Review of David Gower's 50 greatest cricketers book - How great and fair a book?

[Harsh Thakor]

I just bought an edition of David Gower's 50 Greatest cricketers of all time on my visit to London to see the world cup.Thus for the 1st time I could properly read or evaluate it.

No doubt it is written artistically in a flowing style,giving due respect to cricket history and different eras and possessing lively content.Generally has given all of them their due evaluating them with immaculate precision.A must read for all cricket lovers being a book I rank as outstanding.

One significant trend in his book distinct from other writers is his ranking of the more modern giants compared to legends of past eras.Unlike Cristopher Martin Jenkins,John Woodcock and Geoff Armstrong Gower has included must of his top 50 from the post 1968 era and generally re-ranked the post1970-players ahead of greats from previous decades.He has also favoured the great batsmen over the bowlers.Cricket fans here should be subjected to an important debate of the comparison of pre-1970 stars to post-1970 period.I particularly liked his appraisal of Viv,Lara,Sachin,Imran and Marshall.

Some most questionable or debatable rankings are his placing Andy Roberts ahead of Wasim Akram ,Glen Mcgrath and Curtly Ambrose who are in turn all rated above Dale Steyn.Ranking Javed Miandad and Alan Border above Ricky Ponting.Placing Adam Gilchrist at no 42 who generally makes the list of the top 10 cricketers.Places Murlitharan 26 places belwo compatriot Shane Warne and below likes of Ambrose..Ranks Barry Richards above Len Hutton and Sunil Gavaskar.Placing Greg Chappel too low at 37th place below Border,Minadad and Worrell,who was probably the best Australian batsmen after Bradman. And finally ranks the legends WG Grace and Jack Hobbs below Viv Richards,Lara and Tendulkar.

The most positive rankings are giving Jacques Kallis his fair due unlike other writers at 14th place.Though not a match winner he is statistically the best all -rounder of all time and was a giant considering his era.Also giving recognition to Joel Garner and Jeff Thomson unlike others.Recognizing the great prowess of Andy Roberts and Wasim Akram by ranking them ahead of statistically better pace bowlers.He thus respected the great prowess and verstality of the 2 craftsmen .Remember that Lillee ranked Andy as the most complete pacemen of his time and Gavaskar thought the hardest to face.Lara and Viv ranked Wasim the best pace bowler they ever faced.Accurately places Imran Khan and Botham in the top dozen bad fairly rating Imran ahead of Botham and Kallis because of his great qualities as a leader.Gives Walter Hammond the perfect place at no 8.Gives Malcolm Marshal and Dennis Lille their fair due with Marshall deservedly in the top 10 and Lillee at 16th place.Gave Marshall the nod over Sydney Barnes.I also like his ranking of Wasim,Mcgrath and Ambrose in that order and rating them all above Dale Steyn.Finally recognizes stature of AB Devilliers who was like a Viv Richards of his time and accurately ranks Sehwag.



It is all ultimately subject to debate but I feel the rankings of Cristopher martin Jenkins and Geoff Armstrong more analytical and fair,particularly to pre-1968 cricketers.Where did Barry Richard's record justify his ranking ahead of Len Hutton and Sunil Gavaskar even if he was more talented?Remember the staggering statistics of Huitton and Gavaskar against great bowling.Did Lara ,Viv or even Tendulkar equal Jack Hobbs's staggering aggregate on wet pitches or in al conditions or match the impact of WG Grace?Was not Greg Chappel morally almost in the Viv Richards class and ahead of Border and Ponting considering his great record against the best West Indies pace attack ever at home and in the Carribean.Greg was the best batsmen statistically in Kerry Packer wsc cricket where competitiveness and standard was at it's zenith.Was not Murlitharan stats wise the best of al bowlers and almost as impactful as Warne?

The most critical ranking is that of Adam Gichrist at no 42 who could well atleast be in the top dozen or 15 and Greg Chappell and Ponting behind Miandad.

The most unfair omission to me was that of Everton Weekes who in his lifetime plundered runs of batted like Bradman more than anyone.


