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

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

    1 1.33%
  • Imran Khan

    7 9.33%
  • Gary Sobers

    16 21.33%
  • Jacques Kallis

    15 20.00%
  • Don Bradman

    28 37.33%
  • WG Grace

    5 6.67%
  • Other

    3 4.00%
Page 9 of 49 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 725

Thread: Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

  1. #121
    Cricketer Of The Year Agent Nationaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,470
    Sobers is rated better than Imran by most and he probably was. However Kyar2 has to start calling Immy a cheat to try and prove his point. Smali is right, Pak would have won the WI series, so Pak umpires weren't the only patriots.
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Yeah, look, it gives me a pain deep inside my uterus to admit it, but it's Ajmal until such time as we get a working throwing law again.
    Never in a million years would I have thought Brumby to admit this!!!!!!

  2. #122
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    So, you think if the ATG batsmen of today and 70s and 80s etc were to play during Bradman's time, playing 3-4 tests a year, then they would be averaging a lot more, say 70, or 80? If you don't think this, then you shouldn't be pushing your version either.

    P.S. Hammond and Headley were ATG batsmen in that era averaging 60. What would you say their averages would have dropped to? Or do you think that there is a "normal" average of around 55-60 for ATG bats which will always be followed if enough matches are played?
    Headley's most probably would've come down. He only played from memory around 20 tests? It's too hard to extrapolate on what his avg roughly might've been because he played so little.

    Hammond, on the other hand, played a fair amount and avg'd 58, so his avg does give you a reasonably fair reflection of his ability. If he had played more over his career (like another 40 tests during the span of his career), maybe it would've dropped a few points? Yeah, I do think that a career avg of 50-60 is sort of like the upper limit for batsmen who play enough tests year in year out.
    Proud Supporter of All Blacks

  3. #123
    State Vice-Captain harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux View Post
    Sobers is rated better than Imran by most and he probably was. However Kyar2 has to start calling Immy a cheat to try and prove his point. Smali is right, Pak would have won the WI series, so Pak umpires weren't the only patriots.
    Ah.. Fred Goodall...
    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.

  4. #124
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,306
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    when did I say the performance always gets worse as someone gets older?

    Please read carefully.

    "Ponting went from avging 60 to 51 and Dravid likewise.
    The point I am making here is that if you avg an extraordinary amount in a extremely comptetitive age where you play all year around, you wouldn't be able to sustain that avg till the end of your career unless you retire early or something... "

    60 to 51 is a massive drop, almost equivalent of Bradman going from 100 to 80-85.
    You're not looking at the other side of the coin. If getting to 60-51 is likelier/easier when you play more, it is also likelier/easier to go from 51-60 for the same reason.

    In the end, Bradman played 20 years of cricket, so it is not like his performances were a flash in the pan.
    I think there'll sooner be another Bradman than another Warne. - Gidgeon Haigh

    [Warne is] the greatest bowler ever produced in this entire world - Muttiah Muralidaran

    [Warne is] the greatest bowler of all time - Glenn McGrath


    In my opinion Shane Warne is the greatest cricketer who's ever lived - Ian Botham

    Warne is the greatest cricketer to pick up a ball ever.
    And is the greatest bowler I have ever laid eyes on. - Brian Lara


  5. #125
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    Headley's most probably would've come down. He only played from memory around 20 tests? It's too hard to extrapolate on what his avg roughly might've been because he played so little.

    Hammond, on the other hand, played a fair amount and avg'd 58, so his avg does give you a reasonably fair reflection of his ability. If he had played more over his career (like another 40 tests during the span of his career), maybe it would've dropped a few points? Yeah, I do think that a career avg of 50-60 is sort of like the upper limit for batsmen who play enough tests year in year out.
    So if Bradman played as many tests as players do today he'd average 50-60?

  6. #126
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Coronis View Post
    So if Bradman played as many tests as players do today he'd average 50-60?
    what the hell?

    in his era, probably 85 IMO.

  7. #127
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    what the hell?

    in his era, probably 85 IMO.
    Well sorry, you did say 50-60 was the limit for batsmen playing many tests. I just find all these attempts to discredit Bradman as complete and utter ****, sorry if I don't take many of your arguments too seriously.

  8. #128
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    You're not looking at the other side of the coin. If getting to 60-51 is likelier/easier when you play more, it is also likelier/easier to go from 51-60 for the same reason.
    .
    NOPE thats not really possible imo

    From:
    10000 runs / 200 outs = avg 50

    To:
    15000 runs / 250 outs = avg 60

    So 5000 additional runs over 50 dismissals = avg 100!!!

    They'd have to Avg 100 to go from 50 to 60!

  9. #129
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    It's just incredibly hard to even sustain a high avg, let alone improve on it!

  10. #130
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    It's just incredibly hard to even sustain a high avg, let alone improve on it!
    Yet Bradman did. It seems like some people can't except that and want to find a way to bring him back to a "mortal" level. The fact is, he was so far ahead of everyone before and after him that he is basically immortal. Nobody will be able to repeat what he did, ever. He was a true one of a kind.

  11. #131
    International Captain The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,268
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    NOPE thats not really possible imo

    From:
    10000 runs / 200 outs = avg 50

    To:
    15000 runs / 250 outs = avg 60

    So 5000 additional runs over 50 dismissals = avg 100!!!

    They'd have to Avg 100 to go from 50 to 60!
    You mean like Bradman did?
    Last edited by The Sean; 28-03-2013 at 06:12 AM.
    Member of the Twenty20 is Boring Society

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

  12. #132
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pune, India
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by centurymaker View Post
    It's just incredibly hard to even sustain a high avg, let alone improve on it!
    Except bradman sustained it for 20 years. Why is this so hard to accept?

  13. #133
    International Captain The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,268
    It's funny - people come along every now and then with some "controversial" theory suggesting Bradman's numbers are somehow hyper-inflated in a way that no other batsman's are and that when you adjust for era, opposition, playing conditions, bowling quality and the number of spanners in a Sidchrome tool kit he's not actually that much better than anyone else. As though no one had though of that kind of analysis before.

    The truth is, people (in both official and unofficial capacities) have been conducting studies along these lines for years - adjusting for all those factors and more - and the one thing that remains consistent through all of them is the end result, which is always that Bradman is absolutely miles ahead of any other batsman in Test history.

    I personally think Bradman is the greatest cricketer - and, statistically, possibly the greatest sportsman - of all time. However, I can see the case for Sobers or Grace or Imran for example and if someone wants to extol their abilities and achievements to argue for them that's fine and I'll respect that. But don't just invent reasons to speculatively reduce Bradman's average (but conveniently no one else's) and then judge him on that, because you think his actual average is too high and can't possibly be true.

  14. #134
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    You mean like Bradman did?
    Yeah :P

    or they'd have to avg like at least 80, but over greater "additional" runs.
    Last edited by centurymaker; 28-03-2013 at 06:49 AM.

  15. #135
    International Vice-Captain centurymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    4,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyanash89 View Post
    Except bradman sustained it for 20 years. Why is this so hard to accept?
    70 outs, 80 innings. come on.

    I am not saying his avg would drop to 50-60. It'd be around 85 IMO (in his era).

    Where is PEWS when I need him ?

Page 9 of 49 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •