Top all time batsmen

[SaeedAnwar]

this is a good site showing top 20 all time batsmen Third Slip: The world's top 10 batsmen of all time, minus Bradman - August 2005

do you agree with this? he has used some interesting calculations

1.Bradman D.G
2.Lara B.C
3.Richards I.V.A
4.Hobbs J.B
5.Dravid R
6.Tendulkar S.R
7.Sobers G.St.A
8.Barrington K.F
9.Ponting R.T
10.Chappell G.S
11.Gavaskar S.M
12.EdeC Weekes
13.Hayden M.L
14.Inzamam-ul-Haq
15.Border A.R
16.Hutton L
17.Sehwag V
18.Headley G.A
19.Kallis J.H
20.Walcott C.L

 

[SaeedAnwar]

^ btw this list was as of 2005

 

[MrIncredible]

Get ready for the u know what to hit the fan when the u know who groupies see their idol at number 6

 

[SaeedAnwar]

^ this is done by some indian mathematics guy anyways

 

[Richard]

Any attempt at some form of exact rating of, well, anything really, in cricket is an utterly futile exercise IMO.

 

[MrIncredible]

True. i think the only sure thing to say is that Bradman was the best and ne number of other batsmen can be rated at number #2.

 

[zaremba]

Keith Miller unlucky imo

 

[Richard]

True. i think the only sure thing to say is that Bradman was the best and ne number of other batsmen can be rated at number #2.

Not to mention #3-#10, and #11-#20, and so on.

 

[Pothas]

It is an obsession of cricket though, I don't think any other sport has the ethusiasm for lists and statistical evaluation that cricket has. This must be in large part because of the way the Sport works and the chances it offers producing a whole range of stats but it is in many ways a perculiar thing, but one of course which this site in many ways lives on.

 

[SaeedAnwar]

at the end of the day it is skill that counts, I haven't actually seen Bradman batting so I can't comment on his skills but lets assume he is number 1, out of all the others only 3 batsmen in my opinion could be at number 2 position, Lara, Tendulkar, Ponting

 

[SaeedAnwar]

this guy actually has more then 200 all time batsmen list: http://www.thirdslip.com/2005/aug/alltime.txt

 

[Burgey]

Tendulkar > Bradman. Clearly.

 

[bagapath]

Get ready for the u know what to hit the fan when the u know who groupies see their idol at number 6

dude. tendulkar worship (or bashing) is not as obvious in this forum as you make it sound. who are those groupies anyway? of course i take strong exception to your equating the word **** with sachin. i think he is fine at no.6. dravid is probably too high. sobers or hammond or probably both should take that spot, above tendulkar.

 

[silentstriker]

The hype about stereotypical Indian fans hitting the wall when Tendulkar is supposedly insulted is by far more annoying than the actual instances when it does happen. Many times, it's the stereotype itself poisoning the atmosphere and brings about the very thing it ridicules.


In any case, no, I don't see a problem with anyone ranking a bunch of players from #2 through #10, as they are all close and it's subjective.

 

[MrIncredible]

dude. tendulkar worship (or bashing) is not as obvious in this forum as you make it sound. who are those groupies anyway? of course i take strong exception to your equating the word **** with sachin. i think he is fine at no.6. dravid is probably too high. sobers or hammond or probably both should take that spot, above tendulkar.

Even though Im new to this forum I've been through enuff threads to know what im talking about and no i never equated that word with tendy u did that all by ur self. I clearly remember reading a thread a while back where i think Wisden ranked batsmen based on their peak ratings (by the icc) and Tendy came somewhere like 20 or 25 dont remember and boy did certain fans of his go off. If i can ill dig up the thread

 

[bagapath]

Even though Im new to this forum I've been through enuff threads to know what im talking about and no i never equated that word with tendy u did that all by ur self. I clearly remember reading a thread a while back where i think Wisden ranked batsmen based on their peak ratings (by the icc) and Tendy came somewhere like 20 or 25 dont remember and boy did certain fans of his go off. If i can ill dig up the thread

one thread. so?

 

[zaremba]

Get ready for the u know what to hit the fan when the u know who groupies see their idol at number 6

dude. tendulkar worship (or bashing) is not as obvious in this forum as you make it sound. who are those groupies anyway? of course i take strong exception to your equating the word **** with sachin. i think he is fine at no.6. dravid is probably too high. sobers or hammond or probably both should take that spot, above tendulkar.

Bagapath, tbf he isn't in any way equating the word **** with Sachin

 

[bagapath]

Bagapath, tbf he isn't in any way equating the word **** with Sachin

if you say so zaremba. "u know who" is an unnecessary term to refer to a player especially when "u know what" has been used to refer to **** 6 words before. ok. i will assume he didnt call sachin **** because he has said so himself. i am not a sachin fanatic. would have reacted the same way if warne or gilchrist or lara were referred like that and if their fans (i am one of them) are accused of being blind supporters. anyways, i dont think i spent too much time on that reference in my earlier post. and dont intend to from now on also.

this is one of the most decent forums on the net and definitely the best on cricket. i dont want new members to walk in with these wrong opinions and create unnecessary trouble

 

[zaremba]

No, fair enough, and I now can see what you were getting at ("you know what... you know who").

 

[Richard]

It is an obsession of cricket though, I don't think any other sport has the ethusiasm for lists and statistical evaluation that cricket has. This must be in large part because of the way the Sport works and the chances it offers producing a whole range of stats but it is in many ways a perculiar thing, but one of course which this site in many ways lives on.

I like lists that attempt to notate things which can realistically be notated. I hugely enjoy grouping players into categories, but when it comes to exact rankings it's plain silly and totally pointless IMO.