The hardest choice was who was overall ahead between Marshall and Imran,between Greg Chapell,Border and Ponting and bewteen Miller,Botham and Kallis.Also a whisker between Sobers,Bradman and Grace in my opinion.

I admire Gower for not displaying as much as a pro- British bias as John Woodcok or Cristopher Martin Jenkins who rated several great English cricketers in my view unfairly ahead of greats from other cricketing nations.I also appreciate hsi not just giving consideration to statistics but moral performance.Perhaps he is justified in ranking modern stars ahead with the game becoming more competitive from the 1970's.It also proves that not more than a margin of a whisker seperates different cricketers.

. Don Bradman
2. Garry Sobers
3. Sachin Tendulkar
4. Shane Warne
5. Viv Richards
6. Brian Lara
7. Jack Hobbs
8. Wally Hammond
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. W.G. Grace
11. Imran Khan
12. Ian Botham
13. Sydney Barnes
14. Jacques Kallis
15. Barry Richards
16. Dennis Lillee
17. Len Hutton
18. Wilfred Rhodes
19. Richie Benaud
20. Denis Compton
21. Keith Miller
22. Bill O' Reilly
23. Andy Roberts
24. Richard Hadlee
25. Graeme Pollock
26. Sunil Gavaskar
27. Wasim Akram
28. Allan Border
29. Glenn McGrath
30. Muttiah Muralitharan
31. George Headley
32. Curtley Ambrose
33. Javed Miandad
34. Ricky Ponting
35. Frank Worrell
36. Herbert Sutcliffe
37. Greg Chappell
38. Fred Trueman
39. AB De Villiers
40. Dale Steyn
41. Kumar Sangakkara
42. Adam Gilchrist
43. Ray Lindwall
44. Harold Larwood
45. Joel Harner
46. Virender Sehwag
47. Kevin Pietersen
48. Kapil Dev
49. Jeff Thomson
50. Alan Knott

 

[barah_admi]

I have not read the book so it would be interesting to know what criteria Gower was using for his rankings?

For example ,when Bert Sugar did a similar thing for boxing (on ESPN I think it was, a few years ago) he had a criteria set out and detailed.

only then can we know how accurate gowers rankings are.

 

[Robert]

Fascinating list. Hard to disagree.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Fascinating list. Hard to disagree.

Agree that many of post 1970-greats like Viv ,Lara nad SAchin were ahead of Hobbs,Hamond and Grace?Is not Headley so low at 31?Any pertinent disagreements like ranking of Greg Chappell and Murlitharan so low ?Who were the closest together-Marshall and Imran?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Please come here [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=538]bilal[/MENTION] [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION] [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] @Freelance cricketer Particularly want your thoughts your thoughts [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] on ranking of Chappell,Marshall ,Imran Pollock and Barry as well as ommision of Weekes .

 

[satheesh]

just a laughable effort. What are the yard sticks? just naming 50 cricketers as he wished in order . Other than that what is this??

 

[Indiafan]

just a laughable effort. What are the yard sticks? just naming 50 cricketers as he wished in order . Other than that what is this??

Well he has written a whole book on that. You have will have to buy that to find out

 

[Harsh Thakor]

just a laughable effort. What are the yard sticks? just naming 50 cricketers as he wished in order . Other than that what is this??

A great ranking in his own right apart from a few very wrong ones.

 

[Ab Fan]

The list was given in 2015. Considering that timeline, it's a fantastic list and I agree with him completely. Obviously there will be a few here and there for anyone but a great list nevertheless.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

The list was given in 2015. Considering that timeline, it's a fantastic list and I agree with him completely. Obviously there will be a few here and there for anyone but a great list nevertheless.

Particularly want your thoughts your thoughts on ranking of Chappell,Marshall ,Imran Pollock and Barry as well as ommision of Weekes . Sorry missed your name earlier [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION][/MENTION] which I will always cherish here .

 

[Harsh Thakor]

The list was given in 2015. Considering that timeline, it's a fantastic list and I agree with him completely. Obviously there will be a few here and there for anyone but a great list nevertheless.

Most controversial rankings?Gilchrist and Chapell?

 

[Barragan]

sehwag and pietersen, but no Waqar Younis?

Surely, Waqar is greater than both.

 

[Junaids]

Actually I agree that Sangakkara was a greater player than Gilchrist.

He was his equal as a keeper and a far more consistent batsman.

 

[ishtiaq_ctg]

Actually I agree that Sangakkara was a greater player than Gilchrist.

He was his equal as a keeper and a far more consistent batsman.

Sangakkara averaged 40 as a keeper scoring 7 hundreds while Gilchrist averaged 47 with 17 hundreds. Not sure how Sangakkara was more consistant than Gilchrist by scoring 7 less runs on an average

 

[barah_admi]

sehwag and pietersen, but no Waqar Younis?

Surely, Waqar is greater than both.

There is no Waqar Younis on the list??

@harshthakor

What is the criteria that Gower puts forward in his book, if any?

 

[Hitman]

Once again a well reputed cricketer from the 70’s and 80’s rating Sachin as the greatest cricketer from Asia and the 3rd greatest cricketer of all time

 

[PakPremi]

Richard Hadlee was not better than Kapil Dev.
No Waqar Younis - easily top 20 player ever, and top 10 bowler.
Shane Warne was not better than Viv Richard.

 

[silentkiller187]

There is no right or wrong list, you can debate this until the cows come home, gower has chosen his 50 and written a book about it, if you feel so hard done by this list then you can write your own version, not sure how many copies it will sell in comparison to Gower.

 

[Asif khan]

Botham ahead of Wasim...yeah sure! Nah seriously it's all subjective and fasicnating at the same time.

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

A bit parochial the list...but hey, has to sell in England.

 

[Robert]

Agree that many of post 1970-greats like Viv ,Lara nad SAchin were ahead of Hobbs,Hamond and Grace?Is not Headley so low at 31?Any pertinent disagreements like ranking of Greg Chappell and Murlitharan so low ?Who were the closest together-Marshall and Imran?

Interesting that he has put Imran and Botham a long way ahead of Hadlee and Kapil.

I also thought he would have put Andy Roberts higher as he said Roberts was the most difficult bowler he faced. Not Lillee, not Hadlee and not even Marshall.

 

[Varun]

How is Sehwag in this list, but not Dravid?

 

[Ab Fan]

Particularly want your thoughts your thoughts on ranking of Chappell,Marshall ,Imran Pollock and Barry as well as ommision of Weekes . Sorry missed your name earlier [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION][/MENTION] which I will always cherish here .

Chappell- Should be higher.
Marshall- Again a little higher.
Imran- Ranked spot on.
Pollock/Barry- Very hard to rank either of the two given their matches but it's his list and I would say considering he watched them, it's ranked fine.
Weeks omission is fine. There were some more omissions like Dravid but overall a good list. I would have Gilchrist a bit higher as well. Sangakkara was ranked fine and well around 40.
AB de Villiers slightly down now but considering this was in 2015, he was ranked fine.

 

[Hasan]

No Michael Holding! The Rolls-Royce of fast bowling.

 

[happydavy]

It's his list, his discretion. Though I think bowlers aren't too high on his list. Any list that won't have Glenn McGrath in top 5, will be up for questions.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Very much want your analysis [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] do come here

 

[Sunny_majoka]

how sehwag and piterson in this list but not mohammad yousuf or seaeed anwar

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Any one feel Miandad is overrated here being ranked above Ponting and Chappell ?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

No Michael Holding! The Rolls-Royce of fast bowling.

Totally agree you have spoken my exact words.Anyone feel Inzamam unfairly excluded or Alan Donald?

 

[satheesh]

Well he has written a whole book on that. You have will have to buy that to find out

A great ranking in his own right apart from a few very wrong ones.

what ever it is , it would take 'GOD' level brilliance to come out with such a list. Other than that, for ex: 45. Joel Harner 46. Virender Sehwag
what is the yard stick for such a verdict??

