What's new

Hundred best cricketers of all time : Do you agree with this list?

Harsh Thakor

First Class Star
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Runs
3,519
Post of the Week
2
Here I am posting an asesment of 100 best cricketers of all-time by Benedict Bermange of Skysports.Below the list I have written my critique of his ratings.Please read it .

Benedict Bermange of Sky Sport's 100 best cricketers of all time.

1.W.G.Grace

2: Donald Bradman

3: Garry Sobers

5-4: Shane Warne (5), Sachin Tendulkar (4)

10-6: Imran Khan (10), Viv Richards (9), Sydney Barnes (8), Jack Hobbs (7), Jacques Kallis (6)

20-11: Kumar Sangakkara (20), Dennis Compton (19), Sunil Gavaskar (18), Adam Gilchrist (17), Wally Hammond (16), Keith Miller (15), Ian Botham (14), Wasim Akram (13), Brian Lara (12), Muttiah Muralitharan (11).

30-21: Geoff Boycott (30), KS Ranjitsinhji (29), Frank Worrell (28), Herbert Sutcliffe (27), Kapil Dev (26), George Headley (25), Wilfred Rhodes (24), Len Hutton (23), Glenn McGrath (22), Richard Hadlee (21).

40-31: Frank Woolley (40), Javed Miandad (39), Alec Bedser (38), Fred Trueman (37), Victor Trumper (36), Dennis Lillee (35), Malcolm Marshall (34), Ricky Ponting (33), Waqar Younis (32), Allan Border (31).

50-41: Everton Weekes (50), George Lohmann (49), Dale Steyn (48), Graham Gooch (47), Fred Spofforth (46), Peter May (45), Virender Sehwag (44), Clarrie Grimmett (43), Hedley Verity (42), Graeme Pollock (41).

60-51: Alfred Mynn (60), Greg Chappell (59), Clyde Walcott (58), Brian Statham (57), 'Tich' Freeman (56), CB Fry (55), Alfred Shaw (54), Zaheer Abbas (53), Richie Benaud (52), George Hirst (51).

70-61: Steve Waugh (70), Ken Barrington (69), Gilbert Jessop (68), Neil Harvey (67), Barry Richards (66), Clive Lloyd (65), Colin Blythe (64), Mike Procter (63), Aubrey Faulkner (62), Les Ames (61).

80-71: Curtly Ambrose (80), Alan Davidson (79), Michael Holding (78), Bill O'Reilly (77), Shaun Pollock (76), Johnny Briggs (75), Vinoo Mankad (74), Jim Laker (73), Ray Lindwall (72), Tom Richardson (71).

90-81: Chris Gayle (90), Bill Ponsford (89), Alan Knott (88), Rahul Dravid (87), Derek Underwood (86), Monty Noble (85), Hanif Mohammad (84), Learie Constantine (83), Allan Donald (82), Anil Kumble (81).

100-91: Tom Goddard (100), Jack Hearne (99), Phil Mead (98), AB de Villiers (97), Charlie Parker (96), Vijay Merchant (95), Patsy Hendren (94), Charlie "The Terror" Turner (93), Maurice Tate (92), Warwick Armstrong (91).

50 who missed the cut: From Alastair Cook to Courtney Walsh; the 50 cricketers who just missed out on the top 100.


My assessment.of list.

The author has done great work overall.Really appreciate some aspects of his rankings.Rever his ranking at no.1 of W.G. Grace who could well have been morally the greatest of all cricketers.Also admire his high ranking of all rounders with Sobers at 3,Botham at 14 ,Miller at 15,Hadlee at 21,Kapil at 26,Imran at 10 and Kallis at 6.Infact .Basically fair to likes of Tendulkar,Warne,Wasim,Gavaskar,Barry Richards,Hobbs,Lara ,Mcgrath ,Headley,Miandad ,Border etc.I am particularly hapy with the recognition given to Brian Lara at no 12 unlike other writers like Cristopher Martin Jenkins,who propelled a weak bating side with more attacking skill and registered mammoth scores more than any batsmen ever.


