What's new

Best cricketers ever? [80% consideration to Tests and 20% to other formats]

Harsh Thakor

First Class Star
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Runs
3,523
Post of the Week
2
This is my list in order of merit of the 15 best cricketers of all timeoverall-80%consideration to tests and 20% to other forms,apart from the likes of Hobbs and Grace who played much less test cricket.In the case of W.G Grace and Jack Hobbs placed much greater emphasis on 1st class cricket.



1.W G Grace



The inventor of the art of batting who stood out like a colossus like no sportsman ever.If you consider the condition she batted in he could well have been the best of all batsman.No cricketer ever was as impactful or defined cricket as much.He conquered the most treacherous pitches with grass uncut like a surgeon successfully performing an operation on a patient considered incurable.Aggregated 54896 runs at an avergae around 39 and averaged only 32 in tests .Possibly had he played in Bradman's era he would have statistically matched him 8 performing the double of 1000.Also took 2876 scalps at an average of around 18 .For 8 successive seasons achieved the double of 1000 runs and 100 wickets.When scoring 400 and 344 he looked closest to performing a miracle on the cricket field .In 1876 scored 2622 runs in a season and in August scored more runs than any batsman ever.Playing against Kent for Gentleman MCC he amassed 344 when his team was 329 runs in the arrears.,the highest score ever made till then in 1stclass cricket.That season he also achieved a heroic feat of scoring 177 and capturing 8 wickets for 69,for Gloucestershire against Nottinghamshire.







2.Gary Sobers



Morally no all-rounder came near Sobers who too all-round cricketing skill to regions of divinity.No bowler had a greater bowling repertoire,no batsman had a greater range of strokes and no fielder could pull of more stunning catches.A three-in one cricketer who could turn a complexion of game 360 degrees. ni every department.Statistics do scant justice to the extent of how he towered above any other cricketer of his day.No allrounder equalled Sobers' majestic performances in 1970 for rest of the world when he took 21 wickets and scored 583 runs or in 1966 in England when he scored 722 runs and took 20 scalps.Averages 57.78 with the bat . Even if he was overall statistically expensive as a bowler averaging 34.03 he was outstanding in peak era for his time ,averaging around 27 .In my view would have been by a margin of a whisker more impactful than Bradman in a test side.





3.Jack Hobbs



Some cricket historians rate Hobbs better than Bradman in all types of conditions.Hobbs was more prolific on wet or bad pitches and was more proven in a crisis.Hobbs still has the highest first class aggregate of 61237 runs and scored 197 centuries,which is still a record.I would not envisage even a Bradman,Tendulkar,Steve Smith or Lara equalling Hobbs in unfavorable conditions,who made the technical improvisation of a magician.Hobbs participated in a record 166 century partnerships.No opening batsman has equalled the quality of his centuries at the Oval in 1926 and at Melbourne in 1928-29 which determined the fate of the Ashes.Above all never played for his individual records.In modern era I would have backed him to average around 65 in tests .It is worth reading historians account, of how Hobbs batting completely turned the complexion of a game when his team was in dire straits and he could bat in accordance with the situation as noone ever could ,including Bradman..For longevity he was the king,scoring 98 centuries after the age of 40 and 117 centuries after the Ist world war.No batsman ever scored over 2000 runs in a season 17 times.





4.Sachin Tendulkar



No batsman ever may score 100 International centuries or dominate a sport at the top for such a long sustained duration.Nor did anyone take batting skill to such sublime levels,conquering every type of conditions or wickets.The youngest to achieve all the 1000 run landmarks.Arguably did not deliver a knockout punch to win games as much a he could have like a Viv or Lara,but at his best virtually played the role of a lone crusader.I doubt any middle order batsman ever faced as much pressure.Posessed every component of a perfect batsman more than anyone.Few batsman made a Muhammad Ali style comeback as Sachin did in 2008 down under.





5.Don Bradman



Displayed glory of supremacy in sport more than anyone ever,like an invincible emperor reaching heights of divinty.Statistically on another tier from any cricketer.Bradman literally re-defined the law of averages, putting the best mathematicians in a quandry in how to evaluate or scale his figures.None ever will even come close to his test average of 99.94 or rate of making a century in every 2nd test.No batsman ever so clinically dissected a bowling attack or posessed such phenomenal powers of concentration .However not at his best on wet or bad wickets or against express pace as shown in the 'bodyline' series.Also only played in England and Australia.I would back him to still average around 70,-75 in tests in modern era . Still I doubt he would surpass Tendulkar in all forms of the game ,play spin better than Lara ,tackle express pace better than a Viv or Gavaskar or better the strike rat of Sehwag or Gilchrist.





6.Viv Richards



No batsman ever delivered as convincing a knockout punch or reduced opposing bowlers to submission as Viv.Considering his era in peak period the best after Bradman,averaging above 60 from 1976-81.Viv took domination of bowling to regions of divinity which he illustrated at a crescendo in Kerry Packer supertests in 1977-78.The best ever batsman in ODI cricket,who championed many a final.Fell out because of inconsistency in the latter part of his career.Turned the complexion of game more than any batsman ever who at his best blazed a cricket field like a streak of light shimmering.If he wished could have averaged above 60.The best ever against sheer pace.Won more ODI tournament finals than Tendulkar.











7.Shane Warne





Re-defined the role of the leg-spinner being the greatest match-winning cricketer of his day.Warne was a major architect of the ressurection of Australia into emerging what was arguably the greatest cricketing power ever. He created more prodigious turn than anyone. in addition to having an unplayable flipper.No cricketer of his day could make such a dramatic turn in fortunes of a game.708 wickets haul was less than Muralitharan,but morally he was considerably more impactful and better overseas.





8.Sydney Barnes



Figures simply speak for themselves taking 7 scalps per tset at an average of 16.49.At medium pace cut the ball both ways with the skill or deception of a wizard.The equivalent of Bradman to bowling.He jagged the ball in a manner which made it unplayable for batsman.









9.Imran Khan



No cricketer did so much to define the shape of it's cricketing destiny as Imran .From 1981-87 he was the most outstanding all-rounder in the world,outplaying Botham and Kapil.Imran pioneered the art of reverse swing and from 1981-83 be acme the bets fast bowler in the world.His performances and leadership enabled Pakistan to win their first test series on Indian and Englsih soil and morally capture the test world champion tag in 1988 in West Indies with a drawn series.In 1992 he ressurected his team from the grave to reach the pinnacle of glory in the 1992 world cup.No paceman performed a well against the best team of his era,West Indies.In peak era arguably performed better than any paceman ever averaging around 17 with a strike rate of around 43 balls per wicket.What went against him was that he was not at his best with both bat and ball.







10.Brian Lara



Simply the equivalent of a Rembrandt or a Beethoven to batting who at his best could sit with the Gods of Olympus.Took batting wizardry to regions unexplored ,executing strokes that were surreal.No batsman ever with such relish played the role of a lone crusader to win or turn games single-handedly as Lara.None had a better penchant for registering mammoth scores or being so mercurial even after crossing three figures.Not as technically sound as Tendulkar or as merciless as Viv Richards but for sheer aesthecism,ahead of both these icons.Inconsistency marred his career but no batsman scored such a high percentage of his team's runs after Bradman and Headley,than Lara.Arguably 2nd only to Bradman ,amongst test batsman.In peak period better than Tendulkar and proved himself more in a crisis than Viv or Sobers.To me the best left-hand batsman of all.His most defining moments were in the 1999 Frank Worrel trophy and in Sri Lanka in 2002,.In 2 successive tests against Australia in 1999 after his team was one down, he resurrected his team from the grave to reach a pinnacle of glory.In Sri Lanka he aggregated a record 688 runs,for a 3 test series.Also captured the world record score twice ,which no batsman has ever done.Best test strike rate of most of his era of around 60.Arguably at best,no batsman ever reached such heights of glory.





