• 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.

Is there such a thing as "the greatest cricketer ever"?

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Honest question. Bit airy-fairy perhaps, but still.

Just struck me as strange that there seems to be a need to categorically define someone or other as the 'greatest', can't work out why people obsess over this and get so worked up about it.

I'm not convinced that there is such a thing; besides, does it really matter whether Lara or Bradman is the 'greatest' ever? Is it not enough that they are both 'great'?
 

uvelocity

International Coach
yeah, but only because bradders was so far ahead and still is

in regard to best bowler, or next best batsman, or even best catcher no. there are too many close together to ever be definitive.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Obviously there is no such thing definitively, but the topic has the potential to produce a veritable nosegay of outstanding discussion. Admittedly the thread on this occasion was mainly baloney, but the potential was there.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Well the thread has made me question my belief that a specialist can never be a better cricketer than an allrounder.

Bradman is worth two all time great batsmen, was excellent in the field, was a useful part timer and was a captain. Sobers, Kallis, Miller, Imran etc are all time greats in one discipline, good at another and in most cases on that list excellent in the field as well.

I'm torn.
 

Top