 

[satheesh]

Interesting that he has put Imran and Botham a long way ahead of Hadlee and Kapil.

I also thought he would have put Andy Roberts higher as he said Roberts was the most difficult bowler he faced. Not Lillee, not Hadlee and not even Marshall.

placing Kapil so far behind Botham is the perfect example w.r.t the nonsense associated with list.
Even in plain averages they were not that far. This despite Kapil having much longevity as a bowler & having far higher str: in batting. Kapil played along with Binny,Madanlal, Sastri,Maninder type bowlers where as Botham played along with Willis,Underwood,Hendrick etc.
as per cricinfo Kapil's str: is 81 while Botham had 61 only. Botham batted at 6 and Kapil at 7.
So this str: too gets priority in Kapil's case.
In ODI, this is a no contest. Kapil manufactured the biggest upset in ODI , by beating mighty WI in final in 83.His plain stats too is far better to Botham in ODI.

So all taken into account, to place Kapil that much lower to Botham speaks a lot about this list

 

[Robert]

placing Kapil so far behind Botham is the perfect example w.r.t the nonsense associated with list.
Even in plain averages they were not that far. This despite Kapil having much longevity as a bowler & having far higher str: in batting. Kapil played along with Binny,Madanlal, Sastri,Maninder type bowlers where as Botham played along with Willis,Underwood,Hendrick etc.
as per cricinfo Kapil's str: is 81 while Botham had 61 only. Botham batted at 6 and Kapil at 7.
So this str: too gets priority in Kapil's case.
In ODI, this is a no contest. Kapil manufactured the biggest upset in ODI , by beating mighty WI in final in 83.His plain stats too is far better to Botham in ODI.

So all taken into account, to place Kapil that much lower to Botham speaks a lot about this list

Probably more to do with Kapil not doing much against England.

If Kapil had batted at 61 (very fast in those days) instead of 80 he would have hit a lot more test hundreds than the eight he finished on and won more matches.

If Botham batted at #6 it was because he was able to force his way up from the #7 where he played his first fifty tests, through sheer weight of centuries scored. Kapil had a stronger batting line above him than Botham which took pressure off him. And of course Botham batted half his innings in the hardest country to bat in.

 

[Hitman]

Probably more to do with Kapil not doing much against England.

If Kapil had batted at 61 (very fast in those days) instead of 80 he would have hit a lot more test hundreds than the eight he finished on and won more matches.

If Botham batted at #6 it was because he was able to force his way up from the #7 where he played his first fifty tests, through sheer weight of centuries scored. Kapil had a stronger batting line above him than Botham which took pressure off him. And of course Botham batted half his innings in the hardest country to bat in.

Don’t you consider both Viv and Lara better than Sachin? Why haven’t you pointed that out about this list?

 

[satheesh]

Probably more to do with Kapil not doing much against England.

If Kapil had batted at 61 (very fast in those days) instead of 80 he would have hit a lot more test hundreds than the eight he finished on and won more matches.

If Botham batted at #6 it was because he was able to force his way up from the #7 where he played his first fifty tests, through sheer weight of centuries scored. Kapil had a stronger batting line above him than Botham which took pressure off him. And of course Botham batted half his innings in the hardest country to bat in.

every bat position has its own role. Kapil batted at 7 means his role was to put in as much runs as quickly as possible in the company of tail enders. Hence his high str: rate too has its weightage.

I don't believe that Indian batting was that much superior ' man to man ' when compared to England batting unit of those days.Also coming at no:7 means, one more wkt: has fallen in general.So things even out.

If Botham batted in the hardest country to bat , by the same yardstick Kapil bowled in the hardest country to bowl.

And with ODIs coming into play, the position gap of some 34 between these 2 in the list does not make sense to me by any means. Any way it is his list. We shall agree to disagree.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

every bat position has its own role. Kapil batted at 7 means his role was to put in as much runs as quickly as possible in the company of tail enders. Hence his high str: rate too has its weightage.

I don't believe that Indian batting was that much superior ' man to man ' when compared to England batting unit of those days.Also coming at no:7 means, one more wkt: has fallen in general.So things even out.

If Botham batted in the hardest country to bat , by the same yardstick Kapil bowled in the hardest country to bowl.

And with ODIs coming into play, the position gap of some 34 between these 2 in the list does not make sense to me by any means. Any way it is his list. We shall agree to disagree.

Very well explained.Logical analysis of comparison with Kapil only a whisker behind Botham morally.Significant Kapil overshadowed Botham greatly against West Indies,Arguably the best team of all time.Infact Kapil was the best allrounder versus West Indies,even ahead of Imran.

 

[satheesh]

Very well explained.Logical analysis of comparison with Kapil only a whisker behind Botham morally.Significant Kapil overshadowed Botham greatly against West Indies,Arguably the best team of all time.Infact Kapil was the best allrounder versus West Indies,even ahead of Imran.

yeah ... you reminded one very important point which I forgot firstly ... Against Windies in Windies.... This carries lots of weightage.

I think Botham had some thing like 14+ avg: with no 50s even, far off from his 33.54 avg: . Kapil had some thing like 29 with 2 run a ball 98+ scores.

In bowling too Kapil had some thing like 23.5 vs Botham's 39.5 or so.

So you adds in that too, that 14-48 rankings do not make sense atleast to me. Any way Gower has his own reasons which we need to respect.

 

[Robert]

every bat position has its own role. Kapil batted at 7 means his role was to put in as much runs as quickly as possible in the company of tail enders. Hence his high str: rate too has its weightage.

I don't believe that Indian batting was that much superior ' man to man ' when compared to England batting unit of those days.Also coming at no:7 means, one more wkt: has fallen in general.So things even out.

If Botham batted in the hardest country to bat , by the same yardstick Kapil bowled in the hardest country to bowl.

And with ODIs coming into play, the position gap of some 34 between these 2 in the list does not make sense to me by any means. Any way it is his list. We shall agree to disagree.

I never said Kapil should be ranked in the thirties, I was surprised.

Not sure who in the England batting of 1980-86 could displace any of the corresponding Indian top six. Gooch I suppose. Gower if India needed a southpaw. I never thought of that England batting as strong and I always thought India’s was powerful.

Botham was a better batter than Kapil but Kapil was the better bowler. Botham was the better catcher, Kapil the better skipper.

 

[satheesh]

I never said Kapil should be ranked in the thirties, I was surprised.

Not sure who in the England batting of 1980-86 could displace any of the corresponding Indian top six. Gooch I suppose. Gower if India needed a southpaw. I never thought of that England batting as strong and I always thought India’s was powerful.

Botham was a better batter than Kapil but Kapil was the better bowler. Botham was the better catcher, Kapil the better skipper.

England batting consisted of Boycott,Gooch,Gower,Lamb, Smith, Gatting, Robinson, Fowler during Botham's times.
India had Gavaskar,Srikanth,Mohinder, Vengsarkar, Vishwanath, Gaekwad,Asharuddin,Manjrekar
So more or less same strength, if not India by a hair's breadth,That's all.

 

[Robert]

England batting consisted of Boycott,Gooch,Gower,Lamb, Smith, Gatting, Robinson, Fowler during Botham's times.
India had Gavaskar,Srikanth,Mohinder, Vengsarkar, Vishwanath, Gaekwad,Asharuddin,Manjrekar
So more or less same strength, if not India by a hair's breadth,That's all.

Fowler only averaged 34 in tests, you are remembering his 200 in India. Robinson couldn’t play fast bowling.

I would have Gavaskar, Gooch, Gower, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Vishy.

 

[satheesh]

Fowler only averaged 34 in tests, you are remembering his 200 in India. Robinson couldn’t play fast bowling.

I would have Gavaskar, Gooch, Gower, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Vishy.

yeah... but we had Srikkanth,Gaekwad with around 30 avg: as openers too. Any way forgotten Boycott??

