5 greatest cricketers since Don’s retirement.

[kyear2]

If there was a poll today among the establishment / journalist / pundits / historians / former players for the greatest cricketer outside of the big two, I'm pretty confident that Warne wins it.

 

[Thala_0710]

If there was a poll today among the establishment / journalist / pundits / historians / former players for the greatest cricketer outside of the big two, I'm pretty confident that Warne wins it.

Kallis or Tendulkar might beat him to it

 

[kyear2]

As much as I give people grief, there is something to that longevity claim which is just about the only reason I rate him slightly above Viv. Sachin wasn't necessarily (imo) a batter batsman.

Viv was an ATG slip and a good leader though, I think Sachin is very marginally better at batting but that is about it imo, Viv for the tertiary skillset.

Yeah, don't think Sachin was a better nor more impactful batsman, nor was he better against the best of their respective eras, he was however a more consistent one, and that's why he's a hair above Viv.

As a package Viv was better though, he was brilliant in the cordon and in the infield.

The leader bit though? He was like a couple other notable captains from the era, a bit of a bully. Not sure that plays across eras.

 

[Johan]

Yeah, don't think Sachin was a better nor more impactful batsman, nor was he better against the best of their respective eras, he was however a more consistent one, and that's why he's a hair above Viv.

As a package Viv was better though, he was brilliant in the cordon and in the infield.

The leader bit though? He was like a couple other notable captains from the era, a bit of a bully. Not sure that plays across eras.

Sachin was a horrible leader, absolutely horrendous, even average or above average is much better than him in the lead man role imo

 

[kyear2]

Sachin was more adaptable than Viv which is why he had more longevity and more quality years. But Viv as Johan mentioned is a better overall package.

Viv's eyes went, not sure how that plays to adaptability.

Sachin also had the fortune to have his latter years coincide with one of the flattest eras of the game.

I do give him the edge, but let's not pretend that the 2000's were a monumental task. His legacy was built in the 90's.

 

[kyear2]

Kallis or Tendulkar might beat him to it

Tendulkar may be a close 2nd, but I think we underestimate how Warne was and is viewed.

 

[subshakerz]

Viv's eyes went, not sure how that plays to adaptability.

Sachin also had the fortune to have his latter years coincide with one of the flattest eras of the game.

I do give him the edge, but let's not pretend that the 2000's were a monumental task. His legacy was built in the 90's.

Dealing with age is one of the most difficult things for a cricketer. Tendulkar has one of the best records of those after 35 because of his technique.

Stop being so uncharitable and learn to give certain cricketers their due.

 

[kyear2]

Dealing with age is one of the most difficult things for a cricketer. Tendulkar has one of the best records of those after 35 because of his technique.

Stop being so uncharitable and learn to give certain cricketers their due.

I know that didn't come from you.

I do hive him his due, the only batsmen I rank above him are Bradman and Hobbs.

But his record after 35 is also due to some flat ass wickets where everyone was cashing in.

 

[subshakerz]

I know that didn't come from you.

I do hive him his due, the only batsmen I rank above him are Bradman and Hobbs.

But his record after 35 is also due to some flat ass wickets where everyone was cashing in.

Nobody is denying the 2000s were flat. But that same mid 2000s is when he had a dip due to injuries. If you think returning to the no.1 bat position in your late 30s after achieving it over a decade before is that easy, fine.

What's strange is I haven't seen you employ this logic to downplay Lara's return to form in the 2000s. How curious.

 

[kyear2]

Nobody is denying the 2000s were flat. But that same mid 2000s is when he had a dip due to injuries. If you think returning to the no.1 bat position in your late 30s after achieving it over a decade before is that easy, fine.

What's strange is I haven't seen you employ this logic to downplay Lara's return to form in the 2000s. How curious.

How far below Sachin do I rate Lara?

 

[subshakerz]

How far below Sachin do I rate Lara?

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

 

[sayon basak]

Tendulkar may be a close 2nd, but I think we underestimate how Warne was and is viewed.

You just don't realize how big Sachin is. Don't think Warne is seen higher than even Kallis.

 

[subshakerz]

You just don't realize how big Sachin is. Don't think Warne is seen higher than even Kallis.

He is. Warne and Tendulkar are near each other on rating scale.

 

[sayon basak]

He is. Warne and Tendulkar are near each other on rating scale.

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

 

[OverratedSanity]

Viv's eyes went, not sure how that plays to adaptability.

Sachin also had the fortune to have his latter years coincide with one of the flattest eras of the game.

I do give him the edge, but let's not pretend that the 2000's were a monumental task. His legacy was built in the 90's.

Sachin actually kinda missed out on pumping his stats more because his mid career slump in 2003-06 was right in the middle of a very flat era.

 

[DrWolverine]

Nah, Warne is seen close to Murali.

Shane Warne’s aura has somewhat faded with time. In an era increasingly driven by statistics, data and online debates, Muralitharan’s overwhelming statistical record dominates the conversation gradually reshaping perceptions of greatness. In the long run, it is numbers that will outlast memory and emotion in cricketing debates. Sutcliffe and Barrington have seen a revival thanks to the modern obsession with stats and context.

 

[DrWolverine]

Sachin actually kinda missed out on pumping his stats more because his mid career slump in 2003-06 was right in the middle of a very flat era.

2003-2006


Pretty much every decent batsman was averaging 50+ and piling on the runs. Unfortunately, Sachin had a slump and tennis elbow issues at that time.

 

[Johan]

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

Yuck

 

[capt_Luffy]

2003-2006
View attachment 48363

Pretty much every decent batsman was averaging 50+ and piling on the runs. Unfortunately, Sachin had a slump and tennis elbow issues at that time.

Like, Sachin really averaged 44.47 even in his slump.

 

[Johan]

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