11.Malcolm Marshall



No right arm paceman disguised which direction a ball would swing and nonone mastered the art of skidding a ball as effectively.Took pace bowling artistry to metaphysical regions with complete mastery of bio-mechanics.Even as a component of the greatest pace quarter ever,convincingly overshadowed every bowler who comprised it.His strike rate of 46.7 and avergae of 20.94 speak for itself,even if he could not join the elusive club of those who captured 400 or more scalps.A more creative version of Dennis Lillee.Did not swing a ball so much but posessed lethal swerve.In England in 1988 when taking 35 scalps,bowled biter than anyone ever.A ore than useful batsman,too.





12.Walter Hammond



Unfortunate to have played in the , in addition to taking 85 wickets.era of Bradman but still often came into touching distance of him.In full flow none of his time was more majestic than Hammond,who resembled a Galleon in full sail.Scored 7624 runs at an average of 58.46.Equivalent of a great all-rounder in a later era.At his best could be more impressive than even the Don,scoring the fastest ever triple century.His 240 at the Oval was amongst the game's classics.





13.Wasim Akram



Revolutionized the art of fast bowling more than anyone ,virtually taking it to another dimension .Wasim was the ultimate magician taking bowling wizardry to regions of the divine.In peak ear overshadowed Waqar,Ambrose an Donald in terms of bowling avergae.Took a record 502 scalps in ODIS.In combined cricket to me the bets of all paceman,considering the support he received from his teammates.For a great part of his career averaged around 22 with the ball and had a strike rate around 50.At one stage also a very fine batsman,in the class of a Kapil Dev.In Australia in 1989-90 arguably bowled better than any overseas paceman ever and displayed all-round skill ni the Botham class.Best paceman of his time against West Indies and best ever on flat tracks of the sub-continent.Performed two test and ODI hat tricks.Scored 257 against Zimbabwe .Best achievement as his match-winning performance in 1992 world cup final.Whne taking 21 wickets in a home series in 1990 against West Indies revealed pace bowling mastery on flat pancakes at its supre me height.





14.Ian Botham



At his best the best ever match-winner amongst all-rounders exuded cricketing energy at it's zenith.No all-rounder ressurected a side from a grave like Botham did in the 1981 Ashes at home or in the 1980 Jubileee test in Mumbai.Even if not as artistic in sum total more explosive at his best than Sobers or Miller,whose wickets,runs or catches could make a more sensational twist or turn to match than anyone.From 1997-82 2nd to only Sobers.No batsman hit a ball harder,bowled more intelligently or leaped more spectacularly in the slips than Botham.Sadly lost consistency after 1982 when he was overshadowed by Kapil Dev and Imran Khan. Relatively poor against West Indies but neverthless in 1984 at Lords against them scored 81 runs and took 8-103.In 1986-87 gave a sterling allround performance down under to enable England to retain the Ashes.Scored a century and captured 5 wickets in test matches on a record 5 occasions.Best all-rounder statistically combing centuries(14) and five wicket hauls.(27)







15.Jacques Kallis



Statistically the best all-rounder ever in terms of aggregate and average.From point of pure all-round skill 2nd to only Sobers and to bat for your life the best ever batsman amongst all-rounders.At his best with ball potentially as dangerous as Botham or Kapil and in small phases excelled with both ball and bat.As a pure batsman in tests next to only Tendulkar in terms of run aggregate and centuries.Remarkably captured 5 wickets and scored a century twice in test cricket.However lacked the 'x' factor and at times did not sufficiently press the pedal on the accelerator.He also scored quite a bulk of his runs against the weaker teams of his era.Noteworthy also that he hardly bowled much for most of his career.A champion in terms of consistency ,but could not surpass the match-winning prowess of a Sobers.Imran,Botham or Miller.Arguably the leading candidate to replace Sobers in a team.Played a major role as an architect in enabling South Africa to reach the top of the pedestal in test cricket.
 
I think Bradman should be higher and you should include Glenn McGrath in the list who is arguably the second greatest fast bowler of all-time in both the formats. Brian Lara as a cricketer, honestly, I am not too convinced of his impact as cricketer aside from the artistry he had when batting in full-flow.

My list will have these names grouped country-wise:-

Australia- Don Bradman, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Adam Gilchrist

West Indies- Garfield Sobers, Viv Richards, Malcolm Marshall

England- Jack Hobbs, WC Grace, Ian Botham

India- Sachin Tendulkar, Kapil Dev

South Africa- Jacques Kallis, Dale Steyn

Pakistan- Imran Khan, Wasim Akram
 
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] please come here
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

I lol at the 'morally' comments. Can you explain what that means as it looks like a pointless word you use to make yourself seem smart

Bradman stitched up. Legit almost 100% better then Sachin in tests. Given that they are given 80% weighting he should quite clearly be #1
Given he and Hobbs were very similar era's, his average of 80% than Hobbs make the debate a moot point
WG didn't play much test cricket, and his record <Trumper/Hill/Ranji/Shrewsbury from his era

I do not get how you criticise Bradman in poor conditions, and rate him below Hobbs. Bad conditions were very rare and he optimised his game to play in the conditions he would generally face. In conditions akin to modern ones he would legitimately be twice as good as Hobbs
Also with Bradman, I do not understand how you can say that because he would be a worse player than the best attributes of a variety of different players he is worse than someone like Hobbs. A combined player of Richards' destructiveness, Smith's concentration, Tendulkar's technique, Hobbs on bad wickets and Lara's spin abilities might be better, but it would be close and the comparison is just silly.
Anyway, all of those points are highly contestable:
Bradman averaged 56 vs Bodyline, with ridiculously unfair fields and dangerous bowling. That is higher than the career averages of Viv/Gavaskar. Also, the Viv could have averaged 60 argument is ridiculous. He was an incredibly competitive man, and if he could have performed better he could have.
Bradman was very good against 3 great spin bowlers: Verity, O'Reilly and Grimmett. His performances against these bowlers exceed what Lara could do repeatably against spin
Bradman scored 300 in a day. With toothpick bats. Let that sink in. He was no slouch in terms of strike rate. If you scale him down vs Richards, you must use that as a point to raise him above Sachin/Sobers/Hobbs, whose strike rates pailed in comparison to his

McGrath >> Akram as a test bowler, and the ODI debate is very close (McGrath >> WC's). I do not understand how a bowler who is quite clearly the greatest all format bowler of all time doesn't get in

Also Botham is a joke. Definitely not a great ODI player

Let us compare Bradman to Sobers as an exercise
As a bat Bradman was ahead in all qualities. Scored faster, bigger and more consistently on all wickets
Sobers bowling would have to equate to a 42 average to equal Bradman. If you think a 34 bowling average is in any way comparable to a batting average of 42 you are, frankly, an idiot. That would mean Mark Waugh = Jerome Taylor. What a shocking argument

Comparing Bradman to Hobbs is also a joke. Yes, Bradman was worse on poor wickets but on good wickets Hobbs was merely magnificent. Bradman was truly exceptional. A team with Bradman would beat a team with Hobbs 9/10. Poor wickets do not even exist anymore, and they were not common enough even in those days to make Hobbs more valuable than Bradman

You have made a lot of bad lists, but this take the cake. Putting people like Tendulkar, Sobers and Hobbs ahead of Bradman, who was almost twice as good as them as a batsmen is horrible. WG is the only cricketer who can be considered similar to Bradman, but FC records have to be invoked which is clearly outside the context of this thread (despite the fact you legit do that lol :((( )
 
I vote for Gary Sobers considering this thread is not just about batting but also bowling.
 
WG grace was the epitome of beautiful batting as his name also implies. He was also a very lean and fit individual.

Look I have no problem rating someone like that purely based on their influence on the game but they would look worse than tailenders now. Which is okay. Different era and everything
 
1. Sir Don Bradman - Greatest of all time
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Sachin Tendulkar
4. Mutiah Muralitharan
5. Glenn McGrath
 
1. Sir Don Bradman - Greatest of all time
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Sachin Tendulkar
4. Mutiah Muralitharan
5. Glenn McGrath

I like this list alot. For me Richards from Gavaskar would be the only change, but I def agree with the other 4 names. Gavaskar is sightly better than Richards as a test bat but Richards much better ODI for me
A complete list would be
Bradman
Tendulkar
McGrath
Murali
Richards
Lara
Akram
Donald
Gilchrist
Sobers
etc
 
I vote for Gary Sobers considering this thread is not just about batting but also bowling.

