CricketWeb decides the Greatest Players Post World War I

[jaideep]

Bradman
Lara
Sobers
Viv
Imran
Lillee
Warne
Hobbs
Hutton
Mcgrath
Headley
Muralitharan
G Chappell
Steyn
Kohli
de Villiers
Miller
O'Reilly
Kallis
S Smith
Wasim
G Pollock
Gilchrist
Marshall
Garner

 

[weldone]

But the number of people , who thinks Kallis is Flower to Sobers the Tendulkar are 260 times more than the number of people who thinks opposite.

My list was not made by them.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

My list was not made by them.

Then you should not question others list as well.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I assume this is ranked on ability somehow? Purely for test? How are you deciding how good these guys are?

Tests only
Ability , achievements, stats ( except for Procter and Rice)

I think Clive Rice would have been a greater Cricketer than Kallis if played in international level.

Anyway , I will have Rice in my 2nd AT 11 above miller (just )
Kallis may be in 4th AT 11

1st 11
Gavaskar, Hutton, Bradman, Sachin, Lara , Sobers , Gilly, Procter, Hadlee, Akram , Murali

2nd 11
Hobbs, Barry, Viv, Hammond (or Pollock) Headley , Rice, Knott , Imran , Marshall, Warne , Lillee

Also , imagine any of other Great ARs ( Sobers , Procter, Hadlee, Imran , Kapil , Botham, Miller and Rice ) playing in the same team of Kallis or Pollock. They can easily overshadow Kallis and Pollock and become far bigger superstar. ( I know it's not a definitive measure of being greater Cricketer)

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

What is cons. final btw?

Lara just didn't maintain his excellence long enough. From start of 1998 to end of his career in 2007 he just averaged 36. Before that he was averaging 46-47 which in those days was very rare. At that stage, only Bevan had a higher average among his contemporaries I will guess.

Another way of expressing this ,

Top order Lara averaged 46-47
Lower order Lara averaged 36

 

[MrPrez]

Tests only
Ability , achievements, stats ( except for Procter and Rice)

I think Clive Rice would have been a greater Cricketer than Kallis if played in international level.

Anyway , I will have Rice in my 2nd AT 11 above miller (just )
Kallis may be in 4th AT 11

1st 11
Gavaskar, Hutton, Bradman, Sachin, Lara , Sobers , Gilly, Procter, Hadlee, Akram , Murali

2nd 11
Hobbs, Barry, Viv, Hammond (or Pollock) Headley , Rice, Knott , Imran , Marshall, Warne , Lillee

Also , imagine any of other Great ARs ( Sobers , Procter, Hadlee, Imran , Kapil , Botham, Miller and Rice ) playing in the same team of Kallis or Pollock. They can easily overshadow Kallis and Pollock and become far bigger superstar. ( I know it's not a definitive measure of being greater Cricketer)

Hyperbole but somewhat true regarding Pollock; not true regarding Kallis. He could easily hold his own or beat some of those guys.

 

[Bolo]

Ability is a bit subjective. I'm not sure what the difference between stats and achievements is. Pollock and kallis are stats beasts, kallis in particular.

I don't think rice would be so good. Its a big step up for his type of bowler to test level usually. Would be lcky to compete with the worst here.

I dont think you can compare botham to kallis or pollock unless looking at peak. If so, they pull even further ahead of dev. I cant see how you would rate him ahead of them. It's a tenuous enough argument in odis, but ok. In tests, how?

 

[weldone]

Then you should not question others list as well.

I was asked the question first lol.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I was asked the question first lol.

No , he just wanted to know the reason.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ability is a bit subjective. I'm not sure what the difference between stats and achievements is. Pollock and kallis are stats beasts, kallis in particular.

I don't think rice would be so good. Its a big step up for his type of bowler to test level usually. Would be lcky to compete with the worst here.

I dont think you can compare botham to kallis or pollock unless looking at peak. If so, they pull even further ahead of dev. I cant see how you would rate him ahead of them. It's a tenuous enough argument in odis, but ok. In tests, how?

Kapil , Botham type of players can not be fully understood by stats. Chris Cairns stats looks better than Kapil's both in Batting and bowling , yet no one rates him close to Kapil.
Kapil's bowling just below ATG level. His batting can threaten greatest of bowling line ups . Also he performed well against best opponents.
I rate Kallis and Pollock about the same. Entry level ATGs in primary skill. Useful in secondary skill. Botham and Kapil were slightly inferior in primary skill , but better in secondary skill.. and they were capable of destroying the opposition either by bat or by ball.
Talking about peaks ,
Botham as everyone know , was Bradman/ Sobers league in first half of his career.

Kapil , suffered by flat tracks and mediocre support , took 250 wickets in first 60 tests while being capable of hitting 100 plus Strike rate century against a bowling attack of Marshall , Holding , Garner and Roberts.

 

[trundler]

Kapil's bowling just below ATG level.

Nah

 

[weldone]

No , he just wanted to know the reason.

I told the reason

 

[Bolo]

Kapil , Botham type of players can not be fully understood by stats. Chris Cairns stats looks better than Kapil's both in Batting and bowling , yet no one rates him close to Kapil.
Kapil's bowling just below ATG level. His batting can threaten greatest of bowling line ups . Also he performed well against best opponents.
I rate Kallis and Pollock about the same. Entry level ATGs in primary skill. Useful in secondary skill. Botham and Kapil were slightly inferior in primary skill , but better in secondary skill.. and they were capable of destroying the opposition either by bat or by ball.
Talking about peaks ,
Botham as everyone know , was Bradman/ Sobers league in first half of his career.

Kapil , suffered by flat tracks and mediocre support , took 250 wickets in first 60 tests while being capable of hitting 100 plus Strike rate century against a bowling attack of Marshall , Holding , Garner and Roberts.

Ya, this is not remotely convincing compared to say pollock. If you wanted to compare peak 60 kapil would average a similar anount with bat and ball. Pollock would average nearly twice as much with the bat as the ball. If you want to remove the flat home wickets question and just look at away records, kapil averages mid 20s with the bat and mid 30s with the ball.. Bot good enough to make even the typical tesm. Pollock is an atg level bowler and a specialist quality bat. No comparison.

And kallis is a better test player thsn pollock

 

[YCCCfan]

The player I would have loved to have seen was Hedley Verity. He played for Yorkshire & England between 1930-1939. A slow left arm orthodox bowler he took 1956 wickets in first class cricket at 14:90 & 144 wickets for England at an average of 24:37. In 1931, his first full season he achieved the rare feat of taking all 10 wickets in an innings against Warwickshire : the following year he again took all 10 wickets against Notts while conceding just 10 runs. Hedley joined the Green Howard's in 1939 & after training was posted overseas to India, Persia & Egypt achieving the rank of captain. During the allied invasion of Sicily in 1943 Verity was severely injured & captured by the Germans. Taken to the Itlalian mainland, he died in Caserta from his injuries & was buried there.

 

[stephen]

Strike Rates are very interesting. Old times!

Strike rates consistently above 80 for batsmen is a thing that's only rally happened this century. In the 70s, 80s and 90s the pitches were far more bowling friendly. They weren't minefields but 220 was often a defensible total and chasing anything over 260 was difficult and 300 impossible.

And honestly the game was more interesting to watch. A single player could turn the course of a match with either bowling or batting. These days it's common for four batsmen to hit half centuries and one of them go on to the hundred.

I think modern captaincy is too conservative. Pack the cordon and force the batters to take risks by bowling wide outside off early in the innings and force them to drive. Snag early wickets and you'll chase a lot less runs.

It did help that there were half a dozen ATG bowlers running around in the 80s and 90s.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I told the reason

And questioned his ranking difference between Kallis and Sobers.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ya, this is not remotely convincing compared to say pollock. If you wanted to compare peak 60 kapil would average a similar anount with bat and ball. Pollock would average nearly twice as much with the bat as the ball. If you want to remove the flat home wickets question and just look at away records, kapil averages mid 20s with the bat and mid 30s with the ball.. Bot good enough to make even the typical tesm. Pollock is an atg level bowler and a specialist quality bat. No comparison.

And kallis is a better test player thsn pollock

Yet Kapil remains a bigger great in cricket history than Pollock. Reasons ?

Its not "India's only great pacer " thing , in that case Andy Flower must be rated just below Sachin and Lara among previous generation batsmen.

 

[CricAddict]

In my childhood, I remember watching and admiring Donald, Klusenar, Kallis, even Cullinan, Fanie De villiers and Kirsten when India played SA. But don't remember admiring Pollock at all. Not sure why.

 

[ankitj]

Strike rates consistently above 80 for batsmen is a thing that's only rally happened this century. In the 70s, 80s and 90s the pitches were far more bowling friendly. They weren't minefields but 220 was often a defensible total and chasing anything over 260 was difficult and 300 impossible.

And honestly the game was more interesting to watch. A single player could turn the course of a match with either bowling or batting. These days it's common for four batsmen to hit half centuries and one of them go on to the hundred.

I think modern captaincy is too conservative. Pack the cordon and force the batters to take risks by bowling wide outside off early in the innings and force them to drive. Snag early wickets and you'll chase a lot less runs.

It did help that there were half a dozen ATG bowlers running around in the 80s and 90s.

Agree except probably the bolded part. It was more interesting in many ways, but one thing that has changed for the better IMO is how batsmen approach chasing big totals. In old days the nerves and tension were palpable. Batsmen didn't have a clue what to do. They often messed things up after a strong start too. This is one aspect where modern day batsmen are better than old timers and this has nothing to do with better bats, shorter boundaries, 2 new balls, more field restrictions etc.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

In old days the nerves and tension were palpable. Batsmen didn't have a clue what to do. They often messed things up after a strong start too.

Thereby making it more interesting to watch