-
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.
CW50 2nd Edition - No 10
- Thread starter smash84
- Start date
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Had him at 11 as well and did expect him to be higher. Of those remaining only Warne was behind Hobbs in my list. Of those already featured, I had Grace and Barnes ahead of him. Surprised also that the highest ranking was only 4th for Hobbs!
Very good job with quotes Smali
Just realized that the top 10 is going to have a representation from 7 different nations. That's quite awesome.
Last edited:
smash84
The Tiger King
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah he was a bit too low tbh.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I could've had a lot more if I was feeling particularly hipster; I only had six in my top fifteen (seven if you count Hammond) and a few of them (Sobers and Hadlee in particular) would've made my 25 on the strength of their primary discipline alone.
It looks like my top six will all be in the top ten (nine now, actually) although one of the top nine didn't make my list at all, and I named a bloke at #12 who didn't make the CW list at all.
Apologies to Hurricane for this post.
smash84
The Tiger King
Maybe.....last time his rank was 16 and he has gone down 5 places. Difficult to see Lillee in the top 15 here at CW (given the way he is generally viewed on here)
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Each one of those coming up are really great cricketers in their own rights. At this stage it's really no shame to be at any position except if your name is Donald Bradman. Agree though that 17 people not voting for him is a surprise.
In this edition, Imran looks likely to find a place in top 5 as he rightly deserves.
Agent Nationaux
International Coach
Would be very happy if Imran is 3rd after Bradman and Sobers.
kyear2
Cricketer Of The Year
But why is that? Given that most historians, journalists and past players dont have out side of their top two or three and I spent the last two days at Kensington speaking to some veteran spectators, some of whom have seen back to Lindwall and Miller, and all rate Lillee as the top two or three they have seen. Names mentioned were Marshall,Lillee, Holding and a few honourable mentions to Trueman/Ambrose (a lot of them lived in England for decades). Not one mentioned Hadlee.
Last edited:
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Aside from that, I think people underestimate that Lillee was the model others learned off of and the standard they judged themselves against. The way he was as a tearaway, to the way he learned to be methodical, to how he conducted himself as a strike partner and how he was willing to carry the attack if need be...to how he dealt with his stress fractures and the novel regimen he created; and also from being a coach and influencing the next generation.
I think even if you thought Hadlee or some of the other faster bowlers are slightly better than him; his legacy all-round should put him much higher and on this forum he is very underrated IMO.
Last edited:
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, he's no favourite here at "Spreadsheets R Us".
kyear2
Cricketer Of The Year
+1
It's all about numbers here, but cricket isn't played on a spread sheet and if numbers back up what your eyes tell you then fine, but cant't be used in a vacum. From all who saw them, Hadlee was the 4th best bolwer of the era, but because he more than the other played on green tops that assisted him at home and averaged 27 with the bat he is glorified here. Even Hadlee acknowledges that Dennis was better than him, Marshall was faster, had more variety and was more menacing and had to compete for wickets, Imran was Pakistan and helped pioneer reverse swing ect. Batsmen of the era also rated Andy Roberts ahead of Hadlee and some even Holding, especially in the 70's.
It's all about numbers here, but cricket isn't played on a spread sheet and if numbers back up what your eyes tell you then fine, but cant't be used in a vacum. From all who saw them, Hadlee was the 4th best bolwer of the era, but because he more than the other played on green tops that assisted him at home and averaged 27 with the bat he is glorified here. Even Hadlee acknowledges that Dennis was better than him, Marshall was faster, had more variety and was more menacing and had to compete for wickets, Imran was Pakistan and helped pioneer reverse swing ect. Batsmen of the era also rated Andy Roberts ahead of Hadlee and some even Holding, especially in the 70's.
smash84
The Tiger King
So much love for Lillee? You can certainly use some of the arguments for Wasim too
Incidentally Wasim finished just one point ahead of Lillee in this exercise
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Kyear2 - I struggle to understand your basis of criticism of Hadlee really. He finished with second best average of his generation of bowlers who took 300+ wickets. That can't be a fluke specially if you consider how complete and well rounded his record is. I think he suffers from playing for a tiny nation that didn't wield much power in international cricket. What he did for a fairly mediocre side for over a decade is mind boggling. Consider the fact that other than mighty West Indians, only NZ was the team in 80's that won at least one series against each test nation. This includes a couple of oversees series victories against Australia and England. Last time I checked he was the leading wicket taker in all but one of those 8-9 series. He fully deserves the credit that CW gives him that all other commentators of the game fail to.
Last edited: