You're trying too hard bete - maybe a new approach is required. I think you can do better. Take a step back, and approach with a clearer mind
You are confused. Over my 9 years on PP, I have seen many posters who are still stuck in the past and will try to argue that somehow, both batting and bowling standards have gone down the drain.
The reality is that if you are downplaying modern batsmen with the usual excuses that they are playing on easier pitches, shorter boundaries, bouncer restrictions, bigger bats etc., then you need to downplay the previous era bowlers because they were not handicapped by these factors.
By the same token, you need to give extra credit to modern bowlers as well.
So if you are calling Smith inferior to Miandad due to so and so reasons, then you also need to apply the same logic to bowlers and conclude that Cummins is better than Imran, but you will not do that because it goes against your beliefs, and this is where nostalgia merchants like get caught up in your own illogical premise.
The reality is that you have great players in every era, and truly great players are not restricted by the era that they play in. Smith, Cummins, Miandad, Imran etc. were all great players.
Smith and Cummins would be great in the 70s and 80s and Imran and Miandad would be great today.
However, I can guarantee you that if Miandad played today, he would not be averaging higher than Smith’s mind-boggling Test average of 62.
In the age of DRS, Miandad would no longer have the luxury of ensuring that he is never given LBW in a home Test. And before you flaunt his centuries against West Indies, don’t forget that Miandad averaged 29 against them and 26 at home in spite of the biased home umpiring, which clearly shows that he was not good enough against the best bowling attack of his time.
Smith is the best Test batsman since Don. He has an almost perfect batting brain for Test cricket and he is averaging 60+ in an era of DRS. That is phenomenal.
Similarly, Imran wouldn’t be averaging lower than Cummins today. He could be similar but definitely not significantly better. I have seen many, many great Test bowlers, and the level that Cummins is bowling at today is as good as I have seen. He is almost a perfect Test bowler.
That Headingley Test means what? Don’t forget it was the genius of Ben Stokes that won England the game, who is another all-timer. Ben Stokes is not a great bowler, but he is a better batsman than Imran and Kapil and probably on par with Botham.
Imran lost a Test match to Sri Lanka in 1985, the worst team of the era that only won 2 Tests in the entire decade. The 1985 team of Sri Lanka will get devoured by Kohli’s India, especially in Asian conditions.
Learn to respect greatness and get off your nostalgia. This is a great era for cricket with many brilliant batsmen and bowlers.
Kohli is one of the greatest batsmen of all time.
Smith is one of the greatest batsmen of all time.
Williamson is the greatest batsman New Zealand has ever produced.
Root, in spite of his slump, is a finer batsman than 99% of the batsmen England have produced since WWII.
Ben Stokes is an all-time great player and as a batsman, he is better than Imran, Kapil, Hadlee and probably on par with Botham.
Quinton de Kock is the best WK batsman South Africa have ever had.
Boult is probably New Zealand’s greatest bowler since Hadlee.
Anderson is one of England’s best bowlers ever.
Lyon is the finest off-spinner Australia have ever had.
Cummins is one of the best Test fast bowlers to come out of Australia.
Ashwin is on track to be Indian’s greatest spinner ahead of Bedi and Kumble.
Bumrah could be India’s best fast bowler ever.
Similarly, the 70s, 80s, 90s and 2000s were great as well. 2020s, 30s, 40s will be great today.
Great cricketers will continue to come and go but unfortunately some people will still be stuck in the past.