Do you believe that Mark Waugh is an equally good batsmen than Jerome Taylor is a bowler?
Because otherwise bowling does not compensate for an average difference of over 42
 
Do you believe that Mark Waugh is an equally good batsmen than Jerome Taylor is a bowler?
Because otherwise bowling does not compensate for an average difference of over 42

Jerome Taylor from West Indies? Absolutely not.

Mark Waugh was part of the ATG Aussie team. Jerome is a nobody in terms of recognition.
 
Jerome Taylor from West Indies? Absolutely not.

Mark Waugh was part of the ATG Aussie team. Jerome is a nobody in terms of recognition.

That is the point. Bradman is better by a distance of Mark Waugh from Sobers. Do you really think that a bowler at the same level of Jerome Taylor makes up for that
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

I lol at the 'morally' comments. Can you explain what that means as it looks like a pointless word you use to make yourself seem smart

Bradman stitched up. Legit almost 100% better then Sachin in tests. Given that they are given 80% weighting he should quite clearly be #1
Given he and Hobbs were very similar era's, his average of 80% than Hobbs make the debate a moot point
WG didn't play much test cricket, and his record <Trumper/Hill/Ranji/Shrewsbury from his era

I do not get how you criticise Bradman in poor conditions, and rate him below Hobbs. Bad conditions were very rare and he optimised his game to play in the conditions he would generally face. In conditions akin to modern ones he would legitimately be twice as good as Hobbs
Also with Bradman, I do not understand how you can say that because he would be a worse player than the best attributes of a variety of different players he is worse than someone like Hobbs. A combined player of Richards' destructiveness, Smith's concentration, Tendulkar's technique, Hobbs on bad wickets and Lara's spin abilities might be better, but it would be close and the comparison is just silly.
Anyway, all of those points are highly contestable:
Bradman averaged 56 vs Bodyline, with ridiculously unfair fields and dangerous bowling. That is higher than the career averages of Viv/Gavaskar. Also, the Viv could have averaged 60 argument is ridiculous. He was an incredibly competitive man, and if he could have performed better he could have.
Bradman was very good against 3 great spin bowlers: Verity, O'Reilly and Grimmett. His performances against these bowlers exceed what Lara could do repeatably against spin
Bradman scored 300 in a day. With toothpick bats. Let that sink in. He was no slouch in terms of strike rate. If you scale him down vs Richards, you must use that as a point to raise him above Sachin/Sobers/Hobbs, whose strike rates pailed in comparison to his

McGrath >> Akram as a test bowler, and the ODI debate is very close (McGrath >> WC's). I do not understand how a bowler who is quite clearly the greatest all format bowler of all time doesn't get in

Also Botham is a joke. Definitely not a great ODI player

Let us compare Bradman to Sobers as an exercise
As a bat Bradman was ahead in all qualities. Scored faster, bigger and more consistently on all wickets
Sobers bowling would have to equate to a 42 average to equal Bradman. If you think a 34 bowling average is in any way comparable to a batting average of 42 you are, frankly, an idiot. That would mean Mark Waugh = Jerome Taylor. What a shocking argument

Comparing Bradman to Hobbs is also a joke. Yes, Bradman was worse on poor wickets but on good wickets Hobbs was merely magnificent. Bradman was truly exceptional. A team with Bradman would beat a team with Hobbs 9/10. Poor wickets do not even exist anymore, and they were not common enough even in those days to make Hobbs more valuable than Bradman

You have made a lot of bad lists, but this take the cake. Putting people like Tendulkar, Sobers and Hobbs ahead of Bradman, who was almost twice as good as them as a batsmen is horrible. WG is the only cricketer who can be considered similar to Bradman, but FC records have to be invoked which is clearly outside the context of this thread (despite the fact you legit do that lol :((( )

bradman is good because he played in a weak amateur era. He stood out amongst amateurs. wah wah. wow. amazing stuff. rofl.

He may or may not be amazing now. We don't know. Its all conjecture. This thread is so pointless. Across era comparisons is absolutely absurd. Skills change. Rules change. Competition level differs. Equipment differs. Technology advances. nutrition and training would be totally different. Supplements. PEDs.


bradman was the GOAT of his era.

sobers was the GOAT of his era.

I personally don't believe sacchhu bhai was the GOAT of his era but most do. so.....

Steve smith is the GOAT of our era and actually might be the best of all time. He performed vs all top teams everywhere.
 
That is the point. Bradman is better by a distance of Mark Waugh from Sobers. Do you really think that a bowler at the same level of Jerome Taylor makes up for that

This is not just a batting thread. Did Donald Bradman bowl? I believe the purpose of this thread is to look at all aspects of game.

Also, Bradman didn't play in subcontinent much. I am not sure if he was tested enough.

Sobers seems more battle-hardened.
 
This is not just a batting thread. Did Donald Bradman bowl? I believe the purpose of this thread is to look at all aspects of game.

Also, Bradman didn't play in subcontinent much. I am not sure if he was tested enough.

Sobers seems more battle-hardened.

The best player is the one who most impacts the game, and that is Bradman as his batting superiority vastly outweighs Sobers’ bowling

Re the subcontinent, English pitches used to be significantly more varied, and on these pitches Bradman faced bowlers of the quality or Laker and Verity. He also was very good vs Grimmett and O’Reilly. He faced more top tier spinners than any bat in history. His skill against the spinners is not debated - he was much more tested vs them than Sobers
 
I like this list alot. For me Richards from Gavaskar would be the only change, but I def agree with the other 4 names. Gavaskar is sightly better than Richards as a test bat but Richards much better ODI for me
A complete list would be
Bradman
Tendulkar
McGrath
Murali
Richards
Lara
Akram
Donald
Gilchrist
Sobers
etc

Warne and Imran should be there. I’d put Warne before Murali and Immy before Lara
 
I like this list alot. For me Richards from Gavaskar would be the only change, but I def agree with the other 4 names. Gavaskar is sightly better than Richards as a test bat but Richards much better ODI for me
A complete list would be
Bradman
Tendulkar
McGrath
Murali
Richards
Lara
Akram
Donald
Gilchrist
Sobers
etc

A very fine list.Any order of merit?
 
The best player is the one who most impacts the game, and that is Bradman as his batting superiority vastly outweighs Sobers’ bowling

Re the subcontinent, English pitches used to be significantly more varied, and on these pitches Bradman faced bowlers of the quality or Laker and Verity. He also was very good vs Grimmett and O’Reilly. He faced more top tier spinners than any bat in history. His skill against the spinners is not debated - he was much more tested vs them than Sobers

Bradman never played in India or faced bowlers like Subash Gupte and Richie Benaud as Sobers.Bradman did not score big centuries against Lillee and Davidson at their Quickest like Sobers.

Sobers in peak era averaged around 27 which in subsequent decades was close to the equivalent of around 21 and strike rate of around 50.Sobers was more versatile than any bowler ever.He turned more series as a cricketer than Bradman.Would Bradman the batsman surpass Sobers the all-round cricketer in impact in 1966 series in England and in 1970 in England for rest of the world.?

Bradman would have averaged over 70 i Sobers's era in my view.Sobers's statistic do not do justice to his real impact and in a critical study it may well be Gary who was more impactful when you adjust combined performance average.Remember Ian Chappell stating that Sobers was to allrounders what Bradman was to batting.
 
Why no Sobers?Warne?Marshall?Anway good choices.Like your answer.

Personal bias must not come in the way of judgements.

For me, personally speaking, Allan Donald is the greatest but Glenn McGrath's achievements are remarkable and he absolutely.deserves to be at the top of the mountain as far as fast bowling recognition is concerned..

Muralitharan. Same reasoning as above
I'd pick Donald amd Warne over Murali amd McGrath in my ATG XI but that's me picking my team..Murali amd McGrath's achievements are at another level.

Sobers , is up there, just not for me, I always have a hard time rating ARs. Personally speaking they don't belong in the discussion as far as I am concerned. I'd always pick my Top 5 based on a specialist skill and that's just my personal opinion. I respect if anyone does the exact opposite and fill their Top 5 with ARs. To each their own.
 
I have never seen a more weaker and cowardly cricketer among the ATG class then squirrel :sachin shocking record in the 4th innings and an extremely poor match winner, he got more and more horrible with age, grandpa continued playing on his name alone and his delusional worshippers valued his selfish knocks more then the team seeing any benefit

I second this. sachin is a great player but he is nowhere near the best. He was indeed a very selfish player. Indians though.....love to idolize him. Pathetic team work and attitude in general.

Bradman is no where near the best either.

should be sobers or Steve smith.
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

I lol at the 'morally' comments. Can you explain what that means as it looks like a pointless word you use to make yourself seem smart

Bradman stitched up. Legit almost 100% better then Sachin in tests. Given that they are given 80% weighting he should quite clearly be #1
Given he and Hobbs were very similar era's, his average of 80% than Hobbs make the debate a moot point
WG didn't play much test cricket, and his record <Trumper/Hill/Ranji/Shrewsbury from his era

I do not get how you criticise Bradman in poor conditions, and rate him below Hobbs. Bad conditions were very rare and he optimised his game to play in the conditions he would generally face. In conditions akin to modern ones he would legitimately be twice as good as Hobbs
Also with Bradman, I do not understand how you can say that because he would be a worse player than the best attributes of a variety of different players he is worse than someone like Hobbs. A combined player of Richards' destructiveness, Smith's concentration, Tendulkar's technique, Hobbs on bad wickets and Lara's spin abilities might be better, but it would be close and the comparison is just silly.
Anyway, all of those points are highly contestable:
Bradman averaged 56 vs Bodyline, with ridiculously unfair fields and dangerous bowling. That is higher than the career averages of Viv/Gavaskar. Also, the Viv could have averaged 60 argument is ridiculous. He was an incredibly competitive man, and if he could have performed better he could have.
Bradman was very good against 3 great spin bowlers: Verity, O'Reilly and Grimmett. His performances against these bowlers exceed what Lara could do repeatably against spin
Bradman scored 300 in a day. With toothpick bats. Let that sink in. He was no slouch in terms of strike rate. If you scale him down vs Richards, you must use that as a point to raise him above Sachin/Sobers/Hobbs, whose strike rates pailed in comparison to his

McGrath >> Akram as a test bowler, and the ODI debate is very close (McGrath >> WC's). I do not understand how a bowler who is quite clearly the greatest all format bowler of all time doesn't get in

Also Botham is a joke. Definitely not a great ODI player

Let us compare Bradman to Sobers as an exercise
As a bat Bradman was ahead in all qualities. Scored faster, bigger and more consistently on all wickets
Sobers bowling would have to equate to a 42 average to equal Bradman. If you think a 34 bowling average is in any way comparable to a batting average of 42 you are, frankly, an idiot. That would mean Mark Waugh = Jerome Taylor. What a shocking argument

Comparing Bradman to Hobbs is also a joke. Yes, Bradman was worse on poor wickets but on good wickets Hobbs was merely magnificent. Bradman was truly exceptional. A team with Bradman would beat a team with Hobbs 9/10. Poor wickets do not even exist anymore, and they were not common enough even in those days to make Hobbs more valuable than Bradman

You have made a lot of bad lists, but this take the cake. Putting people like Tendulkar, Sobers and Hobbs ahead of Bradman, who was almost twice as good as them as a batsmen is horrible. WG is the only cricketer who can be considered similar to Bradman, but FC records have to be invoked which is clearly outside the context of this thread (despite the fact you legit do that lol :((( )

You have every right to your opinion.You make logical arguments.However remember cricket is not about stats alone .It is also about conquering the worst pitches ,crisis and lethal bowling.The pure figures of Sobers,Viv or Lara may not do justice to their true impact.

Bradman would have had a 70-75 test average in era since 1970,if you scale nature of bowling attacks and fielding.Still I don;t back the Don to surpass the skill of Lara or Tendulkar against spin,counter lethal pace like Gavaskar,batter pace attacks to submission like Viv,handle quicker than Gilchrist or Sehwag or better the skill of Tendulkar into being prolific in every form of the game.Compare the diversity of the era of Tendulkar and the comparative pressure he has faced.In his own time Headley outscored him on wet wickets.

The combined cricketing performance of Sobers would be by a hin margin more effective than Bradman because Sobers could turn games with aball having more repertoires in his armoury than nay bowler ever.Remember the countless times Sobers's combined efforts have turned games or series like for rest of the world in England in 1970 or in a test series in England in 1966.Remember the Kingston test versus England in 1968-69 or the tied test at Brisbane in 1960-61.With pitches more helpful to bowlers in Bradman's era Sobers may have come up with astonishing bowling stats if he played then.Remember theimpact of Gary Scoring a fifty or a century and then taking wickets and catches.In skill he was like a Viv with the bat and a Wasim with the ball.Unlike Bradman Sobers played in India,that too against the best spinners.Sobers was like 2 great cricketers into one.If you scale average of Bradman to around 70 playing in era of Sobers then even on figures Sobers may be more impactful as a combined cricketer.

No doubt Bradman would have averaged more than Hobbs in his day on good wickets.However Hobbs in his time amassed most of his run son bad wickets.Bradman may not have surpassed Hobbs's 197 centuries and 61237 runs.

Similarly Bradman may not have surpassed Tendulkar's 100 international centuries in modern era.Perhaps in pure impact with the bat it was Viv who was on top overall who turned the complexion of a match more than anyone.

You may be correct and I maybe subjective but I will never accept that Bradman is in another league as a cricketer from Sobers,and if you scale relative eras even Tendulkar,Viv,Lara or Hobbs.
 
The best player is the one who most impacts the game, and that is Bradman as his batting superiority vastly outweighs Sobers’ bowling

Re the subcontinent, English pitches used to be significantly more varied, and on these pitches Bradman faced bowlers of the quality or Laker and Verity. He also was very good vs Grimmett and O’Reilly. He faced more top tier spinners than any bat in history. His skill against the spinners is not debated - he was much more tested vs them than Sobers

Sobers was not just a bowler. He was a solid batsman too.

I feel Bradman didn't face enough opponents. But, he is still the best batsman statistically. No doubt.
 
I think Bradman should be higher and you should include Glenn McGrath in the list who is arguably the second greatest fast bowler of all-time in both the formats. Brian Lara as a cricketer, honestly, I am not too convinced of his impact as cricketer aside from the artistry he had when batting in full-flow.

My list will have these names grouped country-wise:-

Australia- Don Bradman, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Adam Gilchrist

West Indies- Garfield Sobers, Viv Richards, Malcolm Marshall

England- Jack Hobbs, WC Grace, Ian Botham

India- Sachin Tendulkar, Kapil Dev

South Africa- Jacques Kallis, Dale Steyn

Pakistan- Imran Khan, Wasim Akram

Great list.appreciate Could you place them in order?Your top 5?What do you feel on my rankings?
 
Thanks,appreciate.Could you give your list and also reason for exclusion of Lara?

Lara is mostly known for his 375 and 400.

His 400 was just a selfish innings. Many players probably would've broken it (including Azhar Ali) but teams generally think about wins first.

I agree with your list but I would replace Lara with someone like Sangakara.
 
Last edited:
Lara is mostly known for his 375 and 400.

His 400 was just a selfish innings. Many players probably would've broken it (including Azhar Ali) but teams generally think about wins first.

I agree with your list but I would replace Lara with someone like Sangakara.

Thanks for response and appreciation.Still never forget the games Lara single-handedly turned or won like none else like against Australia in 1999 at home or later in Sri Lanka.Remember he played for one of the weakest teams.No batsman was his equal as a lone crusader.
 
