• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Sangakkara and Dale Steyn retain 2011 ICC top spots

benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I bet if you asked 99% of cricket followers they wouldn't be able to tell you who the #1 ranked ODI bowler in the world is. Crazy.
 
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
benchmark00 said:
I bet if you asked 99% of cricket followers they wouldn't be able to tell you who the #1 ranked ODI bowler in the world is. Crazy.
Click to expand...
I remember it was Kyle Mills for a while a couple of years ago. :wacko: Wasn't Hafeez top recently?

Steins been top of the test rankings for about 3 years though hasn't he?
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I think they're a bit of fun in a conversation/forum discussion starting kinda way.

For instance, Tendulkar has never cracked the 900 barrier in tests. Proof positive that, etc, etc... :ph34r:

Gambhir at #1 for the year's end in 2009 is rather unfortunate for all concerned tho. :-O
 
ankitj

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
BoyBrumby said:
For instance, Tendulkar has never cracked the 900 barrier in tests. Proof positive that, etc, etc... :ph34r:
Click to expand...
One reason why Tendulkar wouldn't make it to my all time XI

Gambhir at #1 for the year's end in 2009 is rather unfortunate for all concerned tho. :-O
Click to expand...
Haters can suck it :D
 
Last edited:
ankitj

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Shri said:
Would be a **** all time XI no doubt if you use such irrelevant criteria.
Click to expand...
Haha, well not really. Ratings don't exist in vacuum, they reflect some sort of reality. Very high peak rating reflects a ruthlessness at some stage of career where it was near impossible to dismiss a batsman. Ratings aside, you can look at Tendulkar's career and you will find he hasn't had such a period, even during his peak years in 90's. You'd know it even from your memory.

It's an odd one though because I pick in my XI batsmen that I rate below him in a general list of ATGs based on overall careers.
 
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
It annoys me when people say rankings are meaningless. They are based on results, so, while they may not reflect who the best player is, they reflect who the most successful is. Their only flaw is that they can't take into account uncontrollable factors such as pitch conditions and injuries in the opposition.

And as Brumby said they're a good bit of fun.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
marc71178 said:
Because he did most of his scoring against **** attacks or in very high scoring games.
Click to expand...
+1
While one cannot totally rate a player based on the ratings, I does offer some insight into a players career and stats.
Wasim Akram for example is universally lauded, he never cracked the 900 ratings barrier because of his disproportionately high number of lower order wickets taken. It doesn't make him a bad bowler, just makes us take a second look or ask more questions.

Additioally its not so much your peak total thats more important, but the percentage of tour career spent over 900. That is the most telling as it speaks to consistent brilliance and not just one good year or season.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
kyear2 said:
+1
While one cannot totally rate a player based on the ratings, I does offer some insight into a players career and stats.
Wasim Akram for example is universally lauded, he never cracked the 900 ratings barrier because of his disproportionately high number of lower order wickets taken. It doesn't make him a bad bowler, just makes us take a second look or ask more questions.

Additioally its not so much your peak total thats more important, but the percentage of tour career spent over 900. That is the most telling as it speaks to consistent brilliance and not just one good year or season.
Click to expand...
+1

That's what makes Murali a bloody brilliant bowler. I am quite sure that he spent highest % of his career cracking over 800 compared to contemporary bowlers. May be McGrath has edge over him, but any other spinner I am not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top