3rd best cricketer ever?

[Ikki]

Ikki, those exact same arguments you are making for Warne, many people have repeatedly made for Tendulkar (carrying a weaker team, beating stronger opposition single-handedly, opinions of peers/experts) and I haven't seen you giving them any credence.

Who said I don't regard them? I just don't think he is the clear best batsman of his era. Imagine I had said that Ponting and Lara are comfortably better cricketers than Tendulkar. You'd make the same argument: their records are similar and Tendulkar was highly lauded. TBF, even though I disagree, you can't doubt that Tendulkar will finish above those guys in the general consensus of "great" cricketers - not unless Ponting goes skitzo and starts belting everyone again.

Do I think it's wrong to consider Murali or McGrath better than Warne? No. Do I think they were comfortably better? Not a chance.

----

For clarification's sake, I'm not really referring to beating stronger opponents or playing in a weaker team. I am talking about important moments in matches that change them. The way I see cricket, and this may give you a view into how I argue in other threads, is that although cricket is a team sport...it's very individualistic. It's a duel of 1 bowler vs 1 batsman. It doesn't hinder Tendulkar performing as well as he can if his partner is not as good as him. It means Tendulkar has a small chance to win the game if his teammates are weak. Neither does it really hinder someone like Hadlee to be alone in that respect. For every down, there is an up. If you are in a weak bowling attack, for example, you may go for a few more runs but you can bowl more and take more wickets due to less competition. It's really in the team results that you can differentiate. On the other hand, just because Warne is in a strong side, doesn't mean there weren't many games where his teammates weren't performing or were being out-performed - that semi against S.Africa in 99 or Ashes 05, as clear examples.

For me, that's what stands out with Warne...he delivered uncannily in the most important periods of matches for us. It'd be very easy to point to McGrath and say he was the greatest...just look at his record. But viewing them both over these years I can't say he was better than Warne. Murali I watched less so I can't comment with the same accuracy.

 

[vcs]

OK, that's all fair enough then.

However, I still think, taking Tests + ODIs into consideration, one has to put McGrath and Murali clearly ahead of Warne. Agree to disagree, I guess.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Not a doubt in my mind Warne was a better cricketer than Murali or McGrath, tbh. His bowling certainly isn't embarrassed by the comparison and his batting and fielding far outstrips either.

Wouldn't have any of them near the top three, however. Bradman, Grace & Sobers with Imran, Paddles and maybe Marshall rounding out my top six.

 

[weldone]

I think most cricket fans, and all probably should, rate Don Bradman as the best and Garfield Sobers the second best respectively.

Except one man who rated Sobers as the best cricketer of all-time, Donald Bradman himself. And I don't think that was humility, as Bradman rated himself as no. 2.

Back to the thread question, I shall go for Jack Hobbs.

 

[akilana]

I was kidding with Athlai...but nah, neither McGrath nor Murali outstrip him comfortably. I think the only cricketer that outstrips him comfortably is Bradman - but then again, that goes for every cricketer.

By 2000 Warne was already high on the pantheon of 'great' cricketers list, and built upon that towards the latter half his career with series like the one in Sri Lanka and the infamous Ashes 05. You just have to listen to some of his peers to fathom how special he was. McGrath may have been cheaper, Murali have taken more...but no one in my viewing made game-changing spells as often as Warne.

I think there are all-time greats and then there is a level of all-time greats that transcend further. Guys like Warne or Viv epitomise that. McGrath and Murali themselves think of Warne as the greatest bowler of all-time.

any source for that?

 

[Spudsy2061]

Can someone tell me why W.G. Grace has not been mentioned early and often in this thread?

 

[Ikki]

any source for that?

Warne's spin has Murali turning every which way - Cricket - Sport

Around this point, Warne wishes Murali all the best in his pursuit of the world Test record. Then Murali describes Warne as "the greatest bowler ever produced in this entire world". What was to be a cold war between the world's two most prolific spinners, in fact, has become a love-in.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Can someone tell me why W.G. Grace has not been mentioned early and often in this thread?

He was mentioned in the first reply, which seems fairly early to me.

 

[Anil]

probably viv richards - imran khan, malcolm marshall, jack hobbs, muthiah muralitharan, glenn mcgrath, richard hadlee, sachin tendulkar, brian lara, greg chappell all have a case...

 

[zaremba]

Sobers has a pretty good case for being the 3rd best of all time. Not in the Bradman/Grace league, but possibly the best of the rest.

 

[Spudsy2061]

He was mentioned in the first reply, which seems fairly early to me.

I don't know how I missed that.

 

[Slifer]

Sobers has a pretty good case for being the 3rd best of all time. Not in the Bradman/Grace league, but possibly the best of the rest.

no offense but u dont know what ur talking about.

 

[GotSpin]

no offense but u dont know what ur talking about.

Sobers doesn't have a clear cut case for best all rounder

 

[Spudsy2061]

Sobers doesn't have a clear cut case for best all rounder

What? Am I reading this correctly or are you just not that in-tune with cricket?

 

[GotSpin]

What? Am I reading this correctly or are you just not that in-tune with cricket?

There are a number of contenders for best all rounder.

 

[Spudsy2061]

There are a number of contenders for best all rounder.

Uhhhhhhhhh, yeah, but Sobers is like... he's Gary Sobers! Viv Richards is a good case too of course but still, saying Sobers shouldn't be considered is flat-out poppycock!

 

[GotSpin]

Uhhhhhhhhh, yeah, but Sobers is like... he's Gary Sobers! Viv Richards is a good case too of course but still, saying Sobers shouldn't be considered is flat-out poppycock!

I never said he shouldn't be considered for either top three or top all rounder. I just said he's not a clear cut shoe in for either role.

 

[Athlai]

Sobers is the best all-rounder ever because he is the 2nd best batsman ever and could bowl a bit.

Bowling all-rounders count for less since all bowlers have to bat but all batsman don't need to bowl. Otherwise Hadlee could probably get up there 2ndish best bowler ever and could bat a bit. (Though Imran is also a fair bet here but I usually have him around the 5th-10th mark in greatest ever bowlers)

Sobers is not a 'rounded' all-rounder but I have no problem calling him the best.

 

[andyc]

Sobers is the best all-rounder ever because he is the 2nd best batsman ever and could bowl a bit.

Bowling all-rounders count for less since all bowlers have to bat but all batsman don't need to bowl. Otherwise Hadlee could probably get up there 2ndish best bowler ever and could bat a bit. (Though Imran is also a fair bet here but I usually have him around the 5th-10th mark in greatest ever bowlers)

Sobers is not a 'rounded' all-rounder but I have no problem calling him the best.

Surely that means it's better to have a bowling all-rounder, though?

 

[Athlai]

Surely that means it's better to have a bowling all-rounder, though?

Would say that they're more expected tbh.