However there are some gross errors like Jacques Kallis being rated ahead at 6 ahead of Viv,Imran,Hobbs or Imran.Kallis is to me just below them.Kallis has best statistics but could hardly create the impact on games like them. Zaheer Abbas at 53 ahead of Greg Chappel at 59 is ridiculous if you compare test records including WSC..Malcolm Marshall is ranked at 34 when he should be close to 11-12,even ahead of Wasim;Curtly Ambrose is too low at 80 instead of around 50.Everton Weekes is too low at 5o deserving to be near 30. Lillee at 36 should least be in top 25 . Boycott at 30 should be atleast 20 places below.Finally Barry Richards is ranked at 66 which is atleast 30 places low.


I feel the author has given too much consideration to 1st class cricket,thus Zaheer Abbas and Geoff Boycott have been elevated too high,Inzamam Ul Haq ignored .I also think he has given to much attention to mere figures and not given enough consideration to impact of cricketers on games as match-winners,prowess etc.This may be why Kallis is around 5 places ahead of where he should be ranked.
 
Oh look another list that rates Tendulkar among the top 5 greatest cricketers of ALL TIME, they must have been brainwashed by the Indian media according to some bitter keyboard warriors here :rp
 
Shoaib Akhtar should be in that list albeit between 90 and 100. Surely Mohammed Yousaf and Younis Khan should make this list.
 
Abbas, Miandad, Kapil, Sehwag, Boycott and Sangakkara too high. The likes of Donald, Dravid, Ambrose far too low.

Otherwise, solid list.
 
Oh, just noticed. The thing with these lists is that very few posters can often contribute and thus they fade into oblivion.

And usually it's not constructive arguments either. Most of them are due to their favorite players not rated as per their expectations.
 
And usually it's not constructive arguments either. Most of them are due to their favorite players not rated as per their expectations.

Exactly. I mean, its impossible for most Pakistani fans to rate SRT higher than IK or Wasim and vice versa and therefore, I don't think these threads are very contributing to the forum.
 
Anil Kumble is way too low on that list, deserves to be much higher than that.
 
Oh, just noticed. The thing with these lists is that very few posters can often contribute and thus they fade into oblivion.

And usually it's not constructive arguments either. Most of them are due to their favorite players not rated as per their expectations.

Agree. Moreover, there is no purpose of discussing past which cannot serve you in present or future. Best hundred cricketers of all time or Best playing 11 of past 20 years does not have any impact on present or future.
 
Exactly. I mean, its impossible for most Pakistani fans to rate SRT higher than IK or Wasim and vice versa and therefore, I don't think these threads are very contributing to the forum.

Exactly. And it's unrealistic as well for Indian fans to expect Pak fans to rate Sachin ahead of Imran Khan, and vice versa. What I find strange is why fans from both nations take offense when fans from the other nation pick their heroes ahead of theirs. It's completely natural.
 
Exactly. And it's unrealistic as well for Indian fans to expect Pak fans to rate Sachin ahead of Imran Khan, and vice versa. What I find strange is why fans from both nations take offense when fans from the other nation pick their heroes ahead of theirs. It's completely natural.

Absolutely. The thing with discussions about the past is that a lot of emotions are involved, especially when discussing great players like IK and SRT.

If you take a look a present scenarios, I don't think too many Pakistani fans would disagree that Kohli is better than all Pakistani batsmen. Discussions about today or the future are less biased.
 
Don't you get bored with all these lists?

Agree. Moreover, there is no purpose of discussing past which cannot serve you in present or future. Best hundred cricketers of all time or Best playing 11 of past 20 years does not have any impact on present or future.


Exactly ... and he doesnt like it when people point out glaring errors in his observations which are mostly nostalgic ranting and ravings about players from long bygone era's. For example he has Derek Randall and Barry Richards amongst top 10 entertaining cricketers. Between them they have played about 50 Test matches and there is absolutely nothing entertaining about how they play when you watch some actual footage.

The OP is a classic example of Cricket's huge nostalgia bias.
 
WG at 1 is just wrong might have been the first great batsman but look at the era his physique bowling in its initial stages not worthy of no 1 rating overall.
Trueman should be a lot higher aswell.
 
Back
Top