The CW50 - No.50-41

[JBMAC]

Had the "Demon" in my list

 

[Hurricane]

I have ill feelings towards Jardine - and question his placing in any all time list on the question of ethics.

 

[Furball]

Greatest Scot to ever play Test cricket, I'm quite happy with him being on the list.

 

[bagapath]

No issues regarding the rankings system from me. Isn't the point of these lists to have 2-3 random selections that create controversy and discussion?

The influence Flintoff and Jardine have had on the game surely puts them close to a top 50most influential cricketers of all time. It's not as if Pat Symcox has made the list, so I don't get the fuss.

Pretty much my thoughts. I have no problems with any of the names so far.

Sean, this is turning out to be one of the best threads ever. And your pen portraits are definitely staying in. They make the presentation very elegant. Bravo!

 

[fredfertang]

Because he was without peer, undoubtedly the best player on the planet and the greatest the game had seen until Grace came along. Sure it was a different game back then but that does not change the Lion of Kent's accomplishments and impact.

If someone today was to write like Chaucer then they would get no recognition but we recognise the genius of generations past based on comparisions with their contemporaries and their legacy. As such, Mynn deserves to be recognised in terms of cricket as Chaucer and Shakespeare are in English literature.

EDIT- Agree or disagree, Im relieved to see Im not the only one that thinks this way. A quick search shows that John Woodcock has him ranked 4th (a place higher than I had him)
Wisden - Woodcock's hundred

I seriously thought about including Mynn (but didn't) and was aware how highly he was rated by Woodcock and others - Part of the reason I didn't include him in the end was because his record is markedly inferior to his contemporary Fuller Pilch who seldom seems to merit a mention - at the end of the day pre 1864 (when overarm bowling was legalised) players are, I suspect, just too far back in history to make fully informed judgments about

 

[Matt79]

Rolleyes at pratters carry on. Democracy at work.

Good list so far, didn't vote for any of these guys, but they're all deserved place getters. Would personally disagree that Flintoff is remotely close to being one of the ten greatest cricketers EVER, but that's why Sean asked for more than just my opinion.

 

[JBMAC]

I have ill feelings towards Jardine - and question his placing in any all time list on the question of ethics.

Most fair dinkum aussie cricket fans think likewise BUT he, as Captain of England, had to try and curb Bradman.Bodyline was what he came up with and he was respected or feared enough by his accompanying players that they carried his somewhat dubious plan to fruition, no matter what the furore. I do nt like him but certainly respect hsi decision and sticking to it

 

[honestbharani]

Great stuff, Sean... My list varies everyday and I am not even sure I know whom I voted for at this point.. (cant open my email at work )... But a great list and love the pen portraits..


Would love to see what you have to write on some of my favourites who I am sure will come up as we go along..

 

[GIMH]

I wouldn't have Andrew Flintoff any where near the top 100 cricketers of all time, let alone the top 50.

But the idea is to make it as true a list as possible. No one with sense can argue that Flintoff is among the top 100 cricketers of all time (as I said here, Flintoff cannot even be termed a great.)

I like the concept and I am looking forward to the rest of the list but it shouldn't stop me from pointing possible flaws. Maybe only include cricketers with at least 5 votes?

I'll vote on whatever grounds I want thanks. You never even sent in a list, get off your high horse. I voted on a combination of overall impact and also the personal impact on me. Of course that means my list will be unfairly skewed in favour of modern players, so what. It's CW's Top 50, not Pratters.

Cricket is about more than stats and Freddie's influence is, IMO, massive. Not everyone agrees and that's fine.

At 5% Freddie probably got only two votes, but they were both Top 10ers.

Nope, he was 15th in my list

 

[chasingthedon]

In 15 minutes...

It will be 24 hours since 50-41 was posted - the clock is ticking. Enquiring minds want to know.

Seriously, great idea Sean, and although I didn't pick anyone in 50-41, I did have Grimmett.

 

[GIMH]

It's only been 12 hours

 

[chasingthedon]

It's the drink talking!

 

[pasag]

Will you be doing the higer-ups one at a time Sean?

 

[G.I.Joe]

Will you be doing the higer-ups one at a time Sean?

 

[Fusion]

 

[Furball]

I'll vote on whatever grounds I want thanks. You never even sent in a list, get off your high horse. I voted on a combination of overall impact and also the personal impact on me. Of course that means my list will be unfairly skewed in favour of modern players, so what. It's CW's Top 50, not Pratters.

Cricket is about more than stats and Freddie's influence is, IMO, massive. Not everyone agrees and that's fine.

AWTA.

My list is entirely skewed in favour of modern players, because while I appreciate the impact on the game and legacy of guys like Grace, Hobbs, Hammond, Bradman, Headley etc. they have had little to no personal impact on me.

 

[Furball]

At 5% Freddie probably got only two votes, but they were both Top 10ers.

8th in my list IIRC.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

None of those are in my choices, not really surprised TBH. Like I said in the other thread, I thought my 25 was fairly mainstream.

 

[The Sean]

Will you be doing the higer-ups one at a time Sean?

My plan is to do 40-31, 30-21 and 20-11 in blocks of ten like last night, then count down the top 10 individually. Happy to take suggestions though.

 

[GIMH]

Nah do it like that