Top ten greatest bowlers and batsmen of all time

[aussie]

Batsmen:
8. Steve Waugh
9. Alan Border
10. Dravid

They are superb batsmen no question, but i dont know if they are good enough to be ranked as on of the top 10 batsmen of all time.

 

[aussie]

Kapil Dev is one of my all time favorite players, but I don't think he would make the top 30 bowling all time.

You sure about that, surely he can make a top 30.

 

[silentstriker]

You sure about that, surely he can make a top 30.

No, I don't believe so. He might just crack it. As a player he might, because of his batting, but purely as a bowler? I wouldn't think so.


In ODI, he would definatly be there, but not in tests.

 

[silentstriker]

Off the top of my head:

off the top of my head (in no order):

1. Hadlee
2. Lillee
3. Imran
4. McGrath
5. Wasim
6. Waqar
7. Botham
8. Holding
9. Marshall
10. Roberts
11. Ambrose
12. Walsh
13. Warne
14. Murali
15. Bedi
16. O'reilly
17. Laker
18. Barnes
19. Donald
20. Grimmett
21. Tayfield
22. Verity
23. Kumble
24. Bedser
25. Davidson
26. Miller
27. Lindwall
28. Garner
29. Wes Hall
30. Ian Bishop
31. Fazal Mahmood

I am sure you would disagree with some, but I am sure I've missed about 10 bowlers. Kapil Dev is not in there . Like I said, I adore him, but realistically, he isn't in the top 30.

 

[_TiGeR-ToWn_]

I'm sorry, but if you think Paul Weekes even comes close then you, sir, are an idiot.

If you were trying to be sarcastic then, then okay but i do believe he was talking about Everton Weekes.

 

[SJS]

Off the top of my head and not necessarily in an order.

Batsmen

1. Bradman
2. Trumper
3. Hobbs
4. Hammond
5. Headley
6. Viv Richards
7. Sobers
8. Lara
9. Tendulkar​

Not too sure of a tenth who might be a cert. Will come back later

Bowlers (without the West Indians)

1. Barnes
2. Orielly
3. Grimmett
4. Lillee
5. Hadlee
6. Warne
7. Murali
8. Imran
9. Lindwall
10. Larwood​

West Indian Bowlers

1. Marshall
2. Roberts
3. Holding
4. Walsh
5. Garner
6. Ambrose
7. Hall
8. Bishop
9. Constantine
10 Martindale​

Had to have a separate list for the West Indian fast bowlers....there are simply too many of them to fit into a list of just ten from all over the world over over time and including all types of bowling !!

 

[nightprowler10]

Off the top of my head and not necessarily in an order.

Batsmen

1. Bradman
2. Trumper
3. Hobbs
4. Hammond
5. Headley
6. Viv Richards
7. Sobers
8. Lara
9. Tendulkar​

Not too sure of a tenth who might be a cert. Will come back later

Add Sunny. You know you want to

 

[aussie]

Off the top of my head:

off the top of my head (in no order):

1. Hadlee
2. Lillee
3. Imran
4. McGrath
5. Wasim
6. Waqar
7. Botham
8. Holding
9. Marshall
10. Roberts
11. Ambrose
12. Walsh
13. Warne
14. Murali
15. Bedi
16. O'reilly
17. Laker
18. Barnes
19. Donald
20. Grimmett
21. Tayfield
22. Verity
23. Kumble
24. Bedser
25. Davidson
26. Miller
27. Lindwall
28. Garner
29. Wes Hall
30. Ian Bishop
31. Fazal Mahmood

I am sure you would disagree with some, but I am sure I've missed about 10 bowlers. Kapil Dev is not in there . Like I said, I adore him, but realistically, he isn't in the top 30.

based on that i guess your right.

 

[JBH001]

Well I penned this down in the middle of a lecture during a slow spell.

Top 10 Batsmen (in order):

1. D Bradman
2. J Hobbs
3. G Sobers
4. G Chappell
5. G Headley
6. V Richards
7. W Hammond
8. B Lara
9. S Tendulkar
10. E Weekes

Top 10 Pace Bowlers (Quicks and Medium - also in order):

1. S F Barnes
2. M Marshall
3. D Lillee
4. G McGrath
5. C Ambrose
6. R Lindwall
7. W Akram
8. W Younis
9. A Roberts
10. M Holding

Top 10 Spinners (in order):

1. S Warne
2. M Muralitheran
3. B O'Reilly
4. C Grimmett
5. E Prasanna
6. S Gupte
7. B Chandrasekhar
8. B Bedi
9. A Kumble
10. H Verity

 

[Beleg]

TOP TEN ODI Bowlers:

1. Wasim Akram
2. Joel Garner
3. Allan Donald
4. Saqlain Mushtaq
5. Murali
6. Warne
7. McGrath
8. Waqar
9. Shoaib
10. Bishop/Bond

 

[silentstriker]

Prassana and Chandrashekar above Kumble and Bedi? How do you figure that?

 

[C_C]

They are superb batsmen no question, but i dont know if they are good enough to be ranked as on of the top 10 batsmen of all time.

Much better than the amatuers like Hobbs, Hutton, etc. if you ask me.
As i said, apart from few extremely rare high flyers like Bradman,Grimmett,O'Reiley and Barnes, i dont think any other amatuer is worth comparing to a professional of similar statistics. You want Hobbs, tone it down to maybe Tresco. Larwood ? nothing more than patrick patterson.
Great back then = mediocre now. Cricket's standards have gone up,touching its zenith in the mid 60s-late 90s period.-anyone who denies this is simply stuck in nostalgia years.

 

[Johnners]

Batting.

1.Sir Don Bradman
2.Graeme Pollock
3.Sir Garfield Sobers
4.Barry Richards
5.Sachin Tendulkar
6.Sir Viv Richards
7.Brian Lara
8.Steve Waugh
9.Sunil Gavaskar
10.Jack Hobbs

Hard luck for Greg Chappell, Ricky Ponting, Rahul Dravid, Victor Trumper, Everton Weekes.

Bowling

1.Malcom Marshall
2.Shane Warne
3.Glenn McGrath
4.Denis Lillee
5.Richard Hadlee
6.Michael Holding
7.Muttiah Muralitharan
8.Sid Barnes
9.Curtly Ambrose
10.Fred Trueman

Hard Luck for Joel Garner, Wasim Akram, Imran Kahn, Andy Roberts, Allan Donald

 

[andyc]

I am surprised to hear the amount of time Glenn McGrath was been mentioned in this thread. Don't get me wrong here, I think he is a fine bowler, but never in a million years would I have him placed ahead of Garner, Marshall, Holding, Tyson, Trueman and more. I would like to be enlightened to why some people rate him so highly.

Why wouldn't he be rated highly? I think a lot of people underrate McGrath because he lacks the pace and venom of most other fast bowlers, but his record speaks for itself. He's just so accurate and, more importantly, effective, and in a time where batsmen are much more aggressive. He'd be in my top 10.

 

[shortpitched713]

I think a lot of people underrate McGrath

Hes sure not underrated on this board. I'd say that most people would put him as one of the top ten bowlers of all time, and maybe one of the top five pacers as well.

 

[aussie]

Much better than the amatuers like Hobbs, Hutton, etc. if you ask me.
As i said, apart from few extremely rare high flyers like Bradman,Grimmett,O'Reiley and Barnes, i dont think any other amatuer is worth comparing to a professional of similar statistics. You want Hobbs, tone it down to maybe Tresco. Larwood ? nothing more than patrick patterson.
Great back then = mediocre now. Cricket's standards have gone up,touching its zenith in the mid 60s-late 90s period.-anyone who denies this is simply stuck in nostalgia years.

I understand what you saying but i think Hobbs & Hutton are a bit better than amateurs. Yes they would have too many top class bowlers in their careers in an era which was dominated by the bat but you can only score runs againts whats in front of you & Hobbs & Hutton were the two greatest openers post 1960s, so i think that could make them high flyers as well.

 

[Matt79]

Much better than the amatuers like Hobbs, Hutton, etc. if you ask me.
As i said, apart from few extremely rare high flyers like Bradman,Grimmett,O'Reiley and Barnes, i dont think any other amatuer is worth comparing to a professional of similar statistics. You want Hobbs, tone it down to maybe Tresco. Larwood ? nothing more than patrick patterson.
Great back then = mediocre now. Cricket's standards have gone up,touching its zenith in the mid 60s-late 90s period.-anyone who denies this is simply stuck in nostalgia years.

What you're saying is probably correct, but kind of kills the point and the fun of what these comparisons are about. You can use your imagination and assume that the talents of the past could be afforded the same level of training, practice, and fitness, that's available today. Technique, knowledge, etc are specific to time, place and opportunity, but ability, application and determination, as demonstrated by competition at the highest level available, are transferrable.

 

[C_C]

I understand what you saying but i think Hobbs & Hutton are a bit better than amateurs. Yes they would have too many top class bowlers in their careers in an era which was dominated by the bat but you can only score runs againts whats in front of you & Hobbs & Hutton were the two greatest openers post 1960s, so i think that could make them high flyers as well.

Look, i dont care what they did in their eras. If you want to compare between eras, the only question left is what will these guys do with the skills they had and displayed, not the far more ludicrous line of reasoning culminating with 'oh if they were born in this era they'd have dominated just the same because they'd be privvy to the modern techniques'.
In my opinion, that theory is utterly bogus because there are far far too many variables in that kind of tomfoolery. Its simple skills matchup. And simple skills-wise do Hobbs,Hutton,etc. come even close to touching the Vivs Tendulkars and Laras of the world ? the answer is most emphatically NO. They'd be lucky to match Mark Waugh as far as i am concerned.

 

[Anil]

batsmen

bradman
sobers
richards
hobbs
hammond
lara
gavaskar
chappell
headley
tendulkar

pace bowlers

marshall
hadlee
mcgrath
lillee
ambrose
akram
imran
holding
garner
donald

spinners

murali
warne
grimmett
o'reilly
bedi
chandra
prasanna
qadir
laker
barnes

 

[avidude]

the top 10 cricketers

Batsmen:

1. Don Bradman
2. Rahul Dravid
3. Garry Sobers
4. Viv Richards
5. Sachin Tendulker
6. Jack Hobbs
7. Brian Lara
8. Graeme Pollock
9. Greg Chappell
10. Sunil Gavasakar

Bowlers:

1. Kapil Dev
2. Dennis Lillie
3. Malcom Marshall
4. Shane Warne
5. Imran Kahn
6. Richard Haddle
7. Muttiah Muralitharan
8. Ray Lindwall
9. Wasim Akram
10. Waqar Younis