Cricketer of the generation award

[paulted]

How about giving it to someone who was able to excel although playing in a poor team, and if they did well against the best teams too? Hadlee and Kapil Dev for example.....

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Even under that basis 1993 seems fairer. Taking the "dismantling of the Windies side"

Viv Richards: retired 1991
Greenidge: 1991
Marshall: 1991
Dujon: 1991
Logie: 1991
Patterson: 1992
Harper: 1993
Haynes: 1994

Other iconic players from the era of Packer, Saffa isolation and 'taches that retired around this time are

Botham retired 1992
Gower 1992
Imran 1992
Miandad 1993
Kapil 1994
Border 1994
Pringle 1992

So I think 1993 on serves as pretty good measure of "this generation" or "the modern era" if you prefer

But yes, silly award created just to give to Tendulkar, not even trying to be subtle about it, etc etc

I never thought I'd see Derek Pringle referred to as an iconic player!

 

[Pothas]

Don't really see why anyone would get worked up about this.

 

[simonlee48]

Don't really see why anyone would get worked up about this.

Exactly. If you can have a 10 years then why not 20 or 30 years? Nothing to get worked up about it so much. It's just a random period and a random award.

I personally feel that when you account for both formats then SRT does have the strongest claim anyway. If we only take the test format, situation won't be the same.

 

[watson]

Exactly. If you can have a 10 years then why not 20 or 30 years? Nothing to get worked up about it so much. It's just a random period and a random award.

I personally feel that when you account for both formats then SRT does have the strongest claim anyway. If we only take the test format, situation won't be the same.

That' right, it's pretty difficult to define a generation of cricketers. However, most ATG cricketers span two decades during their career. Batsman like Kanhai spanned three, but he would be an exception.

I reckon that a generation of cricketers would consist of those cricketers who have played most of their cricket within the last 20 years. But that's just a guess.

 

[Hooksey]

How about giving it to someone who was able to excel although playing in a poor team, and if they did well against the best teams too? Hadlee and Kapil Dev for example.....

The award is said to be since 1993.

That Hadlee retired in 1990 and Dev in 1994 provides a few issues.

 

[Spikey]

uh guys are you aware that 1993 is the starting point because that's when Cricinfo was founded ie it makes sense

 

[Hooksey]

uh guys are you aware that 1993 is the starting point because that's when Cricinfo was founded ie it makes sense

That's little consolation to Hadlee & Dev.

 

[ankitj]

There is nothing to be excited about here. If public selects it will be Tendulkar. If panel selects it will be Warne.

Correct answer is neither. It is Muralidharan.

 

[ankitj]

This disgusts me. I'd love it if cricinfo had the balls to give it to Warne or Kallis but we all know what's going to happen.

Haha no. I dare them to give it to anyone but Warne.

 

[Jono]

Don't really see why anyone would get worked up about this.

Its life or death man!

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

I never thought I'd see Derek Pringle referred to as an iconic player!

It's obviously meant to be Chris, and the date is wrong.

 

[Red]

It's Warne FFS. As much as I think he's a tosser, he's the most skilled legspinner to have played in about 60 years. And legspin is the most difficult of arts in cricket, there's no doubting that surely.

 

[Mike5181]

Batsman = Tendulkar
Bowler = Warne/McGrath/Murali
Cricketer = Kallis

 

[ankitj]

Reading this thread, I am curious why you all think it's a set up for Tendulkar. It has always been Warne as the cricketer of the generation or century or since dawn of time whenever panel of experts have got together. I will be shocked if it's not him.

Public voting is of course not even necessary for this.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

And Tendulkar is the second greatest batsmen ever (lol)

 

[Burgey]

They're awarding this now because in three years' time it will be so obviously Steve Smith that Tendulkar would miss out.

Just wih Murali being allowed to continue bowling, it won't be Tendulkar's fault if officials see to it he gets this award even though he shouldn't.

 

[YorksLanka]

should be tendulkar, murali should be there ahead of warne as he is better and surprised that lara is not in there..

 

[G.I.Joe]

If one goes strictly by utility, Kallis should have this sewed up.

Otherwise, it's McGrath, Warne/Murali, Lara/Tendulkar. I suppose Tendulkar would have the edge over Lara due to longevity and being the better overall player ODIs included, and Warne over Murali for the overall package. So - Kallis, McGrath, Warne, Tendulkar.

I'm not decided about Gilchrist.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Interestingly this bloke's name hasn't even entered the discussion - amazing stats after 93


All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo