Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 71
Like Tree27Likes

Thread: Top 10 Batsmen and Bowlers of All Time

  1. #46
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,545
    you need a spinner because some pitches turn and some batsmen are terrible against spin.
    marc71178 likes this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  2. #47
    International Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,101
    And;

    There are two surprises. The first is that West Indies played 4 pace bowlers, out of these 8, in only 30 of these during these 27 years. Of course they played other pace bowlers to come to four. The second surprise is that in tests in which West Indies had fielded 4 pace bowlers, out of the selected 8, their win percentage is below 50. This indicates that the best combination was three top pace bowlers and one bowler of different type, a spinner or even a medium pace swing bowler, to maintain balance. One would have again expected the win % to be higher. Maybe 3 pace bowlers + Gibbs/Holder/Richards/Gomes/Harper/Patterson was the more effective combination. Amongst this lot, Gibbs was a world-class spinner on his own rights. Patterson and Holder were good support bowlers.

    Blogs: Eight genial giants: a pictorial view across 28 years | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

  3. #48
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    you need a spinner because some pitches turn and some batsmen are terrible against spin.
    And in those instances you play a spinner.
    Aus. XI
    Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2


    W.I. XI
    Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4

    S.A. XI
    Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

    Eng. XI
    Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3

  4. #49
    State Vice-Captain schearzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Isla de Muerta
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Then why do you need them. I disagree on the notion that teams need spinners. The greatest attack of all time utilized four quicks while the best team in the world currently doesn't have a competent spinner and they are doing quite well.

    From an ATG Team perspective, unless it's Warne or Murali and four great quicks are available (especially if a Garner is available who is capable of marathon economical spells) then I will go four quicks.
    It's the course Australia is in at the moment, after having had Warne, now the selectors won't just choose the best bowlers. Not just based on a pitch, but THE BEST Australian bowlers at any time. I know that Lyon is occasionally lucky enough to get a wicket. But If you don't have a good enough spinner, then use the more than capable part timers for those batsmen who have real trouble against spinners.
    Current Favourite XI 1. Cook 2. Gayle 3. Sangakarra 4. Clarke* 5. Chanderpaul 6. Rahane 7. De Kock+ 8. Neesham 9. Johnson 10. Herath 11. Steyn


  5. #50
    International Vice-Captain Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,891
    Reasons teams should have a spinner-

    - Some batsmen are poor at playing spin.
    - Some wickets are very receptive to spin.
    - Over rates are to be considered.
    - When the ball is older, quite often a spinner is more effective than a quick.
    - On day 5, a spinner can often take wickets where a quick won't.
    - Monotonous fast bowling is ****ing boring.
    - After facing pace for a long time, batsmen can find spin disconcerting.

  6. #51
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk View Post
    Reasons teams should have a spinner-

    - Some batsmen are poor at playing spin.
    - Some wickets are very receptive to spin.
    - Over rates are to be considered.
    - When the ball is older, quite often a spinner is more effective than a quick.
    - On day 5, a spinner can often take wickets where a quick won't.
    - Monotonous fast bowling is ****ing boring.
    - After facing pace for a long time, batsmen can find spin disconcerting.
    And if you have a good one available you select him. But if the spin bowler is not among your top 10 bowlers available do you still force the selection just to say you have a spinner? I don't think you should.

  7. #52
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,545
    That wasn't even your original argument.

  8. #53
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,163
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Then why do you need them. I disagree on the notion that teams need spinners. The greatest attack of all time utilized four quicks while the best team in the world currently doesn't have a competent spinner and they are doing quite well.
    Was it really the greatest attack of all-time though? Or was it just the best collection of bowlers that happened to play for the same country at the same point in time?

    It seems to me that you're justifying the lack of need for a spinner on the basis that the WI had a fantastically phenomenal crop of fast bowlers. But you're rating it as the "greatest attack of all-time" based on the fact that you don't consider a spinner important to the balance of an attack. Those who're big fans of Warne, Murali, spinners in general, would disagree that it was the greatest ever because there was no spinner. You can't use it as your justification and argument.
    "If that Swann lad is the future of spin bowling in this country, then we're ****ed." - Nasser Hussain, 1997.

  9. #54
    International Vice-Captain Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,891
    I don't think it's a given that the WIs were the greatest attack of all time by any means.

    - McGrath, Gillespie, Lee/Kaspa, Warne

    - Lindwall, Miller, Davidson, Benaud, Johnston (around that era anyway)

    - Waqar, Wasim, Imran, Qadir

    - Trueman, Statham, Tyson, Lock, Laker

  10. #55
    International Vice-Captain OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    4,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk View Post
    I don't think it's a given that the WIs were the greatest attack of all time by any means.

