Ranking the Batsmen

[Nishant]

Bradman was a great batsman...but he didnt paly as much cricket as some international players do nowadays. Plus, as Silentstriker said, in those days, risk taking was a rare option!

 

[shortpitched713]

Lara. Once again.

 

[Perm]

5. Sir Viv Richards

 

[chaminda_00]

Weekes

 

[Jono]

Hmm, I voted Viv before so technically I've gotta vote him again. Lara is tempting though, but I'll stick with Viv.

 

[Dasa]

No, not Bradman. He wasn't the most destructive batsman in history. Not really that many before the one-day age.

He might have been destructive for his time, but he played at a time where 2.5 runs per over was the norm in Test cricket.

Bradman scored at a strike rate of about 60-61 - better than the vast majority of batsmen today.

 

[silentstriker]

Bradman scored at a strike rate of about 60-61 - better than the vast majority of batsmen today.

No doubt, I never said he was defensive. Gilly scores at a S/R of 82 though, and at a good average too.

But he wasn't the most destructive batsman in history. Meaning, if you had to pick the perfect player coming in at 7, you would pick him if that was the only way you could get him in the side, but you'd obviously want to bat him higher up.

 

[adharcric]

Update: Richards 8, Lara 5. One day to go.

 

[adharcric]

Lara continues to wait his turn. Will it go on?

The List
1. Don Bradman
2. Garry Sobers
3. Jack Hobbs
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Viv Richards

The vote for the #6 batsman of all-time begins now.

The Contenders

 

[chaminda_00]

Can't see Weekes getting in any time soon. So i'll go Ponting, i think people are underestimating how great he is. An average of 58 is awsome. Lara might have played some great innings and Chappell stood up to some great bowlers, but Ponting is next in line after Weekes for me.

 

[Perm]

#6 Wally Hammond

 

[oz_fan]

I'll go for Lara again.

 

[Dasa]

Lara.

 

[nightprowler10]

Lara

 

[adharcric]

Hammond

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Greg Chappell again.

 

[Matt79]

Hammond.

 

[a massive zebra]

Graeme Pollock

 

[Magrat Garlick]

G Pollock

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Why is it confusing? Most people that are voting have been voting since the first round and whenever you start voting, you can choose the best of the remaining contenders.
The reason the voting is slow is because all of the votes came in the first 10-15 hours of the 2-day period. Expecting a Richards vote from you soon ...

There is no point in me voting in this. I would vote for Barry Richards next but he clearly isn't going to win so I would vote for him again for the next slot which he also won't win and so on until I've voted for him 20 times and he still won't have won. There is no point in my continually clogging up the thread with one vote for Barry Richards.