Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

[Red]

Flintoff (31.77 / 32.78) in the first group but not Kallis (56.10 / 32.43), hilarious. Kallis with more fifers too. I think people understimate Kallis's bowling because of his batting. And that he has been used mainly as a "holding" fifth bowler. Yet 288 wickets. And can someone please link to the ball that made Ponting fall flat on his face as it swung past him.

I don't think Kallis would have played as many tests as he did were he a bowler only. I'm comfortable with him being in the top group though.

 

[KungFu_Kallis]

Just because 2nd Test v SA - Ponting Wicket - YouTube

P.s. ok maybe I'm fanboy. But it's kallisball.

 

[smash84]

Have alrady explained my issues with calling Imran the greatest cricketer of all time, unlike Imran though Miller was a legitimate top order batsman, but not an exceptioanl one (about equivalent to Sobers bowling) and as a bowler he was never a work horse bowler, he was used more purely as a new ball shock bowler and his three wickets a match (despite for one series receiving the new ball every 55 overs) is testament to this and his strike rate is less than stellar. So as a bowler he is not as good as Sobers was as a batsman though his slip fielding added additional to his game and elevates him to just above Imran, but since Imran was the better bowler and that is their main function in any team and would be batting at 8 anyway, Imran makes my first team and we could hide him at mid on or mid off when not bowling or at fine leg.

Dude your posting has become extremely biased, you've been marking down Bradman for minnow bashing and playing in such and such era despite the fact that he only preceded Sobers by 10 years. Now you are marking down Miller's batting by saying it is equivalent to Sobers's bowling. Have you checked Sobers's bowling stats?

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Sobers only did well against the minnows of that time and that too only 1 minnow i.e. India. Also there is a gap between his home and away bowling average if you take out the minnows India from his record. His bowling average against the other minnow of the time i.e Pakistan is 113.50 with a Strike Rate 356. Against NZ he strikes every 116 deliveries. Against Aus at 100. Who in his right mind would want to use Sobers as a front line bowler in a good team who is up against a good team? So how come you never mark down Sobers for something that you consistently mark down other greats for?

 

[akilana]

Sobers record as a bowler is just average. Wouldn't pick him as a bowler alone.

Imran was an ATG bowler and his batting was as good as Sobers's bowling or better.

Anyways, have Imran as my 2nd greatest cricketer ever, just ahead Kallis.

 

[Coronis]

Sobers record as a bowler is just average. Wouldn't pick him as a bowler alone.

Imran was an ATG bowler and his batting was as good as Sobers's bowling or better.

Anyways, have Imran as my 2nd greatest cricketer ever, just ahead Kallis.

Imran's batting is quite overrated.

 

[akilana]

So is Sobers's bowling. If he was one the of the top 5 bowler during his time then the standard must have been low.

 

[harsh.ag]

Dude your posting has become extremely biased, you've been marking down Bradman for minnow bashing and playing in such and such era despite the fact that he only preceded Sobers by 10 years. Now you are marking down Miller's batting by saying it is equivalent to Sobers's bowling. Have you checked Sobers's bowling stats?

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Sobers only did well against the minnows of that time and that too only 1 minnow i.e. India. Also there is a gap between his home and away bowling average if you take out the minnows India from his record. His bowling average against the other minnow of the time i.e Pakistan is 113.50 with a Strike Rate 356. Against NZ he strikes every 116 deliveries. Against Aus at 100. Who in his right mind would want to use Sobers as a front line bowler in a good team who is up against a good team? So how come you never mark down Sobers for something that you consistently mark down other greats for?

I quite agree. I will make two arguments here.

First, Sobers is considered to be a good bowler because for some time, he was the leader/one of the leaders of the West Indian bowling attack. The attack was, quite observably, weak and so he didn't seem bad in that context. Many greats still rank him as the third best left arm pacer they have seen behind Wasim and Davidson. I think his batting may have, perhaps, left a touch of afterglow on his bowling.