    - McGrath, Gillespie, Lee/Kaspa, Warne

    - Lindwall, Miller, Davidson, Benaud, Johnston (around that era anyway)

    - Waqar, Wasim, Imran, Qadir

    - Trueman, Statham, Tyson, Lock, Laker
    Man for man they're better than all of those tbh. There isn't another bowling attack which boasts of 4 genuine top tier ATG bowlers.
    Waqar, Wasim, Imran, Qatar probably the closest even though Imran was on the wane and Qadir was not really that great anyway. That's the thing about Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall-Croft... Not only were they all amazing but they were amazing together. ... No set of fast bowlers has ever peaked together to such an extent
    Proud member of the Indian STFU: Sane Tendulkar Fanboy Union.
    Our motto: Sachin WAG, Don>>>Sachin

  11. #56
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,761
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post
    Man for man they're better than all of those tbh. There isn't another bowling attack which boasts of 4 genuine top tier ATG bowlers.
    Waqar, Wasim, Imran, Qatar probably the closest even though Imran was on the wane and Qadir was not really that great anyway. That's the thing about Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall-Croft... Not only were they all amazing but they were amazing together. ... No set of fast bowlers has ever peaked together to such an extent
    You mean a whole country was playing with those 3
    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

  12. #57
    Eds
    Eds is offline
    International Debutant Eds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,163
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post
    Man for man they're better than all of those tbh. There isn't another bowling attack which boasts of 4 genuine top tier ATG bowlers.
    Waqar, Wasim, Imran, Qatar probably the closest even though Imran was on the wane and Qadir was not really that great anyway. That's the thing about Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall-Croft... Not only were they all amazing but they were amazing together. ... No set of fast bowlers has ever peaked together to such an extent
    I don't think anyone would argue that man-for-man they weren't the best set of bowlers ever. But the debate was regarding whether the lack of a spinner means they can be called the greatest attack ever. A set of incredible pace bowlers all peaking at one point in time doesn't mean that a side doesn't need a spinner.

    Kyear was suggesting that the WI fast bowling unit was the best attack ever. He was using his belief that the absence of a spinner makes no difference to the quality of an attack to determine this. He then used this as justification to suggest that therefore spinners are at some sort of lower level. Which doesn't really work.

  13. #58
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Just under your skin
    Posts
    5,829
    You need spinners because four quicks cannot bowl 90 overs per day against good batsmen. WI pace quartret would have got away bowling to lesser line ups, but we are considering another ATG line up with brilliant batsmen.

    Pluck out this line up: Gavaskar, Sutcliffe, Ponting, Sangakkara, Kallis, Barrington, A. Flower, Hadlee, Garner, Warne, Trueman (2nd ATG XI for me)

    I don't expect even the mighty WI pace quartet to dislodge them within one day more than 50% of the times.
    Last edited by Migara; 23-09-2013 at 08:54 AM.
    Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)

  14. #59
    International Vice-Captain OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    4,104
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    You mean a whole country was playing with those 3
    Ah, the pains of using SwiftKey on a new mobile.

  15. #60
    International Captain ankitj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hyderabad India
    Posts
    6,176
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    01. Sir Donald Bradman
    02. Sir I.V.A. Richrads
    03. Sir Garfield Sobers
    04. Sachin Tendulkar
    05. Brian Lara
    06. Sir Jack Hobbs
    07. Sir Leonard Hutton
    08. Graeme Pollock
    09. Greg Chappell
    10. George Headley / Ricky Ponting

    01. Malcolm Marshall
    02. Glenn McGrath
    03. Muttiah Muralitharan
    04. Dennis Lillee
    05. Shane Warne
    06. Curtly Ambrose
    07. Dale Steyn
    08. Fred Trueman
    09. Alan Donald
    10. Michael Holding / Richard Hadlee / Imran Khan

    Sorry about the cheat, but hard to separate the three for differing reasons and all three deserve to be there.
    Why the down grading of Warne and Headley? By this time all of us could post your rationale for rating them higher and you decide to change your ranking
    Last edited by ankitj; 23-09-2013 at 10:01 AM.
    smalishah84 likes this.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Top ten greatest bowlers and batsmen of all time
    By The King in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 257
    Last Post: 20-09-2013, 07:30 AM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 30-05-2013, 04:24 PM
  3. Greatest Australian bowlers and batsmen of all time?
    By The King in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 14-11-2012, 12:17 PM
  4. Batsmen or Bowlers?
    By hang on in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 18-05-2011, 10:17 AM
  5. Bowlers who became batsmen
    By zaremba in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 22-03-2009, 02:48 PM

Posting Permissions

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