Originally Posted by watson
Lara is different though because any cricket lover can be forgiven for going through a 'Lara phase'.
The reason that a 'Lara phase' is not unreasonable is that there is solid ground for believing that Brian Lara is the 2nd greatest/best batsman of all time. In other words it is not difficult to form a rational argument in support of Lara based on a logical assessment of all Test match innings.
However, there are some players that CWers get hung-up on ("fall in love"), and then claim that they are among the greatest when the supportive evidence is just not there in any significant quantity. That type of 'love' IS irrational and silly.
Very true, very few players can be argued to be in that catergory and some try to romantacise and claim that some players were better than they truely were.
The middle order batsmen who (for me) are truely the elite would be:
Bradman, G. Chappell, Ponting, Headley, Lara, V. Richards, Sobers, Tendulkar, G. Pollock, Hammond.
If it over all top for all batsmen, Hobbs replaces Pollock.