[hendrix]

Originally Posted by harsh.skm

I don't buy this. Doesn't hold with his other selections. What is Boycott doing there ahead of Greenidge, Morris and Mitchell? Barrington ahead of Crowe, Archie Jackson, and Mark Waugh? Ponting behind Border and Waugh? Waqar should be miles ahead by this method. Instead, we get the great Bradman slayer, Alec Bedser, Charlie Turner and Fazal Mahmood.

I think he is just biased towards certain players and pulls out bull****, uh.. sorry, ''specious claims'' in support of his argument. Look at the bucketful of English players on the list. Because, yes, the English have been such an exciting and unique bunch of players since WWII

this

Originally Posted by watson

The word 'Greatest' provides an escape hatch for the author because it has a different meaning to 'Best'.

In other words, a batsman like Arthur Morris might be a better batsman than Geoff Boycott, but he is not greater. Better implies a superior technique or talent, but greatness encompasses everything.

Boycott IS an 'icon' of cricket. Morris never was.

Ok, so why leave out Hanif Mohammad? Probably one of the most iconic players and had an immense effect on the game.

Hanif was the first star of Pakistan cricket, the "Little Master" who played the longest innings in Test history - his 970-minute 337 against West Indies in Bridgetown in 1957-58 - then followed it a year later with the highest first-class innings to that point, 499 run out. With such feats, broadcast on radio, he turned cricket in Pakistan from the preserve of the Lahore educated elite into the mass sport it is today. Although famous for his immaculate defence and never hitting the ball in the air, Hanif could also attack, and was probably the originator of the reverse-sweep.