**** sake ****, take up badminton or something.
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | PM me for my list of CW posters you shouldn't talk cricket with in Cricket ChatCome and Paint Turtle
Make an AFL top 25 and get 50 pages of replies, ****.
Greatest Ever Test XI: JB Hobbs, L Hutton, DG Bradman (c), IVA Richards, BC Lara, GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), Imran Khan, RJ Hadlee, MD Marshall, SK Warne 12th man: M Muralitharan
Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), AC Gilchrist (wk), CL Cairns, SK Warne, FS Trueman, SE Bond, T Richardson 12th man: H Larwood
Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?
With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left
I wonder how Younis' ranking is affected after that double.
Well done DoG. What a great list. Bradman a deserving winner, though greatest sportsman ever? That's hard to say, maybe do some stats?
No it was very well done
Current "Favourite XI" 1. Watson 2. Pujara 3. Sangakarra 4. DM Bravo 5. Clarke 6. De Villiers+ 7. Broad 8.Philander 9.Harris 10. Steyn 11. Herath
The greatest man of his time, have a peaceful sleep Madiba
This whole list was just fascinating, thought it was a wonderful attempt to quantify greatness.
Couple of things bothered me, though.
1) Capping career points doesn't really make sense to me, especially as it seems as though only Bradman, Lara and Tendulkar actually maxed out.
2) Personally, one of the main things I look for in a great batsman is a balanced record in a wide variety of conditions, and not just an "away average" which can be misleading and mask a number of weaknesses in a player's record. It's why I consider Ponting,Lara, Tendulkar, Kallis to be so great, because they've scored heavily virtually everywhere, and it should count for something. Some sort of additional modifier where you penalise a batsman for having a sub 40/sub 35 average in a particular country could help.
3) Maxing out quality points for cricketers who have played very few matches(<30 maybe) would even out the field as players like Headley get an unfair advantage here. While obviously a great batsman, averaging 50+ over 100 matches is infinitely more difficult than averaging 60 over 20 odd games.
4) Instead of a "top opposition", the rating should take into consideration "top quality attack". (ie) It should take into account the quality of the bowlers against whom the runs were made instead of the ranking of the opposing team. I don't know if this is possible to formulate right now.... Maybe once you do a top 100 bowlers list?
Overall, though, a fabulous formula and a great list. Excellent work
Last edited by OverratedSanity; 11-09-2013 at 11:48 AM.
We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
A cricket supporter forever
Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.
Check out this awesome e-fed:
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)