 

[Robert]

yeah... but we had Srikkanth,Gaekwad with around 30 avg: as openers too. Any way forgotten Boycott??

I can just about remember him but Botham only had him for his first forty tests before Boycott was banned. I never thought of the England top six as strong in the eighties. Other than Boycott and Gower nobody averaged above 40.

 

[satheesh]

I can just about remember him but Botham only had him for his first forty tests before Boycott was banned. I never thought of the England top six as strong in the eighties. Other than Boycott and Gower nobody averaged above 40.

Gooch around 42.5 & Robin Smith around 43.5

 

[as-95]

I think the rating of Kapil is fair... In my honest opinion, he shouldn't even be in this list so he is lucky to get the 48th position.

I believe Imran Khan should have a higher ranking that 11. He is arguably the greatest all rounder of all time (yes, I believe he is superior to Sobers) and should therefore be ranked 1 above or 1 below Sobers...

Waqar Younis is an astonishing omission from this list. Definitely one of the Top 10 greatest bowlers of all time and should therefore be in this list.

It is also disrespectful to have Wasim Akram so low at 27! The disrespect is unfathomable!

David Gower is an englishman so he has obviously been biased when creating this list and including the likes of Wilfred Rhodes and other english "oldboys" so high up the list.

 

[satheesh]

I think the rating of Kapil is fair... In my honest opinion, he shouldn't even be in this list so he is lucky to get the 48th position.

I believe Imran Khan should have a higher ranking that 11. He is arguably the greatest all rounder of all time (yes, I believe he is superior to Sobers) and should therefore be ranked 1 above or 1 below Sobers...

Waqar Younis is an astonishing omission from this list. Definitely one of the Top 10 greatest bowlers of all time and should therefore be in this list.

It is also disrespectful to have Wasim Akram so low at 27! The disrespect is unfathomable!

David Gower is an englishman so he has obviously been biased when creating this list and including the likes of Wilfred Rhodes and other english "oldboys" so high up the list.

every body has their own reasons. There are lots of people who do not rate Imran that much higher and rate Kapil very higher

 

[as-95]

every body has their own reasons. There are lots of people who do not rate Imran that much higher and rate Kapil very higher

Those people are extremely delusional and in the extreme minority so I wouldn't say that "there are loads of people".) Kapil is most certainly an Indian great but doesn't compare with the ATG's due to his pathetic bowling records away from home ( England(bowling average of 39). Also (average of 42 in New Zeland, 37 in South Africa)

 

[TamiL_GarvaM!]

I just bought an edition of David Gower's 50 Greatest cricketers of all time on my visit to London to see the world cup.Thus for the 1st time I could properly read or evaluate it.

No doubt it is written artistically in a flowing style,giving due respect to cricket history and different eras and possessing lively content.Generally has given all of them their due evaluating them with immaculate precision.A must read for all cricket lovers being a book I rank as outstanding.

One significant trend in his book distinct from other writers is his ranking of the more modern giants compared to legends of past eras.Unlike Cristopher Martin Jenkins,John Woodcock and Geoff Armstrong Gower has included must of his top 50 from the post 1968 era and generally re-ranked the post1970-players ahead of greats from previous decades.He has also favoured the great batsmen over the bowlers.Cricket fans here should be subjected to an important debate of the comparison of pre-1970 stars to post-1970 period.I particularly liked his appraisal of Viv,Lara,Sachin,Imran and Marshall.

Some most questionable or debatable rankings are his placing Andy Roberts ahead of Wasim Akram ,Glen Mcgrath and Curtly Ambrose who are in turn all rated above Dale Steyn.Ranking Javed Miandad and Alan Border above Ricky Ponting.Placing Adam Gilchrist at no 42 who generally makes the list of the top 10 cricketers.Places Murlitharan 26 places belwo compatriot Shane Warne and below likes of Ambrose..Ranks Barry Richards above Len Hutton and Sunil Gavaskar.Placing Greg Chappel too low at 37th place below Border,Minadad and Worrell,who was probably the best Australian batsmen after Bradman. And finally ranks the legends WG Grace and Jack Hobbs below Viv Richards,Lara and Tendulkar.

