ESPNcricinfo World XI

[Matt79]

Hammond, Pollock or Headley may well beat out the more modern great contenders...

 

[GotSpin]

Agreed. My Border > Ponting thread ended poorly.

He seems to be conveniently forgotten in an era when Australian cricket wasn't exactly top notch.

 

[Jono]

Go run home to your dolly then. I think it's a stupid idea. So what

Obviously in the lead up to the World XI they have got people doing different types of XIs. Someone did a "didnt make the cut XI" (Haigh I think). There has also been a thrill a minute and elegant XI.

Its just for cricket fans to have fun, learn about different players etc.

Complaining about it is just dumb. Sure, you have the right to, but it's stupid.

How dumb would it have been for Chappell and Haigh to make their own World XIs, when there was a whole panel doing it. It'd have made for repetitive reading. There's a reason why Harsha Bhogle didn't get to do an article on his XI, and only got to post it on his twitter.

 

[Jono]

He seems to be conveniently forgotten in an era when Australian cricket wasn't exactly top notch.

So forgotten that they named a medal after him, which has a ceremony shown live on Australian TV every year.

 

[GotSpin]

So forgotten that they named a medal after him, which has a ceremony shown live on Australian TV every year.

I mean by the wider cricket community. When you talk about great batsmen how often is Border brought up. I have no doubt the Australian cricketers in the know recognise his achievements

 

[Matt79]

He seems to be conveniently forgotten in an era when Australian cricket wasn't exactly top notch.

Think its partially because while everyone can agree he was immensely admirable, unless you were a fan at the time living the emotion of his staunch resistance, you probably can't quite appreciate the reverence those who did hold for him, as he doesn't inspire the same excitement or glamour (not quite the words I'm looking for, but in the ballpark) that someone like a Richards, Lara or Chappell did. Plus the poor bugger often didn't get the win despite his efforts, unlike a Steve Waugh or Ponting, and hence probably can be a bit more easily forgotten. That, combined with the average age here probably just missing those who saw him firsthand, probably the issue here.

 

[Jono]

I mean by the wider cricket community. When you talk about great batsmen how often is Border brought up. I have no doubt the Australian cricketers in the know recognise his achievements

Hmm, see I don't reckon that's the case. But maybe you're right.

Out of curiosity, who do you think is mentioned as a great batsman in the cricket community that is actually inferior to Border?

 

[GotSpin]

Hmm, see I don't reckon that's the case. But maybe you're right.

Out of curiosity, who do you think is mentioned as a great batsman in the cricket community that is actually inferior to Border?

I believe that when you talk of the greatest batsmen in recent times - Your Richards, Tendulkars, Chappells etc Border should be a part of this group, and often he is left out.

Depending on how Pontings career pans out I might have Border above him, perhaps even Lara. It could go either way, but my point is that Border is not nearly enough associated with these players.

 

[Jono]

Border was my first cricketing hero, big fan. Still have his bat. Love his commentary and analysis.

But IMO, and Burgey will possibly rip my balls out for saying it, I just don't see any argument where he can actually be said to be as good as Tendulkar, Chappell or Viv Richards.

Doesn't mean I don't think he's not an all time great. But would still have him below those three.

 

[GotSpin]

Border was my first cricketing hero, big fan. Still have his bat. Love his commentary and analysis.

But IMO, and Burgey will possibly rip my balls out for saying it, I just don't see any argument where he can actually be said to be as good as Tendulkar, Chappell or Viv Richards.

Just me though. Doesn't mean he's not an all time great.

I'm willing to accept that, I just think he should be involved in circles of discussion amongst these greats - Rather than forgotten and thought about as a tier below.

 

[Jono]

Do you think the same is happening for Steve Waugh?

 

[GotSpin]

To some extent. I don't know for sure. Perhaps on CW? But I think he's fairly well remembered by the Australian cricketing public. Whenever I'm at the pub watching the cricket and an Australian collapse is underway, his name often gets brought up.

 

[smash84]

Think its partially because while everyone can agree he was immensely admirable, unless you were a fan at the time living the emotion of his staunch resistance, you probably can't quite appreciate the reverence those who did hold for him, as he doesn't inspire the same excitement or glamour (not quite the words I'm looking for, but in the ballpark) that someone like a Richards, Lara or Chappell did. Plus the poor bugger often didn't get the win despite his efforts, unlike a Steve Waugh or Ponting, and hence probably can be a bit more easily forgotten. That, combined with the average age here probably just missing those who saw him firsthand, probably the issue here.

I do quite agree. Glamor and excitement do play a huge part in making a good player stick in the minds of the public.

I feel Miandad too is somewhat similar to Border in this way. Quite under rated too. And he was a decent match winner too. If I remember correctly he is one of a handful of players whose test match average never fell below 50. His name too never comes up in the company of such greats. Although I am not sure that he was in the same class as Lara, Tendulkar, Richards, and Chappell (something I feel about Border too). But I will not rate these guys too far below the top notch.

 

[Teja.]

Border>everyone bar Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Headley and Hobbs, IMO, and I would be semi-delighted if Border got picked over Tendulkar just because he is so criminally underrated. Has a fair shout to be the 2nd best batsman ever.

 

[Jono]

Don't want to make this a vs. thread, and again, I love Border, but why do you think he is better than Viv?

They played in the same era, so I reckon it's a good comparison. Obviously their styles were different, but why do you think he was the better/more effective batsman?

 

[Jono]

I do quite agree. Glamor and excitement do play a huge part in making a good player stick in the minds of the public.

I feel Miandad too is somewhat similar to Border in this way. Quite under rated too. And he was a decent match winner too. If I remember correctly he is one of a handful of players whose test match average never fell below 50. His name too never comes up in the company of such greats. Although I am not sure that he was in the same class as Lara, Tendulkar, Richards, and Chappell (something I feel about Border too). But I will not rate these guys too far below the top notch.

Gavaskar is rated VERY highly though, so the style aspect doesn't explain why Miandad is underrated.

He just is for some reason.

 

[Teja.]

Don't want to make this a vs. thread, and again, I love Border, but why do you think he is better than Viv?

They played in the same era, so I reckon it's a good comparison. Obviously their styles were different, but why do you think he was the better/more effective batsman?

Haha, To answer that I have to go through why I don't rate Viv as highly as most on CW do,(And No, Not because he averaged 'only' 50) and reckon he's a little overrated(Still an ATG) which might appear to be ignorant and typical behaviour of a stat-fixated modern generation fanboy like me.

Nah, Will tell when I can get on a proper computer.

 

[Jono]

I'm a believer that even if you never saw Viv hit a ball at all, properly analysing his stats will back up why he is one of the best ever, and better than Border.

The opinions of his colleagues and journalists and opponents etc. only back it up.

Anyway look forward to your post

 

[weldone]

Gavaskar is rated VERY highly though, so the style aspect doesn't explain why Miandad is underrated.

He just is for some reason.

I think Miandad's stats against (and specially in) West Indies might have something to do with how he's rated compared to Gavaskar and Chappell. Though I personally rate Miandad highly (and for other reasons).

 

[Teja.]

Gavaskar is rated VERY highly though, so the style aspect doesn't explain why Miandad is underrated.

He just is for some reason.

From an technical POV, Gavaskar was extremely stylish-in the same way as Dravid is- though. Also, Reckon' the slow-batting thing is a little exaggerated, he initially batted watchfully as he simply had to keep his wicket. A 108 in 284 balls from Clive Lloyd might have meant frustration for WI supporters but for the Indian supporters it meant we were living to fight another day. In the mid-eighties as India's batting line-up became stronger, His strokeplay became more aggressive, he never became Viv Richards as far as attacking is concerned but his knocks against the WI in the 1984 test series in India show how attacking he could be.