Second, this is the reason why I don't rank Sobers as the greatest all-rounder of all. As I remarked before, if you had to pick one cricketer in your team given that the other 10 could be anybody from history, picking Miller or Imran is perhaps the best option. Bradman is a good option as well. So, just going by that criteria, they would be the greatest 3. But there are other criteria as well, of course, and they will probably have Sobers and Kallis ahead. For example, filling the 6th batsman and 5th bowler's role in an ATG team.

My overall position on this is that Sobers is the best all round player the game has ever seen, while Miller and Imran the best all rounders.

 

[Satyanash89]

Dude your posting has become extremely biased, you've been marking down Bradman for minnow bashing and playing in such and such era despite the fact that he only preceded Sobers by 10 years. Now you are marking down Miller's batting by saying it is equivalent to Sobers's bowling. Have you checked Sobers's bowling stats?

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Sobers only did well against the minnows of that time and that too only 1 minnow i.e. India. Also there is a gap between his home and away bowling average if you take out the minnows India from his record. His bowling average against the other minnow of the time i.e Pakistan is 113.50 with a Strike Rate 356. Against NZ he strikes every 116 deliveries. Against Aus at 100. Who in his right mind would want to use Sobers as a front line bowler in a good team who is up against a good team? So how come you never mark down Sobers for something that you consistently mark down other greats for?

Look, all he was saying was that Sobers would have been picked in that West Indies side as either a bowler or as a batsman, which is completely true. West Indies' bowling resources were pretty barren and Sobers was one of their frontline bowlers. The thing that made him the greatest is the fact that Sobers was the best batsman in the side, and had to bowl the bulk of their overs too, as a frontline seamer. He also ended up as the highest wicket taker on a tour to England once, if im not mistaken. Yes his strike-rate was poor and his record is pretty uneven so he's no more than a merely decent support bowler in an AT XI, but his workload was absolutely immense, as batsman and frontline seamer , far more so than any other all-rounder ever. People seem to conveniently forget this about Sobers

If you want an all-rounder who can be picked in an All-time XI either solely for batting or bowling, you'll never find one, because there hasnt been such a player yet.

 

[smash84]

Look, all he was saying was that Sobers would have been picked in that West Indies side as either a bowler or as a batsman, which is completely true. West Indies' bowling resources were pretty barren and Sobers was one of their frontline bowlers. The thing that made him the greatest is the fact that Sobers was the best batsman in the side, and had to bowl the bulk of their overs too, as a frontline seamer. He also ended up as the highest wicket taker on a tour to England once, if im not mistaken. Yes his strike-rate was poor and his record is pretty uneven so he's no more than a merely decent support bowler in an AT XI, but his workload was absolutely immense, as batsman and frontline seamer , far more so than any other all-rounder ever. People seem to conveniently forget this about Sobers

If you want an all-rounder who can be picked in an All-time XI either solely for batting or bowling, you'll never find one, because there hasnt been such a player yet.

EXACTLY and so could Imran and Miller find a place in their sides for each of their disciplines because usually the teams that they played in were relatively weak in one department to make room for them.

Also the thing that irritates me is the double standards. While arguments are being put forward to find holes in non-favorite players' resume the same arguments are not being used to mark down favorite players.

 

[Red]

Sobers record as a bowler is just average. Wouldn't pick him as a bowler alone.

Imran was an ATG bowler and his batting was as good as Sobers's bowling or better.

Anyways, have Imran as my 2nd greatest cricketer ever, just ahead Kallis.

His initial selection for the WIs was as a bowler. So he fits the criteria of the point I was making.

 

[Satyanash89]

EXACTLY and so could Imran and Miller find a place in their sides for each of their disciplines because usually the teams that they played in were relatively weak in one department to make room for them.

Also the thing that irritates me is the double standards. While arguments are being put forward to find holes in non-favorite players' resume the same arguments are not being used to mark down favorite players.

There are no double standards here. Sobers was West Indies' most important batsman and was also a frontline seamer. Im not even saying this makes Sobers the better cricketer....Just pointing out how vital he was to the team in both departments and that he would be a top pick as both batsman and bowler. Imran while obviously being Pakistan's best bowler for a long time was nowhere close to being their most important or irreplacable batsman. Simple enough to understand.

Just looked at the votes, and Kallis has the second most votes?!! Wow...kallisball indeed

 

[smash84]

There are no double standards here. Sobers was West Indies' most important batsman and was also a frontline seamer. Im not even saying this makes Sobers the better cricketer....Just pointing out how vital he was to the team in both departments and that he would be a top pick as both batsman and bowler. Imran while obviously being Pakistan's best bowler for a long time was nowhere close to being their most important or irreplacable batsman. Simple enough to understand.

Bradman is being marked down for playing against minnows and bettering his average and
Sobers isn't? Similarly Imran and Murali are marked down for having better home averages than away averages. Sobers isn't. If that is not double standards then what is?

 

[sunilreddy]

GachiBowli Diwakar

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Just looked at the votes, and Kallis has the second most votes?!! Wow...kallisball indeed

It's all down to the current fad fanboyism. The same way a poll of the greatest Rock 'N' Roll star would have the latest X-Factor winner ahead of Elvis Presley.

 

[harsh.ag]

It's all down to the current fad fanboyism. The same way a poll of the greatest Rock 'N' Roll star would have the latest X-Factor winner ahead of Elvis Presley.

Talk about taking it to the extreme. Kallis is no X-Factor winner (This sentence seems all kinds of wrong )

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Talk about taking it to the extreme. Kallis is no X-Factor winner (This sentence seems all kinds of wrong )

Kallis is going to be the greatest statistical anomaly in history. His current day fans will have the irrational hero worship of him and put him in an All Time XI whilst his detractors don't think he measures up to the other great players. However in 100 years time the statsmongers will look at his figures and think it's impossible to leave him out of any team.

 

[harsh.ag]

Kallis is going to be the greatest statistical anomaly in history. His current day fans will have the irrational hero worship of him and put him in an All Time XI whilst his detractors don't think he measures up to the other great players. However in 100 years time the statsmongers will look at his figures and think it's impossible to leave him out of any team.

Nah, Cricinfo archives will sort them out. Crowe, Nicholas and Chappelli all rating Sobers the best bat and all..

 

[kyear2]

Bradman is being marked down for playing against minnows and bettering his average and
Sobers isn't? Similarly Imran and Murali are marked down for having better home averages than away averages. Sobers isn't. If that is not double standards then what is?

Yes Bradman is marked down for playing againts minnows, but also partially for the rules or the day and other factors. Ask yourself if Imran couldn't get lbw decisions once the ball pitched out side of the off stump how effective he would have been.

With Murali, being marked down for the disparity between his home and away averages is only to diffreciate him from Warnr as they are practically even. For Imran, it was one of several reasons why I don't see see him as the best ever player, including reaching his batting and bowling peaks at opposite ends of his career and never excelling at both at the same time and the fact that he was a poor fielder among others.

As for Keith Miller, all I am saying is that I would rather have a 5th bowler with an average of 34 that a number 5 batsman with a batting average of 35. Whats wrong with that. Sobers legacy is not based on his bowling, he was a more than useful 5th bowler and the best in history at that role, who was over bowled and misused as a strike bowler and alternately as a stock bowler who bowled two types of spin and also seam who wal one of the greatest fielders ever and lights iout in the slip cordon. Oh, and by my ratings the thirs best batsman ever.

Regarding Bradman again, for instance, Everton Weekes averaged over 100 vs India, but we don't rate him based on that. We rate him based on what he did vas Lindwall and Miller and Trueman ect and Bradman out side of Larwood at his best for one season, never faced an attack like Lindwall and Miller, not a double standard, it's one we use for everyone.

 

[The Sean]

How often is the same biased, disingenuous **** allowed to get posted over and over again in multiple threads before it becomes an issue?

Genuinely curious.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

How often is the same biased, disingenuous **** allowed to get posted over and over again in multiple threads before it becomes an issue?

Genuinely curious.

Why should it become an issue? It's hysterical. The comedy value of posters trying to belittle Sobers and Bradman is what makes this forum unique and keeps people coming back.