• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Top 50 Greatest test batters

DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Captain
Len Hutton’s only flaw in my opinion was that he never faced ATG bowlers like others but that’s not his fault. That’s why he is my 5 among post-war batsmen.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
He did, Ashes 1946-1953, the attacks had

Ray Lindwall – 158 @ 20.12 as of 1953
Keith Miller – 123 @ 21.10 as of 1954
Bill Johnston – 132 @ 21.75 before Knee injury

1953, Johnston fell apart but Benaud and Davidson replaced him.

In the four Ashes renditions, he faced the second or third greatest attack ever assembled constantly, and made 1,735 runs @ 57.83, by all means, anyone here is welcome to show us Sobers (or Richards, for that matter) performing similarly against an attack comprising of nearly three sub 24 averaging bowlers.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
Graeme Pollock is a very weird case in test cricket

1. He played only 23 Tests.

2. 14 of those were at home.

3. 9 away matches - 5 in Aus, 3 in Eng & 1 in NZ.

4. Faced Aus 14 times, Eng 8 times and NZ once

5. Never faced any quality bowlers.

6. Never faced Trueman.

7. The best bowler he faced was Graham McKenzie

8. Retired at 26 years old

I honestly don’t know how to judge his test career.
Click to expand...
South Africa's George Headley.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johan said:
He can only face what is presented, he faced one of the greatest attacks ever made from 1946 Ashes to 1953 Ashes and averaged nearly 60, always coming up on tough wickets against them. put a bunch of ATG Batsmen in the same context and I don't think they break to 40.

also, him above the names below him isn't ridiculous at all.

He could flip the switch when he needed to, he wasn't a slogger.
Click to expand...
I can live with Hutton at 4th. Not Kallis in the top 10. I would defy anybody who watched him in his career to be thinking we are watching one of the ten greatest batters ever.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz said:
I can live with Hutton at 4th. Not Kallis in the top 10. I would defy anybody who watched him in his career to be thinking we are watching one of the ten greatest batters ever.
Click to expand...
Imo Kallis is like 14-18 but that's not that bad a take, the most outrageous thing is probably Cook and Chanderpaul over Waugh.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I love Sanga but at no.12 is also too high. As is Root at 14.

Dravid ahead of Ponting and Greg Chappell feels just so wrong.

And after 20 the list just gets borderline indefensible.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johan said:
Imo Kallis is like 14-18 but that's not that bad a take, the most outrageous thing is probably Cook and Sehwag over Waugh.
Click to expand...
Chanderpaul over Steve Waugh. Like they are literally the same batter except one did his work in a far tougher era against elite bowlers. No body in the real world would find them a remote comparison.

And Jaya at 39? Ahead of Amla, KP, Worrell? What was Kimber smoking?
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz said:
Chanderpaul over Steve Waugh. Like they are literally the same batter except one did his work in a far tougher era against elite bowlers. No body in the real world would find them a remote comparison.

And Jaya at 39? Ahead of Amla, KP, Worrell? What was Kimber smoking?
Click to expand...
That Jaya placement is actually insane, I just think he more or less neglected everyone from Hutton's era except Hutton of course, Weekes/Worrell/Walcott/Harvey came at the end of the list which is dumb, Harvey is no worse than names 20 spots above him. May and Compton didn't even get in, it would make sense if he was like post 1970 only but he went for Sutcliffe/Hobbs and even Ranji/Grace so clearly he was taking all of Cricket history into account.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Kimber said when he did his first statistical analysis, Viv was well outside the top 15. So he then tried to justify him getting in the top ten based on other metrics.

Which just shows he might have an arbitrary mishmash of an entire list.

My problem is when you have peer cricketers where one is considered unanimously better yet you rate the other ahead. It seems so off.

Gavaskar should not be ahead of Viv.
Dravid should not be ahead of Ponting.
Steve Waugh should not be behind Chanderpaul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top