World's Greatest Cricket Legend

[Shoaib]

I think Tendulkar is by far ahead of everyone.

Tendulkar a legend?Is qualification for being a legend is popularity among the non-test playing nations?If yes,then Nasser Hussain should have a place ahead of Tendulkar in that list.Tendulkar has never performed in the hour of need for his team.There are no match winning innings to his name.Having an average of around 57 with 34 100s is enough to be included in the list of legends but only if u have the capability to perform when your team is under crisis.For that reason Lara is 100 times better player and a true legend as compared to tendulkar .I think instead of tendulkar, Rahul Dravid should've been there who is known as"wall" for having great tendency to bear pressure and to perform in the hour of need and critical situations.IMO,Tendulkar has no place even in the list of top 50 legends.

 

[cricket player]

Shoaib come on yar,

Tendulkar does deserve to be in the top 50 if not top if not 10.

I am suprised that their is not Wasim Akram.

What a idiotic list.

 

[Shoaib]

Brian Lara is a better batsman than any of the others in that list but I've voted for Imran Khan as he was a true legend with both bat and ball.Don Bradman would've never been able to cope up with the present day cricketing conditions.The conditions were very easy in the past as compared to present.

 

[Shoaib]

I am suprised that there is no Wasim Akram in that list.

Yeah, its a bit of surprise not to see Wasim Akram there.He is the only one to take more than 500 wickets in odis.Moreover,he is the first bowler to take more than 400 wickets in both forms of the game.He was an excellent bowling all-rounder who should've been there in that list.

 

[SJS]

I am surprised that anyone other than WG and the Don even figures in it. I hope we are talking of "legend' as it is understood.

 

[Burpey]

Sir Don of course for me ... however, Gary Sobers runs a close second. I didn't see either play but I have been told by those who saw Sobers that he was a freak. He could bat magnificently and bowl spin and pace

 

[SJS]

Sir Don of course for me ... however, Gary Sobers runs a close second. I didn't see either play but I have been told by those who saw Sobers that he was a freak. He could bat magnificently and bowl spin and pace

Sobers is too 'real' to be called a legend in the true sense. Not yet at least. Maybe in a hundred years, stories will be added to him which might give him a legendry flavour.

Actually WG , Ranji, and some others of those era are the true legends of cricket. The Don is the last one that really fits in, barely though in my humble opinion...and this has nothing to do with his undeniable status as the greatest cricketer ever (if not the greatest sportsman of all).

Pronunciation: 'le-j&nd
Function: noun
Etymology:
Middle English legende, from Middle French & Medieval Latin;
Middle French legende,
from Medieval Latin legenda, from Latin,
feminine of legendus,
gerundive of legere to gather, select, read;
akin to Greek legein to gather, say, logos speech, word, reason
a : a story coming down from the past; especially : one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable
b : a body of such stories <a place in the legend of the frontier>
c : a popular myth of recent origin
d : a person or thing that inspires legends e : the subject of a legend

PS : Before anyone(everyone) jumps on me, I am aware legend is used more generally too but I rather prefer the context where a person reaches a stature where exploits (real as well as imaginary) are associated with him/her because of the aura around that person and 'stories/fables' are made around the individual which are not always verifiable.

 

[social]

I think people are confusing the issue.
This isnt about who is the better player or who is more popular amongst cricket aficionados and like.
Its about who has the biggest legend, ie, mystique, awe, reverence and popularity amongst the general populace.
In that aspect, i think Tendulkar is by far ahead of everyone.

Tendulkar's market penetration relates to the power of advertising.

If Bradman were playing today, the rest would be extras to his leading man.

 

[C_C]

Tendulkar's market penetration relates to the power of advertising.

If Bradman were playing today, the rest would be extras to his leading man.

Agreed. It is the power of advertising and global inter-connectedness with communications technology.
I am not judging as to who deserves the spot and who doesnt......i am merely pointing out who HAS the most penetration around world public......And in that case, a player of Tendulkar's callibre and era has far bigger scope of creating a legend than Bradman does.This is not a question of how it should be or what it should be...the question of this thread is about what is.

Shoaib- i wont bother with your so-called matchwinning crap. There is no such thing as a matchwinning knock- you can either bat well or bat poorly. But nobody wins a match on their own and others have to carry their weight. The best 'matchwinning' knock described in recent times around here is either Laxman's 281 or Lara's 153* but neither of them would've been matchwinning if Harbhajan and Walsh didnt pull their weight and do their thing.
But the point is, OVERALL market penetration and legend status. Tendulkar already has more fans than any cricketer on the planet...a case can also be made about his popularity even ignorning home fans..... there are tendy fanatics out there who hold him in reverence that even Bradman or Sobers struggle to achieve...... India is a cricket-mad nation and i dont think you'll see the stockmarket grinding to a halt in any nation simply because of a solitary sportsman...I've had my train delayed due to Tendy batting and the driver not wanting to miss it - and this isnt some local train but an express train.
Plus like i said, Tendulkar being the undisputed king of the 90s( ie, at the start of this whole globalisation stuff) alongwith his alltime legend status, he has awareness in places where nobody knows anything about cricket.

 

[archie mac]

I am surprised that anyone other than WG and the Don even figures in it. I hope we are talking of "legend' as it is understood.

Spot on as per usual SJS, the only other one might be Alfred Mynn. Please lets have no more crap about Bradman being unable to cope with the bowlers of today, a few Tests against the Bangas and Zims? If he was not captain of the heaven world 11 he could have pushed his ave: over 100.

 

[C_C]

Btw, I think Sobers deserves mention ahead of WG, because while WG was a pioneer, Sobers was considerably better allrounder than WG and he didnt artificially inflate his figures by matchfixing.

 

[archie mac]

Btw, I think Sobers deserves mention ahead of WG, because while WG was a pioneer, Sobers was considerably better allrounder than WG and he didnt artificially inflate his figures by matchfixing.

I will have to stick up for the 'GOM' WG was a fine all-rounder in his younger days, Test Cricket did not start in England until WG was 32 and was not the bowler he once was. I have read 5 bios on WG and can never remember any allegations of matchfixing. The occasional story of WG refusing to leave the wicket abound, I am sure most of these are apocryphal, and 99% happened in minor Cricket which WG played a lot of, and in which all most everyone bar the bowlers parents came to see WG make runs.

 

[C_C]

I have read 5 bios on WG and can never remember any allegations of matchfixing.

CB Fry and a few others openly admit that it was a common practice in English Country cricket in the latter half of the 1800s that a so-n-so player wouldnt get out before scoring so-n-so runs or a so-n-so bowler would pick 'n' number of wickets in the innings.

Grace was a prodigy in the sense that he practically invented modern day concept of batting and was an excellent bowler.
But it occured at such an early developmental stage of cricket that quality back then cannot be expected to be the same as quality early on this century, let alone in the recent times.
Plus it is very much akin to a decent FC allrounder today going and setting up basecamp in Mongolia or some oddball place like that and subsequently terrorising batsmen and bowlers with revolutionary new techniques...or akin to the first gun-weilder going up against people with spears and swords.....ie, not a fair field.

 

[Burpey]

Why is Steve Waugh not on the list ? He wasn't necessarily the most talented player even though he was very good.

However, the aura around him in his latter days was unbelievable. The public support when he faced the chop in the last 18 months of his career is unable to be put into words. The reception he received in his last Test at the SCG was incredible

 

[age_master]

Easily Tendulkar.

clearly with the one vote people agree with you

Bradman's achievements in the game im quite sure will never be equaled.

Tendulkar on the other hand, is more a fad in the history of the game.

 

[archie mac]

CB Fry and a few others openly admit that it was a common practice in English Country cricket in the latter half of the 1800s that a so-n-so player wouldnt get out before scoring so-n-so runs or a so-n-so bowler would pick 'n' number of wickets in the innings.

Grace was a prodigy in the sense that he practically invented modern day concept of batting and was an excellent bowler.
But it occured at such an early developmental stage of cricket that quality back then cannot be expected to be the same as quality early on this century, let alone in the recent times.
Plus it is very much akin to a decent FC allrounder today going and setting up basecamp in Mongolia or some oddball place like that and subsequently terrorising batsmen and bowlers with revolutionary new techniques...or akin to the first gun-weilder going up against people with spears and swords.....ie, not a fair field.

Can not remember reading that about CB Fry, if you can recall where you read that I would like to have a look at the context.

I really think you can only be compared with your contemporaries and WG was almost twice as good as any of his. In 1895 (aged 47) when well past his best and with some great batsman around he was still the best.
I agree that Sobers is an all time great, and would always be in my greatest team. I just don't think he strode the Cricket world like Grace or Bradman.

 

[SJS]

Can not remember reading that about CB Fry, if you can recall where you read that I would like to have a look at the context.

I really think you can only be compared with your contemporaries and WG was almost twice as good as any of his. In 1895 (aged 47) when well past his best and with some great batsman around he was still the best.
I agree that Sobers is an all time great, and would always be in my greatest team. I just don't think he strode the Cricket world like Grace or Bradman.

Waste of breath Archie

 

[social]

bradman by a mile...the only one who is close to him would be sobers......and what is adam gilchrist doing in that list?

<edit>
oops...i didn't realize that this is not necessarily the best players' list...that would make it bradman as the overall biggest legend and tendulkar as the current biggest one.....

Aside from the fact that Gilchrist:

1. is the greatest keeper/batsman ever;

2. has revolutionised his role;

3. is one of the greatest all-rounders ever;

4. is one of the most dangerous batsmen ever;

5. is a shoe-in for a World's Greatest Ever X1,

I have absolutely no idea why he's on the list.

 

[archie mac]

Aside from the fact that Gilchrist:

1. is the greatest keeper/batsman ever;

2. has revolutionised his role;

3. is one of the greatest all-rounders ever;

4. is one of the most dangerous batsmen ever;

5. is a shoe-in for a World's Greatest Ever X1,

I have absolutely no idea why he's on the list.

Maybe the greatest batsman/keeper would be correct, but yes hard to hold out in an all-time side.

 

[archie mac]

Waste of breath Archie

As long as it is not 'bad breath' I will keep trying, or until I become bored.