ponting (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]17 [/td][td]JB Hobbs (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]18 [/td][td]AB de Villiers (SA) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]19 [/td][td]Javed Miandad (PAK) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]20 [/td][td]Younis Khan (PAK) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]21 [/td][td]S Chanderpaul (WI) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]22 [/td][td]G Boycott (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]23 [/td][td]Inzamam-ul-Haq (PAK) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]24 [/td][td]AC Gilchrist (AUS) [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]25 [/td][td]AN Cook (ENG) [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Kallis has 45 test hundreds, that's not a joke. Calling him statistical great is ridiculous. He has won South African team who are not known for producing spinners a test series win in India and Pakistan. Plz respect the cricketer.

He is actually a top 10 material. But because he was boring and didn't had the X-factor, you can put him in top 15 but not including even in top 25 and that too in test cricket, that's terrible. I disqualify such lists on that basis alone. Kallis literally walks into every all-time XI made in the mdoern era.

Very hard to seperate Gavaskar and Chappell, probably ODIs got me Chappell higher. If I make a test list, I will have Gavaskar just on par with Chappell.

Otherwise could you comment on my rankings overall and in tests?Appreciate your view.Balanced ranking?

 

[Ab Fan]

Otherwise could you comment on my rankings overall and in tests?Appreciate your view.Balanced ranking?

Yes, I agree with the rest. Just the Kallis exclusion because IMO he is definitely better than Younis or Sehwag. Also, I will have Steve Waugh a little higher, around Dravid or Miandad. A clutch player, I recall some of his vital innings in India or even in that 2003 tour if not for his batting, we could have won that series.

 

[atreus]

1. Sir Donald Bradman

2. Sir Jack Hobbs
3. Sir Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Sir Leonard Hutton/Sir Garfield Sobers
6. Sir Leonard Hutton/Sir Garfield Sobers
7. Steven Smith
8. Brian Lara
9. Sir Walter Hammonds
10. George Headley
11. Sunil Gavaskar
12. Herbert Sutcliffe
13. Allan Border
14. Graeme Pollock
15. Joe Root
16. Steve Waugh
17. Ricky Ponting
18. Steve Waugh
19. Ken Barrington
20. Greg Chappel
21. Kumara Sangakkara
22. Rahul Dravid
23. AB De Villiers
24. Martin Crowe
25. Virat Kohli

entirely on test cricket, don't know or care enough for one days to give an opinion but reckon Viv is number one there by a clear margin, really can't choose between Viv and Sachin, Hutton and Sobers. Feel free to ask him regarding the others!

 

[atreus]

The second Waugh is meant to be Kallis, apologies