View Poll Results: Who is the best "Cricketer" ever

Voters
74. You may not vote on this poll
  • Keith Miller

    1 1.35%
  • Imran Khan

    7 9.46%
  • Gary Sobers

    16 21.62%
  • Jacques Kallis

    14 18.92%
  • Don Bradman

    28 37.84%
  • WG Grace

    5 6.76%
  • Other

    3 4.05%
Page 4 of 49 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 725

Thread: Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

  1. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pune, India
    Posts
    807
    It's Bradman. Even if you want to hold to the logic that the best player must be an allrounder(which I don't agree with at all), I say Bradman WAS an all rounder whose two core strengths were batting and batting.

    FFS, he's statistically worth two ATG batsmen.

  2. #47
    State Vice-Captain harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyanash89 View Post
    It's Bradman. Even if you want to hold to the logic that the best player must be an allrounder(which I don't agree with at all), I say Bradman WAS an all rounder whose two core strengths were batting and batting.

    FFS, he's statistically worth two ATG batsmen.
    If you were that old, and that kind, and the very last of your kind, you couldn't just stand back and watch children cry.

  3. #48
    State Vice-Captain harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    We have been down this road before and I keep arguing the same points over and over but what exactly is a good all round series for you? In most of the series that Imran played he had a very good batting average (At least the ones in the 1980s). What would that suggest?
    That he was a very good all-rounder. But he didn't add an extra batsman to the side when he was a great bowler, and when he did add an extra batsman to the side, he wasn't a great bowler anymore.

  4. #49
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    53,719
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyanash89 View Post
    It's Bradman. Even if you want to hold to the logic that the best player must be an allrounder(which I don't agree with at all), I say Bradman WAS an all rounder whose two core strengths were batting and batting.

    FFS, he's statistically worth two ATG batsmen.


  5. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pune, India
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    That he was a very good all-rounder. But he didn't add an extra batsman to the side when he was a great bowler, and when he did add an extra batsman to the side, he wasn't a great bowler anymore.
    Yup. Sobers was far more an actual all rounder than Imran in that sense.

    Edit: stupid spellcheck
    Last edited by Satyanash89; 27-03-2013 at 01:40 AM.

  6. #51
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    That he was a very good all-rounder. But he didn't add an extra batsman to the side when he was a great bowler, and when he did add an extra batsman to the side, he wasn't a great bowler anymore.
    I would have a different take on things. That whatever chance he got with the bat he did very well and his average would indicate that. In case you point out his not outs I might add that I wouldn't count a not out against a batsman
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  7. #52
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyanash89 View Post
    Yup. Sobers was far more an actual all rounder than I mean in that sense.
    Sobers bowling was very ordinary

  8. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pune, India
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    Sobers bowling was very ordinary
    Well so was imran's batting then.
    Sobers played the actual all-rounder role of doing well with both bat and ball together more often than Imran, I'd guess

  9. #54
    State Vice-Captain harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    I would have a different take on things. That whatever chance he got with the bat he did very well and his average would indicate that. In case you point out his not outs I might add that I wouldn't count a not out against a batsman
    I have nothing against not-outs. But when I pick Imran, I have to contend with the very real possibility that most probably, either the great-bowler-okay-batsman Imran or the limited-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran is going to show up, not the great-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran.

    And, if as you said, Sobers' bowling was ordinary (which in the 60s it really wasn't), but if we take that, then would I be hesitant to put Imran in my all time side at number 8 after Gilchrist? Hell yes. Much rather have Hadlee or Marshall there.

  10. #55
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    I have nothing against not-outs. But when I pick Imran, I have to contend with the very real possibility that most probably, either the great-bowler-okay-batsman Imran or the limited-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran is going to show up, not the great-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran.

    And, if as you said, Sobers' bowling was ordinary (which in the 60s it really wasn't), but if we take that, then would I be hesitant to put Imran in my all time side at number 8 after Gilchrist? Hell yes. Much rather have Hadlee or Marshall there.
    How wasn't Sobers bowling ordinary? Have you checked out his bowling record? I'll try and pull out some really interesting posts from Ikki in a bit

  11. #56
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyanash89 View Post
    Well so was imran's batting then.
    Sobers played the actual all-rounder role of doing well with both bat and ball together more often than Imran, I'd guess
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    I have nothing against not-outs. But when I pick Imran, I have to contend with the very real possibility that most probably, either the great-bowler-okay-batsman Imran or the limited-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran is going to show up, not the great-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran.

    And, if as you said, Sobers' bowling was ordinary (which in the 60s it really wasn't), but if we take that, then would I be hesitant to put Imran in my all time side at number 8 after Gilchrist? Hell yes. Much rather have Hadlee or Marshall there.
    Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

    Other than against India where Sobers strikes at 73 balls per wicket against no other team does he even strike at 85 balls per wicket. Not only that have you checked his SR against Pakistan. He strikes every 356 deliveries which would mean 1 wicket a day. If that is not ordinary than what is?

  12. #57
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    10,454
    Bradman still top for me though WG is right up with him just didn't get to play international cricket properly at his peak and his records are way better than anyone else at his time despite his age and the standard of equipment/pitches. The more you think of WG he was a freak before his time. As for allrounders i'd probably place Imran top above Sobers and Botham so my top 3 would be Bradman, WG and Imran.

  13. #58
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5,112
    Imran Khan IMO.

    On Sobers vs Khan, IMO Imran's bowling (i.e. his strength) was better than Sobers' batting (his strength). I'd say Imran's batting was probably about equal to Sobers' bowling.

  14. #59
    State Vice-Captain harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    How wasn't Sobers bowling ordinary? Have you checked out his bowling record? I'll try and pull out some really interesting posts from Ikki in a bit
    Dude, I am agreeing with you about Sobers! What are you on about? Now look at what I wrote:

    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    But when I pick Imran, I have to contend with the very real possibility that most probably, either the great-bowler-okay-batsman Imran or the limited-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran is going to show up, not the great-bowler-reliable-batsman Imran.

    And, if as you said, Sobers' bowling was ordinary (which in the 60s it really wasn't), but if we take that, then would I be hesitant to put Imran in my all time side at number 8 after Gilchrist? Hell yes. Much rather have Hadlee or Marshall there.
    What would be your views on this.

  15. #60
    International Captain The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,267
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    So how come Bradman's stats drop but the others don't?
    A thousand times this.

    I know I've said it before, but this obsession that a few people seem to have with inventing reasons or criteria to mark down Bradman - and only Bradman - just to somehow bring him back to the field is beyond ludicrous. I suppose it must seem easier to artificially create some sort of level playing field than to acknowledge that there was a bloke so good that statistically he shouldn't exist.
    Member of the Twenty20 is Boring Society

    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    C'mon Man U.
    RIP Craigos

Page 4 of 49 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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