Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 178

Thread: The Greatest All-Rounder of All Time

  1. #16
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,255
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    i think faulkner should be the greatest all-rounder of all time.
    His record is fantastic and he is very highly rated by those who saw him. He should be on any short list.

  2. #17
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,477
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    well... u r somewhat right... rhodes was not as a great a bowler as the rest on that list... but am gonna hold on with the arguments till the thread starts....

    (can you replace my quote in your post with the spelling corrected one i've re-posted? looks embarrassingly bad)
    I did replace .

    I am not saying Faulkner has no case, I am just saying I am pretty skeptical. I think he'd be more akin to a Sobers (looking at his batting average) than a Miller who was probably the most rounded all-rounder of them all.
    I think there'll sooner be another Bradman than another Warne. - Gidgeon Haigh

    [Warne is] the greatest bowler ever produced in this entire world - Muttiah Muralidaran

    [Warne is] the greatest bowler of all time - Glenn McGrath


    In my opinion Shane Warne is the greatest cricketer who's ever lived - Ian Botham

    Warne is the greatest cricketer to pick up a ball ever.
    And is the greatest bowler I have ever laid eyes on. - Brian Lara

  3. #18
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,255
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    WG - and with all due respect to some great players of the twentieth century, by some distance
    Oh yes. But you know why I do not arte him amongst the greatest of all time, because of what he bowled. He bowled round arm slow. His arm was just at shoulder level, parallel to the ground, and he tossed the ball in the air and his main wicket taking ball was where he tempted the batsman to try and hit what looked like a 'lollipop' towards square leg (which was really the only place you could hit such a ball. And he would have them caught in the deep.

    This doesn't seem the kind of tactics that would work with latter day cricketers. I think under arm and round arm bowlers have to be left out of consideration in all time teams unless they really made the ball talk by putting some work on them.

  4. #19
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cloud Cuckoo Land
    Posts
    11,811
    I don't disagree with you SJS - judging by different criteria will give different opinions - WG had a degree of dominance over his peers that no modern day rival can come close to matching - but I would accept that doesn't really help much in making comparisons


  5. #20
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,460
    Quote Originally Posted by SJS View Post
    I agree about Imran but I have one issue. His best bowling years and his best batting years hardly overlapped. By the time his batting really flowered he was bowling from experience and memory and really relied on the younger legs of Wasim and Waqar (even Bakht) to prop up the bowling.
    Hmm that's true. I suppose you can say he was a world-class batsman and a world-class bowler, but never at the same time, so it might not quite be right to call him the greatest all-rounder ever.

    What about if you factor in captaincy?
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  6. #21
    International Vice-Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,872
    Quote Originally Posted by SJS View Post
    Oh yes. But you know why I do not arte him amongst the greatest of all time, because of what he bowled. He bowled round arm slow. His arm was just at shoulder level, parallel to the ground, and he tossed the ball in the air and his main wicket taking ball was where he tempted the batsman to try and hit what looked like a 'lollipop' towards square leg (which was really the only place you could hit such a ball. And he would have them caught in the deep.

    This doesn't seem the kind of tactics that would work with latter day cricketers. I think under arm and round arm bowlers have to be left out of consideration in all time teams unless they really made the ball talk by putting some work on them.
    well, with only 9 wickets he would not be able to meet any statistical cut off point. i guess he would never be part of the poll. intend to start the first poll tomorrow evening. will wait for any further opinions/tips on how this can be run.

  7. #22
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,460
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    I don't disagree with you SJS - judging by different criteria will give different opinions - WG had a degree of dominance over his peers that no modern day rival can come close to matching - but I would accept that doesn't really help much in making comparisons
    I don't really think you can even begin to compare WG Grace to any of the others mentioned though. Inter-generational comparisons grow tedious at the best of times, but the game Grace played was so different it's akin to adding Babe Ruth to the equation.

  8. #23
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    I'd like to add Babe Ruth to the equation.

  9. #24
    RTDAS pasag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Looking for milksteak
    Posts
    31,678
    W. Armstrong
    Rest In Peace Craigos
    2003-2012

  10. #25
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cloud Cuckoo Land
    Posts
    11,811
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    I'd like to add Babe Ruth to the equation.
    A career total of 700 odd runs doesn't merit the inclusion of a bloke who doubtless chucked as well

  11. #26
    International Debutant inbox24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,108
    Andrew McDonald
    Inappropriate signature.
    --Moderators

  12. #27
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    Sobers - Kallis - Warne - Murali - stats - eyewitness evidence - Babe Ruth - Andrew Macdonald - close the thread please - goodbye

  13. #28
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,255
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    I don't disagree with you SJS - judging by different criteria will give different opinions - WG had a degree of dominance over his peers that no modern day rival can come close to matching - but I would accept that doesn't really help much in making comparisons
    Exactly. I agree he was a very good bowler in his time but the stuff he bowled is gone. No one bowls it any more. I always maintain that a great athlete in one time period will be a great athlete in another. He will adapt to the change since he would be born to it but its difficult to decide what WG would bowl for example in a different time.

    I have no doubt, for example, that the Tendulkar's and Lara's may consider WG's bowling fodder if it was bowled at them today but they would have to treat it with respect if THEY were been 125 years ago.

    Thats why, I dont mind putting WG in an all time side as a batsman (and maybe a change bowler) but not as an all rounder.

    By the way, a change bowler is what he was called even in those days. I am sure I can find a description of his bowling by one of his contemporaries.

    That should be interesting for some people here.

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cloud Cuckoo Land
    Posts
    11,811
    Although I don't really agree with Uppercut (although I can see his point) I suppose it has to be conceded that overarm bowling wasn't even legal when WG began his career

  15. #30
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,255
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    well, with only 9 wickets he would not be able to meet any statistical cut off point. i guess he would never be part of the poll. intend to start the first poll tomorrow evening. will wait for any further opinions/tips on how this can be run.
    Of course if one was to consider WG one cant look at Test matches. He played so few, so late and at a time when they were not even considered as important as a game between Yorkshire and Surrey or Gentlemen versus Players.

    WG has to be evaluated on the basis of his first class career.

    By the way, someone mentioned that WG played a completely different game. Sorry mate, you have got it all wrong. If I send you action pictures of WG batting you will be stunned to see the strokes... and he also slog swept and did it often to balls outside the off stump in defiance to what was considered 'propah' in those days.

    That guy could bat.

    I read somewhere that we would look at WG differently if only he didn't have that beard. It somehow is in total contrast to our stereo type of an athlete. Add to that his increasing girth over his career and the modern fan finds him as an amusing caricature of a cricketer but wont always say it since it may be considered blasphemous by some.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Most dominant sports-people of all time?
    By AlanJLegend in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 13-03-2010, 07:12 AM
  2. All Time Sri Lankan Test XI
    By grant28 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 24-03-2009, 06:05 PM
  3. Greatest WWE Intercontinental Champion of All Time
    By masterblaster in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 20-03-2009, 07:19 AM
  4. Vote for England's greatest all time uncapped XI
    By Lillian Thomson in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 28-02-2009, 11:17 AM
  5. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09-02-2009, 06:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •