The Ten Best Cricketers Of All Time - Page 3

Matt79 · 24-05-2007, 03:32 AM

Nice thread Francis. I might post some longer thoughts later on, but you've done a fair job at an unenviable task - hats off!

Perm · 24-05-2007, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

Number of wickets divided by 3

That post does not make sense.

Francis · 24-05-2007, 03:39 AM

I think there's certainly a case for Hadlee > Miller.

WG Grace is very hard to place. Firstly, he's best known for making over 50,000 first class runs and making cricket a game for the people. He definitely doesn't belong at number two if you ask me. Why?

1. Sir Garfield Sobers really was that great. If not for Bradman, I think Sobers would be most people's pick for best cricketer ever. Sobers is pretty much the equivelant of the greatest players in a lot of sports... it's just that he's overshadowed by someone who dominated his sport (Bradman), more than Pele or Maradonna dominated footy. Many who saw Sobers put him head and shoulders above the rest. And the rest aint half bad.

2. Sir Jack Hobbs, at least in discussions I've partaken in, is genrally regarded as England's best ever cricketer. Considering he had amazing dometic success (like close to 200 domestic centuries), and enjoyed much better Test success than Grace, he gets put easily above Grace. Hobbs was genrally regarded the best cricketer ever before Bradman, and rightfully so because it did a lot of his work in horrendous conditions.

3. I suppose based on what I said about Hobbs, he could be as high as three. Because he's clearly ahead of Grace. I personally think Viv Richards imposed himself on attacks more potently than Grace. My biggest reasoning for having Richards ahead of Grace is i. He played in a tougher era. ii. Was the heart of the best cricket side ever. Based on some other criteria, I suppose Grace could be put ahead of Viv, but he's not close for me.

4. Robin Marlar called Warne the modern day WG Grace and I think Warne's legendary status will be best savoured over time. I wont be suprised if 100 years from now, people will still know what the Gatting Ball is. What other cricketer in history can make such a claim? Grace's legacy is his greatest attribute, but I think Warne's will age as good as anybody's.

5. I have no hesitation putting Imran ahead of Grace. Imran meant more to Pakistan than just being a great player. I remember seeing a special on him on TV, where Waquar Younis talks about how he once got slaughtered by a batting attack and yet Imran asked selecters to pick him because he saw potential... Younis wasn't a great player at all at the time, Imran just saw something. Imran doesn't have the legacy of saying he popularised the game like Grace, but he's a collosus of Pakistani cricket and I think will always be remembered as a godfather of sorts. Heavy lies the crown of any Pakistani captain because the Pakistani people expect an Imran. Needless to say he was more accomplished than Grace. Imran gets the easy nod here.

I could keep going but I think I'll stop. Grace could maybe have have commanded a spot at 9 or 10... his legacy in cricket will never be extinguished. But there's certainly been plenty of better cricketers, as I think as time goes by, even a century from now, players like Imran might be talked about in the same light as far as being a legend of his time.

Fiery · 24-05-2007, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perm

That post does not make sense.

It should Perm, you're a smart cookie. Divide Hadlee's no. of test wickets by 3 (or a bit less) and you get Miller's.

OK, I should have said closer to 2.5 but I like to exaggerate to make a point

Perm · 24-05-2007, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

It should Perm, you're a smart cookie. Divide Hadlee's no. of test wickets by 3 (or a bit less) and you get Miller's.

OK, I should have said closer to 2.5 but I like to exaggerate to make a point

Seeing as how my previous post was talking about averages, it did not make sense. Until you edited it that is. Anyway, I can easily counter your point with the fact that Miller has only 200 odd less runs than Hadlee, despite playing 30 less matches.

Fiery · 24-05-2007, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perm

Seeing as how my previous post was talking about averages, it did not make sense. Until you edited it that is. Anyway, I can easily counter your point with the fact that Miller has only 200 odd less runs than Hadlee, despite playing 30 less matches.

Hadlee's bowling far outweighs that. What is it about you and Australia and Australian players buddy...sheesh. I never met a more wanna-be-Aussie.

Prince EWS · 24-05-2007, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

Hadlee's bowling far outweighs that. What is it about you and Australia and Australian players buddy...sheesh. I never met a more wanna-be-Aussie.

And that means a lot given Fiery lives in New Zealand!

Fiery · 24-05-2007, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

And that means a lot given Fiery lives in New Zealand!

? I don't get it

Francis · 24-05-2007, 03:57 AM

Quote:

I never met a more wanna-be-Aussie.

There isn't a more objective poster here at CW than Perm... maybe that Indian lad as well.

Fiery · 24-05-2007, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Francis

There isn't a more objective poster here at CW than Perm... maybe that Indian lad as well.

Check out the Adam Gilchrist avatar...it's just not normal for a lad from the Clutha Valley

Matt79 · 24-05-2007, 04:05 AM

So the guy has aspirations to better himself. No need to slam him for that.

Perm · 24-05-2007, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

Hadlee's bowling far outweighs that. What is it about you and Australia and Australian players buddy...sheesh. I never met a more wanna-be-Aussie.

His bowling outweights the fact that if Miller had played in as many innings as Hadlee, then he would've scored almost 5000 Test runs. I doubt it, especially given the fact that Hadlee murdered a weak team like Sri Lanka in both disciplines whereas Miller was impressive overall IIRC. I am a huge fan of Sir Richard Hadlee's, even more so after reading his autobiography but I find it hard to beleive that you think Hadlee is a better player than Miller, who is to some the greatest all rounder ever.

Also, my loyalty or nationality shouldn't have anything to do with this and I am a little annoyed that you brought it up in this argument. Yes I do like Australian cricketers and the Australian cricket team, it doesn't mean that I don't have a sense of neutrality when talking about cricketers from Australia and New Zealand.

Perm · 24-05-2007, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

? I don't get it

I think he was hinting that all New Zealanders aspire to be Australians.

Perm · 24-05-2007, 04:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Francis

There isn't a more objective poster here at CW than Perm... maybe that Indian lad as well.

Thanks Francis, I'm pleased you think so.

Perm · 24-05-2007, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiery

Check out the Adam Gilchrist avatar...it's just not normal for a lad from the Clutha Valley

He is my favourite player ever and one that I respect the most. I wouldn't disrespect you're favourite player if he happened to be a foreigner, I'd appreciate it if you did the same.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Overrated Cricketers//Underrated Cricketers	grant28	Cricket Chat	48	10-12-2006 06:36 PM
Highest paid cricketers?	silentstriker	Cricket Chat	57	02-11-2006 01:17 PM
All time Best Goalkeepers	Pratters	2006 Football World Cup - Germany	40	09-05-2006 02:59 PM
British Summer Time	superkingdave	Site Discussion	20	16-04-2006 04:56 PM

24-05-2007, 03:39 AM	#33 (permalink)
Francis State Vice-Captain Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: WELLYWOOD Posts: 1,032	I think there's certainly a case for Hadlee > Miller. WG Grace is very hard to place. Firstly, he's best known for making over 50,000 first class runs and making cricket a game for the people. He definitely doesn't belong at number two if you ask me. Why? 1. Sir Garfield Sobers really was that great. If not for Bradman, I think Sobers would be most people's pick for best cricketer ever. Sobers is pretty much the equivelant of the greatest players in a lot of sports... it's just that he's overshadowed by someone who dominated his sport (Bradman), more than Pele or Maradonna dominated footy. Many who saw Sobers put him head and shoulders above the rest. And the rest aint half bad. 2. Sir Jack Hobbs, at least in discussions I've partaken in, is genrally regarded as England's best ever cricketer. Considering he had amazing dometic success (like close to 200 domestic centuries), and enjoyed much better Test success than Grace, he gets put easily above Grace. Hobbs was genrally regarded the best cricketer ever before Bradman, and rightfully so because it did a lot of his work in horrendous conditions. 3. I suppose based on what I said about Hobbs, he could be as high as three. Because he's clearly ahead of Grace. I personally think Viv Richards imposed himself on attacks more potently than Grace. My biggest reasoning for having Richards ahead of Grace is i. He played in a tougher era. ii. Was the heart of the best cricket side ever. Based on some other criteria, I suppose Grace could be put ahead of Viv, but he's not close for me. 4. Robin Marlar called Warne the modern day WG Grace and I think Warne's legendary status will be best savoured over time. I wont be suprised if 100 years from now, people will still know what the Gatting Ball is. What other cricketer in history can make such a claim? Grace's legacy is his greatest attribute, but I think Warne's will age as good as anybody's. 5. I have no hesitation putting Imran ahead of Grace. Imran meant more to Pakistan than just being a great player. I remember seeing a special on him on TV, where Waquar Younis talks about how he once got slaughtered by a batting attack and yet Imran asked selecters to pick him because he saw potential... Younis wasn't a great player at all at the time, Imran just saw something. Imran doesn't have the legacy of saying he popularised the game like Grace, but he's a collosus of Pakistani cricket and I think will always be remembered as a godfather of sorts. Heavy lies the crown of any Pakistani captain because the Pakistani people expect an Imran. Needless to say he was more accomplished than Grace. Imran gets the easy nod here. I could keep going but I think I'll stop. Grace could maybe have have commanded a spot at 9 or 10... his legacy in cricket will never be extinguished. But there's certainly been plenty of better cricketers, as I think as time goes by, even a century from now, players like Imran might be talked about in the same light as far as being a legend of his time.

24-05-2007, 04:05 AM	#41 (permalink)
Matt79 Global Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!! Posts: 17,427	So the guy has aspirations to better himself. No need to slam him for that.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)