The most positive rankings are giving Jacques Kallis his fair due unlike other writers at 14th place.Though not a match winner he is statistically the best all -rounder of all time and was a giant considering his era.Also giving recognition to Joel Garner and Jeff Thomson unlike others.Recognizing the great prowess of Andy Roberts and Wasim Akram by ranking them ahead of statistically better pace bowlers.He thus respected the great prowess and verstality of the 2 craftsmen .Remember that Lillee ranked Andy as the most complete pacemen of his time and Gavaskar thought the hardest to face.Lara and Viv ranked Wasim the best pace bowler they ever faced.Accurately places Imran Khan and Botham in the top dozen bad fairly rating Imran ahead of Botham and Kallis because of his great qualities as a leader.Gives Walter Hammond the perfect place at no 8.Gives Malcolm Marshal and Dennis Lille their fair due with Marshall deservedly in the top 10 and Lillee at 16th place.Gave Marshall the nod over Sydney Barnes.I also like his ranking of Wasim,Mcgrath and Ambrose in that order and rating them all above Dale Steyn.Finally recognizes stature of AB Devilliers who was like a Viv Richards of his time and accurately ranks Sehwag.



It is all ultimately subject to debate but I feel the rankings of Cristopher martin Jenkins and Geoff Armstrong more analytical and fair,particularly to pre-1968 cricketers.Where did Barry Richard's record justify his ranking ahead of Len Hutton and Sunil Gavaskar even if he was more talented?Remember the staggering statistics of Huitton and Gavaskar against great bowling.Did Lara ,Viv or even Tendulkar equal Jack Hobbs's staggering aggregate on wet pitches or in al conditions or match the impact of WG Grace?Was not Greg Chappel morally almost in the Viv Richards class and ahead of Border and Ponting considering his great record against the best West Indies pace attack ever at home and in the Carribean.Greg was the best batsmen statistically in Kerry Packer wsc cricket where competitiveness and standard was at it's zenith.Was not Murlitharan stats wise the best of al bowlers and almost as impactful as Warne?

The most critical ranking is that of Adam Gichrist at no 42 who could well atleast be in the top dozen or 15 and Greg Chappell and Ponting behind Miandad.

The most unfair omission to me was that of Everton Weekes who in his lifetime plundered runs of batted like Bradman more than anyone.


The hardest choice was who was overall ahead between Marshall and Imran,between Greg Chapell,Border and Ponting and bewteen Miller,Botham and Kallis.Also a whisker between Sobers,Bradman and Grace in my opinion.

I admire Gower for not displaying as much as a pro- British bias as John Woodcok or Cristopher Martin Jenkins who rated several great English cricketers in my view unfairly ahead of greats from other cricketing nations.I also appreciate hsi not just giving consideration to statistics but moral performance.Perhaps he is justified in ranking modern stars ahead with the game becoming more competitive from the 1970's.It also proves that not more than a margin of a whisker seperates different cricketers.

. Don Bradman
2. Garry Sobers
3. Sachin Tendulkar
4. Shane Warne
5. Viv Richards
6. Brian Lara
7. Jack Hobbs
8. Wally Hammond
9. Malcolm Marshall
10. W.G. Grace
11. Imran Khan
12. Ian Botham
13. Sydney Barnes
14. Jacques Kallis
15. Barry Richards
16. Dennis Lillee
17. Len Hutton
18. Wilfred Rhodes
19. Richie Benaud
20. Denis Compton
21. Keith Miller
22. Bill O' Reilly
23. Andy Roberts
24. Richard Hadlee
25. Graeme Pollock
26. Sunil Gavaskar
27. Wasim Akram
28. Allan Border
29. Glenn McGrath
30. Muttiah Muralitharan
31. George Headley
32. Curtley Ambrose
33. Javed Miandad
34. Ricky Ponting
35. Frank Worrell
36. Herbert Sutcliffe
37. Greg Chappell
38. Fred Trueman
39. AB De Villiers
40. Dale Steyn
41. Kumar Sangakkara
42. Adam Gilchrist
43. Ray Lindwall
44. Harold Larwood
45. Joel Harner
46. Virender Sehwag
47. Kevin Pietersen
48. Kapil Dev
49. Jeff Thomson
50. Alan Knott