My 15 greatest cricketers list

1. Sir Don Bradman - Average of 99. probably the greatest statistical average of all sports. no one can beat this in any sport. A mythical achievement.

2. Adam Gilchrist - Greatest wicket keeper batsman of all time. Just no other argument about it. Had Ridiculous average of 55+ after 70 odd tests as a keeper batsman. Insane stuff. Was fortunate and privileged to watch him butcher great bowlers like nobodies.

3. Glenn Mcgrath - Greatest match winner of all time as a bowler. Ahead of Malcolm Marshall because of the 20% ODI influence.

4. Malcolm Marshal - Magical Player. great against everyone.

5. Shane Warne - One of the most influential cricketers of all time. Greatest leg spinner of all time.

6. Gary Sobers - Probably the greatest all rounder of all time.

7. Steve Smith - Arguably the greatest test batsman of all time after Bradman.

8. Muttiah Muralitharan - Greatest off spinner of all time. Hard to look past his stats.

9. Sunil Gavaskar - Opening the batting and performing against that West Indian attack of 70s and 80s. Legendary stuff.

10. Wasim Akram - Greatest Left arm bowler of all time.

11. Graeme Smith - Probably the best test opener after gavasakar. Played most of his cricket in South Africa, which is a minefield for openers. An amazing captain as well who went undefeated for years away from home.

12. Imran Khan - Great player, Great Captain. One of the finest cricketers of all time.

13. Sachin Tendulkar - ProbablyMisbah Ul haq's biggest weakness is his inferiority complex. Also it seems like he's the boss of the team when ideally the captain should be the one in charge.

14. Viv Richards - Changed the game with aggression and power. One of the Greatest ODI batsman of all time. Great test batman with averaging 60 for first half of the career. Captained one of the greatest team of all time.

15. Jacques Kallis - One of the Greatest all rounder of all time. Class player.
 
Warne and Imran should be there. I’d put Warne before Murali and Immy before Lara

Murali was a better ODI bowler for me, while Imran’s odi bowling record is no where near as good as his test record. However, their test strength would mean they would probably be the next two picked
 
Thanks for response and appreciation.Still never forget the games Lara single-handedly turned or won like none else like against Australia in 1999 at home or later in Sri Lanka.Remember he played for one of the weakest teams.No batsman was his equal as a lone crusader.

That bit about the lone crusader is a bit much. Border, Flower and Headley are there. I have done some research on Lara and my view on him has changed - he seemed to score an extraordinary amount in dead rubbers
 
bradman is good because he played in a weak amateur era. He stood out amongst amateurs. wah wah. wow. amazing stuff. rofl.

He may or may not be amazing now. We don't know. Its all conjecture. This thread is so pointless. Across era comparisons is absolutely absurd. Skills change. Rules change. Competition level differs. Equipment differs. Technology advances. nutrition and training would be totally different. Supplements. PEDs.


bradman was the GOAT of his era.

sobers was the GOAT of his era.

I personally don't believe sacchhu bhai was the GOAT of his era but most do. so.....

Steve smith is the GOAT of our era and actually might be the best of all time. He performed vs all top teams everywhere.

Do you know what the most important aspect of batting is. It is concentration and mental toughness. In these fields Bradman is so far ahead of any player ever that he would succeed in any era. Even Bradman himself remarked that he say many better players, they just kept getting out. If Bradman was given a year to adjust to the modern game, no doubt he would dominate.
While Smith and Tendulkar and Sobers were the best of their era, it was tight never more than a few percent. Through cricket history all of the greats have average in the 50’s, the odd one pushing 60. 99.94. You say they are all the GOAT’s if their era but surely the fact that Bradman was so dominant over people like Hammond and Headley, legit ATG’s mean he deserves to lie a tier above

The other issue with regards to your era comments it this this. Steyn played with Tendulkar. Tendulkar played with Imran. Imran played with Sobers. Sobers played with Compton. Compton played with Bradman. All of these players had consistent records that spanned long careers. Such a change in standard st any point would break this continuity of greats succeeding against a younger genarstion
 
Sobers was not just a bowler. He was a solid batsman too.

I feel Bradman didn't face enough opponents. But, he is still the best batsman statistically. No doubt.
I can kind of see your POV. Would you rate Kallis > Sachin as a test cricketer?
 
Lol what a ridiculous list. Did you watched Hobbs , W.G Grace live. If you have'nt then its absurd to claim that one was the epitome of grace and the other was fantastic on a sticky wicket. First of all its pointless to compare across eras and secondly you can only rank players you have watched footage of or have seen live. Hobbs was half the batsman Bradman was and no wonder nobody remember Hobbs now and Bradman is still remembered . W.G Grace was accused of being a cheater. W.G Grace era was extremely unprofessional.
All in all its a thoroughly pointless list. Not only because its ridiculous to compare across eras but also because White ball cricket now is also a very important format of the game. Ranking should in the ratio of 65/35
 
Do you know what the most important aspect of batting is. It is concentration and mental toughness. In these fields Bradman is so far ahead of any player ever that he would succeed in any era. Even Bradman himself remarked that he say many better players, they just kept getting out. If Bradman was given a year to adjust to the modern game, no doubt he would dominate.
While Smith and Tendulkar and Sobers were the best of their era, it was tight never more than a few percent. Through cricket history all of the greats have average in the 50’s, the odd one pushing 60. 99.94. You say they are all the GOAT’s if their era but surely the fact that Bradman was so dominant over people like Hammond and Headley, legit ATG’s mean he deserves to lie a tier above

The other issue with regards to your era comments it this this. Steyn played with Tendulkar. Tendulkar played with Imran. Imran played with Sobers. Sobers played with Compton. Compton played with Bradman. All of these players had consistent records that spanned long careers. Such a change in standard st any point would break this continuity of greats succeeding against a younger genarstion

Smith is the best ever. I have never seen someone able to dominate teams single handedly and not to mention he actually saves his team from a precarious position consisstenyl.

definition of GOAT.

bradman is GOAT vs amateurs. yes.
 
Why do people find others rankings ridiculous. It's their right to rate whomever the way they like..
 
sachin wasn't that good in tests. 100%. selfish ungrateful dude he was. Still above any Pakistani or English player that ever played.
 
My 15 greatest cricketers list

1. Sir Don Bradman - Average of 99. probably the greatest statistical average of all sports. no one can beat this in any sport. A mythical achievement.

2. Adam Gilchrist - Greatest wicket keeper batsman of all time. Just no other argument about it. Had Ridiculous average of 55+ after 70 odd tests as a keeper batsman. Insane stuff. Was fortunate and privileged to watch him butcher great bowlers like nobodies.

3. Glenn Mcgrath - Greatest match winner of all time as a bowler. Ahead of Malcolm Marshall because of the 20% ODI influence.

4. Malcolm Marshal - Magical Player. great against everyone.

5. Shane Warne - One of the most influential cricketers of all time. Greatest leg spinner of all time.

6. Gary Sobers - Probably the greatest all rounder of all time.

7. Steve Smith - Arguably the greatest test batsman of all time after Bradman.

8. Muttiah Muralitharan - Greatest off spinner of all time. Hard to look past his stats.

9. Sunil Gavaskar - Opening the batting and performing against that West Indian attack of 70s and 80s. Legendary stuff.

10. Wasim Akram - Greatest Left arm bowler of all time.

11. Graeme Smith - Probably the best test opener after gavasakar. Played most of his cricket in South Africa, which is a minefield for openers. An amazing captain as well who went undefeated for years away from home.

12. Imran Khan - Great player, Great Captain. One of the finest cricketers of all time.

13. Sachin Tendulkar - ProbablyMisbah Ul haq's biggest weakness is his inferiority complex. Also it seems like he's the boss of the team when ideally the captain should be the one in charge.

14. Viv Richards - Changed the game with aggression and power. One of the Greatest ODI batsman of all time. Great test batman with averaging 60 for first half of the career. Captained one of the greatest team of all time.

