yup, quite RelevantOriginally Posted by Ford_GTHO351
yup, quite RelevantOriginally Posted by Ford_GTHO351
Amazed that you don't know who Hobbs is. Go revise your cricket history.Originally Posted by Sehwag309
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."
I'm guessing that you do not agree with Warne's inclusion?Originally Posted by luckyeddie
My 2003 Australian Cricketers Rankings No.1's
Test Batting: Mathew Hayden
Test Bowling: Stuart MacGill
ODI Batting: Ricky Ponting
ODI Bowling: Brett Lee
I am post 96 cricket follower, I actually didn'tknow Hobbs..seriouslyOriginally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
Last edited by Sehwag309; 07-05-2004 at 05:02 AM.
I'm a post-98 following, but I do a lot of reading.Originally Posted by Sehwag309
Good for u,Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
Last edited by Sehwag309; 07-05-2004 at 05:10 AM.
then surely you havent heard of bradman,richards,botham,sobers,clive lloyd,jim laker etc!!Originally Posted by Sehwag309
Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!
Well that is asking a bit much knowing all those players!Originally Posted by tooextracool
R.I.P Fardin Qayyumi (Cricket Player)
'Last one on drugs is a queer,' yells portillo..
Hope is a good thing, maybe even the best of things. And no good thing ever dies......
Self appointed president of the KPPAS
I know Bradman, Richards, Botham, Sobers. Before joining these forums, I'd never heard of Lloyd, Laker and Hobbs (although Hobbs did sound vaguely familiar when I first heard it). I probably started following cricket in NZ at around '96, too. England cricket doesn't get much coverage at all over in NZ, at least it never reached me. You're generally lucky if a younger cricket-follower in NZ knows anyone pre1980's, NZ or not! I learn from here and from CricInfo, but don't expect me to go through old news. Just threads and columns slowly build the knowledge, for me.Originally Posted by tooextracool
Oh, missed the topic by distraction: I agree with the majority, Shane Warne is a no go. Brian Lara springs to mind.
Just out of curiosity and patriotism, what position was Richard Hadlee in?
Over their whole careers this is certainly true, but including only the 20th century, Warne outperformed Murali. Murali's peak has been 2000-present.Originally Posted by Sehwag309
Here are their 20th century records:
................... M Balls M Runs Wkt Avge BB 5wi 10wm SR Econ
Warne.......... 80 22575 1157 9009 351 25.67 8-71 16 4 64.32 2.39
Muralitharan...48 14883 624 6140 227 27.05 9-65 17 2 65.56 2.48
Warne was more effective than Murali during that time but he was more than matched by a number of bowlers and I certainly would not have picked him as one of the 5 cricketers of the 20th century.There is an obvious bias towards modern players in the selections - Wisden asked great modern players to select their top 5 and many only selected people they had seen (plus Bradman). Bradman and Sobers are certainties but Richards the third best batsman of the 20th century? I think not - Headley and Weekes were as good if not better in the West Indies alone. Warne the best bowlers of the 20th century? Definetly not.
Here are my 5 cricketers of the century: Bradman, Sobers, Hammond, Barnes, Imran. Hammond was as good a batsman as Hobbs (who made the list) and also possibly the best slip fielder ever while not forgetting his useful bowling. Barnes was unplayable during the last few years of his career and became the most consistently devastating test bowler ever. Imran is the best allrounder since Sobers, being one of the all time great bowlers in whose company he is clearly the best batsman.
Last edited by a massive zebra; 07-05-2004 at 09:05 PM.
THE ULTIMATE CRICKET WEB ARCADE EGGS CHAMPION
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1990-2006
RIP Craig Walsh (AKA "Craig"), 1985-2012
It's not "Best". It's the Cricketers who have had the Biggest Impact on the Game.
Personally, I'd have had Kerry Packer and/or Basil d'Oliveira in there.
MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?
Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC
Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog
"Sir Donald Bradman
Sir Garfield Sobers
Sir Jack Hobbs
Sir Vivian Richards
I havent seen the first four play, so i have to reserve my judgement on them. Although i've heard that richards was one hell of a player and bradmans record speaks for itself!!
Shane warne, however is one man that i have seen bowl. He is good, no doubt. But one of the greatest? What is the criterion? Because if it is wickets taken then warne is behind murali and ambrose (or was it walsh?).
Also, im quite surprised that not a single player from the sub continent has made it!!
No miandad, imran khan, wasim, waqar, kapil dev, sachin, murali!!
'd rather have any of those (despite not having seen dev play, nor imran for that matter) in the selection ahead of warne!!
And what about lara for christ sakes!! 400 & 375 is not easy!
Also, on a side note.....have any pak players been made a 'sir' ?
IMO tendulkar should have been in that list.
Viv Richards, from what I've heard from everyone, was a very great batter. But comparing with tendulkar's record, he is below him against every team.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)