Sunil G had written an absolute gem of a book called 'idols' in the mid 80's....off course there is no ranking in it....just Sunny G's admiration of cricketers he played with and against....a must read - just for the eloquency of writing, the chance to see some of the legends as people and a fantastic dissection of skills....his description, observatory skills are absolutely spot on....
coming back to David G's book...i guess that is a must read as well...but yeah wherever ranking comes....with it come opinions.....so here u go....

 

[satheesh]

Those people are extremely delusional and in the extreme minority so I wouldn't say that "there are loads of people".) Kapil is most certainly an Indian great but doesn't compare with the ATG's due to his pathetic bowling records away from home ( England(bowling average of 39). Also (average of 42 in New Zeland, 37 in South Africa)

you need to look out side of this forum and go thru the comments of lots of people especially w.r.t video clippings associated with all rounders.
A few months back, a survey was conducted in a well known cricket forum w.r.t the standings of Kapil in the list of great all rounders.
Of the 12 people voted in all , 10 considered him to be better than Imran,Botham & Hadlee.It was then I realized as to how highly Kapil is regarded. People do not take plain averages alone.They take other factors also into account

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Please come here [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] love your response

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Actually I agree that Sangakkara was a greater player than Gilchrist.

He was his equal as a keeper and a far more consistent batsman.

What about Barry Richards ranking and Graeme Pollock

 

[MMHS]

Please come here [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] love your response

It's his list and he can put it as he wishes, not much to judge here.

I believe this is a list based on Test cricket only and my thought is - it's a book written targeting the 1.4 bn Indian Market. And, obviously he is biased to English cricket.

I'll have lots of changes in that list apart from top two (almost universally taken for granted), but it's Gower's list and he must have explained why - I haven't read it.

 

[Ab Fan]

If I have to group 40-50 players in certain categories or tiers, I would have my list one as below:-

Tier 1:-

Batsmen:- Bradman, Viv, Sachin, Lara, Hobbs
Bowlers:- Marshall, McGrath, Wasim, Warne, Murali
All-rounder:- Sobers, Imran

Tier2:-

Batsmen:- Hammond, Gavaskar, Ponting, Chappell
Bowlers:-Ambrose, Hadlee, Steyn, Lillee, Donald, Garner, Holding
All-rounders:- Kallis, Botham, Miller
Wicket-keeper:- Adam Gilchrist

Tier3:-

Batsmen:-Dravid, Sangakkara, Border, Miandad, Waugh
Bowlers:- Waqar, Pollock, Walsh, Roberts, Kumble
All-rounders:- Kapil Dev

Don't know but might have missed some. But that's bonafide ATG list for me. Might add some more names to make it 50 like G Smith, Hayden, Sehwag, ABD,KP etc..

 

[Ab Fan]

And Smith and Kohli will be in tier-2, Kane in tier-3 as well by the time they retire.

 

[praveen]

Dale Steyn need to be higher. He is a modern great and peerless.

 

[Robert]

Gooch around 42.5 & Robin Smith around 43.5

Gooch averaged around 37 for most of his career, and nearly the whole time he played with Botham. He turned into Superman from 1990-93, in which time I think Botham played three tests.

Botham and Robin Smith almost never played together.

 

[satheesh]

Gooch averaged around 37 for most of his career, and nearly the whole time he played with Botham. He turned into Superman from 1990-93, in which time I think Botham played three tests.

Botham and Robin Smith almost never played together.

may be it is .... but I don't think all in all the 2 teams of their times differed much in caliber from one another. To think that the likes of Srikanth & Gaekwad were the openers of this team, it can't be the other way around.