15. Jacques Kallis - One of the Greatest all rounder of all time. Class player.

Great list.Well done.Is it in order of merit?If so you rate Viv Richards and Tendulkar too low and Gavaskar ,Mcgrath and Gilchrist to high.No payers of older generations?appreciate response.
 
Why do people find others rankings ridiculous. It's their right to rate whomever the way they like..

Sorry if it looked offensive or it offended anyone. But my only problem is that someone should rate those player who he/she has seen play either live in the ground or on tv or on a footage. I cant understand how Hobbs is rated at no2 when no one remembers him and WG Grace player 150 years ago and I think accounts of his "graceful" are more theoretical than practical. In a lot of sources it is mentioned that he cheated as he was a authoritative figure in the society
 
13. Sachin Tendulkar - ProbablyMisbah Ul haq's biggest weakness is his inferiority complex. Also it seems like he's the boss of the team when ideally the captain should be the one in charge.

a5bd7773f350ec827f8f144c6903fcdc.jpeg
 
Great list.Well done.Is it in order of merit?If so you rate Viv Richards and Tendulkar too low and Gavaskar ,Mcgrath and Gilchrist to high.No payers of older generations?appreciate response.


I again greatly complement your list.A great effort.

However did not Tendulkar score 100 International runs and 30000 runs facing more pressure than any other middle order batsman?Should be close to the top.I praise your rating of Sobers but feel he should make top 3 with cricketing acheivements at ultimate height.You give a balanced rating to Imran,Kalllis but miss out on Botham,close to the bes ever cricketer or match-winner at his best-15 centuries and 27-5 wkt.hauls.Gavaskar was no-doubt a legend arguably amongst the op 5 test batsman of all time,but most-of runs against West Indies was not scored against he top Carribeam pace quartet r and he partially benefited from playing 2nd string Australian and West Indies attacks in late 70's.Tendulkar,Viv and Lara had significantly better scoring rates.Dennis Lille was more overstate than Mcgrath and penetrative who morally took 460 international wickets,adding unofficial games.Comparatively considering opposition and era his strike rate was better than Mcgrath's.Brian Lara single-handedly turned or won games more than anyone playing for a weak team.Viv Richards in peak era was more impactful than anyone after Bradman and intimidated bowlers more than any batsman ever.I doubt Bradman would equal Viv's domination of express pace.
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]. I noticed you said that Bradman would not meet Viv's dominance of express pace. What is your argument against Bradman's average in bodyline being harder than Viv's career average
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]. I noticed you said that Bradman would not meet Viv's dominance of express pace. What is your argument against Bradman's average in bodyline being harder than Viv's career average

Viv has countless more runs facing likes of Lillee,Imran,Willis etc.That too without a helmet.
 
Only scored 50 hundreds. What a loser. That has to be one of the worst posts of all time by [MENTION=141306]sweep_shot[/MENTION]

My point is there were other players who did better than Sachin in Test.

Sachin is the Bradman of ODI but he was not the best in Test.

Sachin also played a ridiculous number of Tests and it helped him to get to 50 centuries.
 
Last edited:
Viv has countless more runs facing likes of Lillee,Imran,Willis etc.That too without a helmet.
Lol at the w/o a helmet. Bradman did that too
He scored more runs as he played more tests. Bradman scored runs significantly higher frequency - average of 56 in bodyline
 
My point is there were other players who did better than Sachin in Test.

Sachin is the Bradman of ODI but he was not the best in Test.

Sachin also played a ridiculous number of Tests and it helped him to get to 50 centuries.

Sachin is a top 5 test bat of all time. His century ratio is very good so that is no criticism.
In fact, he is probably as good a test player as ODI player, is both cases clearly behind only 1 player - Bradman/Viv
 
you know what sachin is the GOAT of 90s

Steve smith is the GOAT of 2010s

bradman is the GOAT of amateur era

kalis is the best all rounder of all time

sobers is the GOAT OF HIS ERA.
 
you know what sachin is the GOAT of 90s

Steve smith is the GOAT of 2010s

bradman is the GOAT of amateur era

kalis is the best all rounder of all time

sobers is the GOAT OF HIS ERA.

Smith isn't greatest of 2010 and even Australian ex cricketers do not come up with such claims . That whole decade was ruled by Kohli and it's not even close. Kohli scored more international runs in the 2010s than any cricketer ever in any decade.

As much as I respect test cricket, in 2020 no cricketer can be called GOAT on basis of tests alone and even in tests given the style of play , many still prefer to watch Kohli howsoever clutch Smith may be.
 
Great list.appreciate Could you place them in order?Your top 5?What do you feel on my rankings?

Sure brother. Here is my top 5:-

Sir Don Bradman
Garfield Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Shane Warne
Glenn McGrath

Special Appearance- Jack Hobbs

Rest can be put in any order, there is really nothing that seperates 6th, 7th or 8th or even after that. These Lara's , Sangakkara's don't deserve a place in top 15 list. They have not impacted the game or the culture of cricket in their country in such a huge way like Tendulkar or Imran have done for their respective countries.
 
I again greatly complement your list.A great effort.

However did not Tendulkar score 100 International runs and 30000 runs facing more pressure than any other middle order batsman?Should be close to the top.I praise your rating of Sobers but feel he should make top 3 with cricketing acheivements at ultimate height.You give a balanced rating to Imran,Kalllis but miss out on Botham,close to the bes ever cricketer or match-winner at his best-15 centuries and 27-5 wkt.hauls.Gavaskar was no-doubt a legend arguably amongst the op 5 test batsman of all time,but most-of runs against West Indies was not scored against he top Carribeam pace quartet r and he partially benefited from playing 2nd string Australian and West Indies attacks in late 70's.Tendulkar,Viv and Lara had significantly better scoring rates.Dennis Lille was more overstate than Mcgrath and penetrative who morally took 460 international wickets,adding unofficial games.Comparatively considering opposition and era his strike rate was better than Mcgrath's.Brian Lara single-handedly turned or won games more than anyone playing for a weak team.Viv Richards in peak era was more impactful than anyone after Bradman and intimidated bowlers more than any batsman ever.I doubt Bradman would equal Viv's domination of express pace.

a. I only picked 3 batsmen in my top 10 list who I believe are better than Sachin. Don Bradman and Steve Smith have superior average and greater impact than Sachin. Sunil Gavaskar being an opener has an edge over Sachin who's a middle order batsman because to me openers face the most difficult moments of bowling in test matches.

b. I also picked Grame Smith ahead of Sachin not necessarily as a better batsman but as a better cricketer who'se probably the greatest South African captain of all time and leading a side which probably is the top 5 greatest side of all time.

c. I picked Garry Sobers as the best all rounder. He's 6th in the list because top 5 had more impact and were better match winners. Sir Don has mythical stats, Gilchrist along with great stats is widely regarded as the undisputed Wk batsman of all time, He's still the benchmark of keepers. Shane Warne is the greatest leg spinner of all time. He also is still the benchmark of spinners. So they had to be in my top 5.

d. Mcgrath & Marshall are the two greatest match winning bowlers of all time. Due to 20% ODI influence, i rated Mcgrath higher. Evm if you add those unofficial wickets of Lillie, He averages higher than Mcgrath with fewer wickets. He also was untested in Subcontinent. Whatever few matches he played, he wasn't impactful. No way he's better than Mcgrath. Every statistical filter has Mcgrath easily ahead of Lillie.

e. Viv averaged 40 in the latter part of career. Isn't comparable with Don.

f. Lara was a heavy scorer but never scored a hundred against Wasim/Waqar/Donald even after playing many tests. That's why I didnt picked him.

g. Couldn't find space for Botham as I feel Sobers, Imran and Kallis are all better than him.
 
Smith isn't greatest of 2010 and even Australian ex cricketers do not come up with such claims . That whole decade was ruled by Kohli and it's not even close. Kohli scored more international runs in the 2010s than any cricketer ever in any decade.

As much as I respect test cricket, in 2020 no cricketer can be called GOAT on basis of tests alone and even in tests given the style of play , many still prefer to watch Kohli howsoever clutch Smith may be.

Currently Bilateral ODIs are in the lowest point of relevance in cricket history. Not sure a great player can be measured by those bilateral ODI stats. Cricketers should be called GOAT based majorly on tests with 20-30% consideration for ODIs and especially performances in the big ODI tournaments.
 
My point is there were other players who did better than Sachin in Test.

Sachin is the Bradman of ODI but he was not the best in Test.

Sachin also played a ridiculous number of Tests and it helped him to get to 50 centuries.
I think 90's Sachin was probably the top 3 batting talent of all time. Captaincy stint and a poor team didnt help him. From 2000 onwards, India were a very good side but Sachin lost his magic touch. He was still a great great player but didnt had that monstarous feeling to his batting anymore.(2003 WC match against Pakistan being one of the few exceptions)
 
I think 90's Sachin was probably the top 3 batting talent of all time. Captaincy stint and a poor team didnt help him. From 2000 onwards, India were a very good side but Sachin lost his magic touch. He was still a great great player but didnt had that monstarous feeling to his batting anymore.(2003 WC match against Pakistan being one of the few exceptions)

Yes. He was declining after 2003.

His best period was probably late-1990's to early-2000's.
 
Smith isn't greatest of 2010 and even Australian ex cricketers do not come up with such claims . That whole decade was ruled by Kohli and it's not even close. Kohli scored more international runs in the 2010s than any cricketer ever in any decade.

As much as I respect test cricket, in 2020 no cricketer can be called GOAT on basis of tests alone and even in tests given the style of play , many still prefer to watch Kohli howsoever clutch Smith may be.

When talking about an 80% test weighting, I don't think it is controversial to put Smith ahead of Kohli at all
 
a. I only picked 3 batsmen in my top 10 list who I believe are better than Sachin. Don Bradman and Steve Smith have superior average and greater impact than Sachin. Sunil Gavaskar being an opener has an edge over Sachin who's a middle order batsman because to me openers face the most difficult moments of bowling in test matches.

b. I also picked Grame Smith ahead of Sachin not necessarily as a better batsman but as a better cricketer who'se probably the greatest South African captain of all time and leading a side which probably is the top 5 greatest side of all time.

c. I picked Garry Sobers as the best all rounder. He's 6th in the list because top 5 had more impact and were better match winners. Sir Don has mythical stats, Gilchrist along with great stats is widely regarded as the undisputed Wk batsman of all time, He's still the benchmark of keepers. Shane Warne is the greatest leg spinner of all time. He also is still the benchmark of spinners. So they had to be in my top 5.

d. Mcgrath & Marshall are the two greatest match winning bowlers of all time. Due to 20% ODI influence, i rated Mcgrath higher. Evm if you add those unofficial wickets of Lillie, He averages higher than Mcgrath with fewer wickets. He also was untested in Subcontinent. Whatever few matches he played, he wasn't impactful. No way he's better than Mcgrath. Every statistical filter has Mcgrath easily ahead of Lillie.

e. Viv averaged 40 in the latter part of career. Isn't comparable with Don.

f. Lara was a heavy scorer but never scored a hundred against Wasim/Waqar/Donald even after playing many tests. That's why I didnt picked him.

g. Couldn't find space for Botham as I feel Sobers, Imran and Kallis are all better than him.

Logical analysis and I appreciate your effort to reply.Still I feel Botham has to be given respect for impact in peak Era.Also Lara should be in for his herculean efforts in winning games as a lone crusader who was arguably 2nd to only Bradman in tests.Tendulkar had a much better ODI record,was a better player of spin and could turn the complexion of games more than Gavaskar.Sunny was right up there but not as much a match-winner like Barry Richards.Lillee ws more complete than Mcgrath and was succesful against better opposition.Five wickets per test was phenomenal for that era.He aso had a brilliant average on ODIS.I would have also considered Marshall's prowess with the bat nad for that reason may place even Wasim ahead of Mcgrath.Wasim had phenomenal combined stats.
 
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]. I noticed you said that Bradman would not meet Viv's dominance of express pace. What is your argument against Bradman's average in bodyline being harder than Viv's career average

One important factor that Bradman played only a few tests against such sustained pace.Gavaskar and Viv played many more tests coming close to averaging 50 against the most hostile pace without a helmet.Gooch in 1981 averaged over 57 against the most hostile pace attack on the quickest tracks.Mohinder Amarnath in 1983 averaged over 66 there and Border above 73 in 1984.Even Clive Lloyd;s average of 46.9 was more meritorious than Bradman averaging 56 in bodyline,with Lillee and Thomson at their deadliest.Even Wasim Raja averaging 57 in the Carribean in 1977 was more commendable.
Bodyline bowling strategy in that series really started in the 2nd test and not when Bradman scored his unbeaten century in the first test.In that light even the likes of Grace,Hobbs,Hammond or Headley were not fully tested who did not face the fiery pace of bowlers of post war years,particularly after the 1970's.It is hypothetical as we never saw a Bramna,Hammond or Hobbs play Jeff Thomson at his fastest or Marshall or Wasim at their best.

Gavaskar,Viv and Greg Chappel were the most prolific against the most lethal pace but it must be noted that great fast-medium could me even more challenging which was proved by stalwarts like Mcgrath and Hadlee .Tendulkar and Lara championed causes more against great fast-medium with the exception of Alan Donald in the case of both bad both Donald and Steyn in the case of Sachin.Still wit the great skill that they endowed I would back both to be prolific against the best pace of the 70's and 80's.

Had Gavaskar been as successful facing the likes of Lillee,Roberts,Garner and Holding in his golden era from 1977-80 he would be closer to Bradman and arguably ahead of Tendulkar or Lara.Gavaskar was the equal of Hutton having a comparatively slow strike rate.Infact Vishwanath won India more games than Sunny.

Greg had phenomenal stats averaging almost 60 against West Indies but not at his best on the fast wickets of Barbados and Kingston like in 1979 and in the 1980's was not comfortable against the bouncing ball.This was shown in 1979-89 and 1981-82
 
Without ignoring the 20% odi cricket weightage.
1.Bradman
2.Tendulkar
3.Mcgrath
4.Sobers
5.Kallis
6.Muttiah Muralitharan
7.Akram
8.Ponting
9.Adam Gilchrist
10.Kohli
11.Abdevilliers
12.Pollock
13.Lara
14.Allan Donald
15.Warne
 
I think Bradman should be higher and you should include Glenn McGrath in the list who is arguably the second greatest fast bowler of all-time in both the formats. Brian Lara as a cricketer, honestly, I am not too convinced of his impact as cricketer aside from the artistry he had when batting in full-flow.

My list will have these names grouped country-wise:-

Australia- Don Bradman, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Adam Gilchrist

West Indies- Garfield Sobers, Viv Richards, Malcolm Marshall

England- Jack Hobbs, WC Grace, Ian Botham

India- Sachin Tendulkar, Kapil Dev

South Africa- Jacques Kallis, Dale Steyn

Pakistan- Imran Khan, Wasim Akram

Any comments on my rankings and evaluation and the criticisms on this thread or other lists?appreciate
 
Without ignoring the 20% odi cricket weightage.
1.Bradman
2.Tendulkar
3.Mcgrath
4.Sobers
5.Kallis
6.Muttiah Muralitharan
7.Akram
8.Ponting
9.Adam Gilchrist
10.Kohli
11.Abdevilliers
12.Pollock
13.Lara
14.Allan Donald
15.Warne

Great list but why no Marshall ,Hadlee ,Imran o rLillee?
 
One important factor that Bradman played only a few tests against such sustained pace.Gavaskar and Viv played many more tests coming close to averaging 50 against the most hostile pace without a helmet.Gooch in 1981 averaged over 57 against the most hostile pace attack on the quickest tracks.Mohinder Amarnath in 1983 averaged over 66 there and Border above 73 in 1984.Even Clive Lloyd;s average of 46.9 was more meritorious than Bradman averaging 56 in bodyline,with Lillee and Thomson at their deadliest.Even Wasim Raja averaging 57 in the Carribean in 1977 was more commendable.
Bodyline bowling strategy in that series really started in the 2nd test and not when Bradman scored his unbeaten century in the first test.In that light even the likes of Grace,Hobbs,Hammond or Headley were not fully tested who did not face the fiery pace of bowlers of post war years,particularly after the 1970's.It is hypothetical as we never saw a Bramna,Hammond or Hobbs play Jeff Thomson at his fastest or Marshall or Wasim at their best.

