Do you agree with Wisden's 5 cricketers of the century??

[Zinzan]

Hobbs
Sobers
Warne
Richards
Bradman


If not, who would yours be???

 

[archie mac]

Hobbs
Sobers
Warne
Richards
Bradman


If not, who would yours be???

I believe only Bradman was on every ones list. I would have had S. Barnes (England) instead of Warne. I almost agree with Gideon Haigh who thought Benaud should have been on the list for his wide commitment to the game; Cricketer, writer and commentator.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I thought at the time it was a very "batsmen heavy" list: 3 batsmen, 1 batting all-rouner & a spinner. I'd have been tempted to include a quick in there, possibly Malcolm Marshall for Viv or Hobbs.

 

[Dasa]

I don't think it's possible to have 5 cricketers of the century who have contributed extensively more than many other greats. The only 2 who really stand out are obviously Bradman and Sobers - I don't think Hobbs, Richards or Warne stand out enough (or at all) to warrant being on such a list.

 

[Jamee999]

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=7791

752 posts.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I actually do agree with it... every pick. I think that a list like that has to be based on contributions to the game in other ways than just being the best player. Each of those 5 players changed the game and the way it was played and talked about in a significant way, as well as being among the best to ever play the game. Each led their team to a huge amount of success, and were among the greatest of their time, and each was a magnetic, memorable personality who attracted people to the game and made lasting impressions.

Excellent list.