Bradman, no question
Mohammad Rizwan
You just triggered 1b people with that no question remark.
1.4B
Either Bradman or Ponting.
GOAT SantoMcGratch, Wasim, Bradman, Warne - they are level 1 undisputed GOATs.
Tendulkar, Viv, Kallis, Sobers, Lara, Jayasuriya - they are level 2 undisputed GOATs.
Anderson, Sanga, Kohli, Dhoni, Jayawardene, Steyn, Rohit etc. - they are level 3 undisputed GOATs.
I may have missed some names but level 1 shouldn't have any other name.
McGratch, Wasim, Bradman, Warne - they are level 1 undisputed GOATs.
Tendulkar, Viv, Kallis, Sobers, Lara, Jayasuriya - they are level 2 undisputed GOATs.
Anderson, Sanga, Kohli, Dhoni, Jayawardene, Steyn, Rohit, Inzamam etc. - they are level 3 undisputed GOATs.
I may have missed some names but level 1 shouldn't have any other name.
Aithe Rakh!I know it’s either Rizzu or Misbah for OP
You gotta just pick one name to be in the OP that major posted bro.McGratch, Wasim, Bradman, Warne - they are level 1 undisputed GOATs.
Tendulkar, Viv, Kallis, Sobers, Lara, Jayasuriya - they are level 2 undisputed GOATs.
Anderson, Sanga, Kohli, Dhoni, Jayawardene, Steyn, Rohit, Inzamam etc. - they are level 3 undisputed GOATs.
I may have missed some names but level 1 shouldn't have any other name.
But it does lead to some nasty and comical discourse on online forums so there is that.
Their is no point to prove. Unless it cones from my mouth, their is no point to prove from your end.My point gets proven within 2 minutes.
He is a GOAT, but the, Greatest Of All Temus.It has to be Bumrah else....
Why do you think I will consider him a candidate for GOAT? He is not among the even top 3 pacers for me right now in the test format which I give most weight.I am glad you didn't mention Bumrah.
He wasn't best even during his own playing days. McGrath will trump him by a clear margin.
Lets divide this into 2.
Played multiple teams at first class level, and his first class record is still pbly standard deviations better than the second best, despite people in weaker first class structures having the opportunity of scoring as heavily, if not moreso, his innings building ability is unique in all of cricket, and so long as test cricket is the ultimate format, bradman is the undisputed goat.
considering the fixing and rubbish fielding standards of pak in the 90s, 00s wasims records no where near as good as it should have been, also missed a tonne of tests because of poltiics and injuries. i think wasim is number 1 for flair, and bowling magic balls, but he just wasnt consistent enough for many many different reasons. he had the potential of being in the test goat discussion imo.
That's true, Wasim did play for a much crappier team then mcgrath and Marshall however despite this the gap is just too high.
But to consider warne, shouldnt we consider murali than?
Football and baseball are also team sports but messi and babe ruth are considered greats
That is not unanimous. Many hate messi as well. Besides cricket has two major disciplines. In baseball pitching is less celebrated compared to striking. In Cricket it is not entirely true. Bowlers do get celebrated
I just opened cricinfo just to see the dons first class. I always knew his 99 in international.
Babe ruth is accepted as the greatest baseball player.
And here's where you along with others fall into the fallacy of stats.
Bradman's true avg is around 81 in international. His avg is a bit inflated due to avg 230+ against sides like India, SA and a few others and this was when these sides were virtually China level.
It’s between BradMan and SuperMan.
Even though I love wasim Akram he is not better then Mcgrath, Hadlee, Marshall etc etc.
You are calling warne a great when someone else has more wickets that him ina format.
My point exactly, you are fixated with stats, hence you bring in Murli.
But why not? Murali used to turn the ball both ways, was unplayable to almost everyone
Why not? Then stop asking who the GOAT is and head off to the top 10 stats page at Cricinfo and end the thread if you think the best stats equate to greatness.
Its a discussion forum... this is a discussion going on.
Nope. Your standards of greatness are clear, its the best stats.
i did a deep dive on his stats years ago when arguing with some people, two more stats to put his achievements into context, even if you take a 50 test subset of any cricketers career, they dont come close to his career average, and in his last year in the sport, and the age of 40 he scored 1000 runs at an average of 114. his entire basis of exceptionality came down to simply not making mistakes, which is why even as he got older, his numbers didnt diminish. and all of this when he missed 8 years of his career, from the ages of 30 to 38 due to the second world war. had he had a full career his stats would have been crazier, likely 80 odd tests, likely 11,000 runs and 50 hundreds.
All great until you realise he played his entire career (with exception of a few Tests Vs SA) against England.
Nope. Your standards of greatness are clear, its the best stats.
The question is whether you are willing to accept and apply your logic. Not at all it seems.
You say Bradman, means you fell for the best run average. Cricket is a lot more than runs.
Anyway, no discussion from me, anyone who relies on stats can go sit with the cult and burn the midnight oil.
Murli with all his skillz didn't make Sri Lanka one of the greatest Test teams, let alone teams in Cricket.
its no different to many other players of that era, and see my earlier point on his first class career, theres numerous players who have played in only one first class structure, but none has averaged 95 over 330 innings. even in the weakest least professional leagues, think aghan or zimbabwean or bangladesh first class cricket, you dont see anyone averaging even 75, let alone 80 or more. the closest to him in all professional cricket is vijay merchant who averaged 20 runs less.
Other players of his era were part timers.
no, numerous amatuers were only amateurs in name, even before bradman guys like hobbs were playing 800 first class games, in england, in india, they were professionals in all but name. and the control test across sports is baseball, which has been around since roughly the same time, across 100s of thousands of games no batter has stats as statistically anomalous as Bradman.