Gavaskar,Viv and Greg Chappel were the most prolific against the most lethal pace but it must be noted that great fast-medium could me even more challenging which was proved by stalwarts like Mcgrath and Hadlee .Tendulkar and Lara championed causes more against great fast-medium with the exception of Alan Donald in the case of both bad both Donald and Steyn in the case of Sachin.Still wit the great skill that they endowed I would back both to be prolific against the best pace of the 70's and 80's.

Had Gavaskar been as successful facing the likes of Lillee,Roberts,Garner and Holding in his golden era from 1977-80 he would be closer to Bradman and arguably ahead of Tendulkar or Lara.Gavaskar was the equal of Hutton having a comparatively slow strike rate.Infact Vishwanath won India more games than Sunny.

Greg had phenomenal stats averaging almost 60 against West Indies but not at his best on the fast wickets of Barbados and Kingston like in 1979 and in the 1980's was not comfortable against the bouncing ball.This was shown in 1979-89 and 1981-82

He did play few tests, but in those he was excellent. Shut up about the without a helmet, that applies to Bradman as well except Bradman batted with bad pads. How are those averages more commendable. Bodyline was outlawed for a very good reason - it is completely unfair and promotes a bad game. No batsmen can continuously hook fast bowlers for sixes with those bats and that is what is required vs bodyline. Bodylinee started from the 1st test, I'm not sure where that comes from. Hobbs is tested, McDonald and Gregory were very good in 20-21. Grace is not tested, and it is debatable re Headley/Hammond (especially Hammond as in his day there were question marks over him vs fast bowling), but Bradman faced bodyline and averaged 56!

No we did not see Bradman play those bowlers, but he faced an equivalent under tactics that should have been illegal. Surely it should be the other way as well - Marshall and Thomson were not proven against the great batsmen like Hammond, Hobbs and Bradman (no more stupid an argument than yours)

Also why did you bring Greg into the discussion, but he was excellent vs WI in 75/76 (one of the great series) and in WSC
 
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] plead your participation here with view on my rankings and criticism and lists of pp viewers on this thread.

Also [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] appreciate
 
Great list.Well done.Is it in order of merit?If so you rate Viv Richards and Tendulkar too low and Gavaskar ,Mcgrath and Gilchrist to high.No payers of older generations?appreciate response.

Just wondering, when you say order of merit is that opposed to in the order of how good-looking they are?
 
When talking about an 80% test weighting, I don't think it is controversial to put Smith ahead of Kohli at all

Definitely.

Although I think this is getting ridiculous :))

I prefer to keep things simple for myself.

Smith the best test batsman currently
Kohli the best overall batsman

Personally speaking, a big fan of Smith and would like to see more fire in his belly for LOIs. It might already be too late though..

Realistically speaking, Smith's career aim.now must be to sustain his test performance level till 4-5 more years.

Retire with most test runs for an Aussie at a 55+ average. It would be great.
 
Definitely.

Although I think this is getting ridiculous :))

I prefer to keep things simple for myself.

Smith the best test batsman currently
Kohli the best overall batsman

Personally speaking, a big fan of Smith and would like to see more fire in his belly for LOIs. It might already be too late though..

Realistically speaking, Smith's career aim.now must be to sustain his test performance level till 4-5 more years.

Retire with most test runs for an Aussie at a 55+ average. It would be great.

Yep this conversation has descended into ridiculousness. Still can't get over the Tendulkar comments

Smith's goal for now IMO is ti finish with 10k + runs @60. That would make him a definite contender for the best after Bradman with probably 5 others
 
Yep this conversation has descended into ridiculousness. Still can't get over the Tendulkar comments

Smith's goal for now IMO is ti finish with 10k + runs @60. That would make him a definite contender for the best after Bradman with probably 5 others

10+ should be minimum. I mentioned highest run getter for Australia because that's a realistic goal for him. Tendulkar with his age advantage took it too far. It's mentally exhausting for anyone to catch him in test runs. 13-14k runs is a realistic goal for both Smith and Kohli. 55+ at that point is phenomenal and 60+ will put him right up there.
 
Yep this conversation has descended into ridiculousness. Still can't get over the Tendulkar comments

They say that Sachin is hyped only because he played more and them they come up with le arguements to suggest that guys like Younis Khan were bettee batsmen than Sachin but don't get their due credit because they did not play as much as Sachin.

The irony of this whole arguement is that it is actually the exact opposite. It is only because someone like Younis Khan got to play for so long that his cummulative statistics at the end of the career make him look great/good when actually throughout his career not even once was he talked about as the absolute best batsman in the world.

It takes only 30-40 tests, and about 100 ODIs at max for people to take notice of an iconic batsmen in a generation.

Smith and Kohli with mere 6-7 thousand runs today have bigger aura than many retired batsmen with more runs than them. It is taken for granted that they will retire as greats. They proved themselves as among the absolute best batsmen in their generation and they did not need 200 tests to prove it.

Federer when he just had 6-7 grand slams, people knew he will go on to win many more and retire among the greatest and he's proven it. That's the aura and belief iconic sporstpersons carry.

Contrary to what trolls believe, fans overall are very fair. They acknowledge the likes of Barry Richards, Graham Pollock who did not get to exhibit their full potential on international cricket. They get their due credit from even people like me who only got to hear stories and old footages.
 
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] please come here


If you want guys who moved the game forward I’d say, in date order....

Grace (best of the nineteenth century and the first world sports star)

Bosanquet (developments to wrist spin)

SF Barnes (invented orthodox swing)

Armstrong (invented modern field placing)

Hobbs (architect of 20th century batting)

Bradman (most organised batting brain ever)

Sobers (just really good at everything)

Viv Richards (raised the batting bar by miles)

Imran (discovered reverse swing)

Warne (developed modern wrist spin bowling)

Kohli (best bat overall taking all three codes into account)
 
They say that Sachin is hyped only because he played more and them they come up with le arguements to suggest that guys like Younis Khan were bettee batsmen than Sachin but don't get their due credit because they did not play as much as Sachin.

The irony of this whole arguement is that it is actually the exact opposite. It is only because someone like Younis Khan got to play for so long that his cummulative statistics at the end of the career make him look great/good when actually throughout his career not even once was he talked about as the absolute best batsman in the world.

It takes only 30-40 tests, and about 100 ODIs at max for people to take notice of an iconic batsmen in a generation.

Smith and Kohli with mere 6-7 thousand runs today have bigger aura than many retired batsmen with more runs than them. It is taken for granted that they will retire as greats. They proved themselves as among the absolute best batsmen in their generation and they did not need 200 tests to prove it.

Federer when he just had 6-7 grand slams, people knew he will go on to win many more and retire among the greatest and he's proven it. That's the aura and belief iconic sporstpersons carry.

Contrary to what trolls believe, fans overall are very fair. They acknowledge the likes of Barry Richards, Graham Pollock who did not get to exhibit their full potential on international cricket. They get their due credit from even people like me who only got to hear stories and old footages.

tendulkar is > any batsman either England, south afrixa or pakistan have ever produced. That's for sure.


please come....
 
tendulkar is > any batsman either England, south afrixa or pakistan have ever produced. That's for sure.


please come....

There's no comparison and there's no need to put down anyone. I respect the batting greats of all nations.

Howsoever you want rate them, totally fine.

But don't appreciate when people come up with ridiculous statements to serve their agenda.
 
tendulkar is > any batsman either England, south afrixa or pakistan have ever produced. That's for sure.


please come....

Not better than Wally Hammond I think, not better than Kallis, not better than Miandad.
 
WhyTendulkar below Miandad?Sachin has far more outstanding record.Overall like my rankings?
 
Back
Top