5 greatest cricketers since Don’s retirement.

[DrWolverine]

Like, Sachin really averaged 44.47 even in his slump.

First 50 Tests : 49.82
Second 50 Tests: 57.60
Third 50 Tests : 52.73
Fourth 50 Tests : 53.86
Overall : 53.79
24 years
200 Tests
Unreal consistency

 

[subshakerz]

Nah, Warne is seen close to Murali. Tendulkar is seen as a god, don't think the "experts" are much different.

He isn't. Remember the ATG XI breakdown we did and how voted for Warne, he was the highest ranked bowler. Tendulkar is also highly rated but Lara is much closer.

 

[sayon basak]

He isn't. Remember the ATG XI breakdown we did and how voted for Warne, he was the highest ranked bowler. Tendulkar is also highly rated but Lara is much closer.

ATG XI breakdown is absolutely useless here. Warne is the most preferred bowler because he has only Murali as competition (sometimes not even that, pretty sure there were people who picked both spinners)

 

[Johan]

Tendulkar isn't really a god to people outside India tbf

 

[DrWolverine]

Most people have Sachin ahead of Lara.

Murali and Warne are equals. Some have Murali ahead of Warne. Some have Warne ahead of Murali.

 

[DrWolverine]

Tendulkar isn't really a god to people outside India tbf

I do not think anyone with brains see him as “God”. It is just that he is hugely popular and also respected for being mostly non-controversial.

 

[subshakerz]

kind of a double edged thing, like had Sachin's prime taken place in 2002-2009 he would properly average 80+ and have a much higher overall average, but had Sachin's slump taken place in a bowling era it would've been a lot worse than what it was, overall just about everything balances out and his final averages and general averages throughout career are good at reflecting his skill level, not too high, not too low

I am fine with that.

I think we should give credit to late career peaks even if the era was batting friendly.

Tendulkar first became ICC number 1 in 1994 at 21 years old, he keeps it for most of his late 20s and then gets it again at 38 years old. That's quite something.

 

[sayon basak]

I do not think anyone with brains see him as “God”.

Genius. Obviously people do not think he is the tri-omni supreme creator God.

It is just that he is hugely popular and also respected for being mostly non-controversial.

That is what god means in this regard.

 

[subshakerz]

ATG XI breakdown is absolutely useless here. Warne is the most preferred bowler because he has only Murali as competition (sometimes not even that, pretty sure there were people who picked both spinners)

If you think Murali is close as far as wider peer pundit public opinion to Warne you are wrong. He is in terms of our ratings. Those ATG XI reflects that, you would expect Murali to replace Warne more if close.

 

[sayon basak]

If you think Murali is close as far as wider peer pundit public opinion to Warne you are wrong. He is in terms of our ratings. Those ATG XI reflects that, you would expect Murali to replace Warne more if close.

Umm, any evidence? Don't get why modern pundits would rate Warne way higher than Murali.

 

[subshakerz]

Umm, any evidence? Don't get why modern pundits would rate Warne way higher than Murali.

I didnt say way higher but notably higher. And the ATG XI is one indication along with the general descriptions of Warne in the wider cricket punditry.

 

[sayon basak]

I didnt say way higher but notably higher. And the ATG XI is one indication along with the general descriptions of Warne in the wider cricket punditry.

Ok.

 

[honestbharani]

Most people have Sachin ahead of Lara.

Most people dont understand cricket.

 

[kyear2]

A few places. But the point is you don't bring that point up.

There's a couple reasons, but yeah both of these guys are rated because of what the did in the 90's.

 

[kyear2]

Nah, Warne is seen close to Murali. Tendulkar is seen as a god, don't think the "experts" are much different.

You're going on fans I assume. None of the pundits see Sachin anywhere close to "a god"

Sorry, even for the Cricinfo exercise, Warne was an unanimous selection, joining Sobers and Bradman. He makes practically every AT XI, while we argue ad nauseum, it's not seen to be especially close.

 

[sayon basak]

You're going on fans I assume. None of the pundits see Sachin anywhere close to "a god"

Sorry, even for the Cricinfo exercise, Warne was an unanimous selection, joining Sobers and Bradman. He makes practically every AT XI, while we argue ad nauseum, it's not seen to be especially close.

When was that done?

 

[subshakerz]

There's a couple reasons, but yeah both of these guys are rated because of what the did in the 90's.

Don't think Lara is.

 

[kyear2]

Umm, any evidence? Don't get why modern pundits would rate Warne way higher than Murali.

There are still commentators who refer to Warne as the greatest cricketer ever.

There are still articles that extoll him in that light.

I guess it's basically like politics and what ecosystem or echo chamber on positions themselves in.

 

[sayon basak]

There are still commentators who refer to Warne as the greatest cricketer ever.

I'm out.

 

[honestbharani]

Lol @ anyone thinking anyone who rates Warne the greatest cricketer is a "commentator" of any sort.

Lets face it. The ones who rate Warne into the top 5 cricketers are usually the same ones who think Tendulkar is a God. And anyone who knows a bit about cricket will see there is not much between either Lara-Sachin or Murali-Warne. If some sort of box office appeal is what such things are decided by, then again, Sachin and heck, even Virat, will end up being ahead of Warne, even if Warne does get one of those 5 spots.