Dravid
International Captain
Much better than AAAS, which almost sounds like ass(which stands for Agarkar sucks society), and GM-FBABaussie tragic said:And don't forget ZKBIPS
Much better than AAAS, which almost sounds like ass(which stands for Agarkar sucks society), and GM-FBABaussie tragic said:And don't forget ZKBIPS
Pacer*PhoenixFire said:Zaheer Khan, Best Indian Player S?
SocietyPhoenixFire said:Pacer, I see. Whats the S for?
Nah, they don't exist.PhoenixFire said:Zaheer Khan, Best Indian Player S?
Yea, Thommo would have been picked instead for his ability to launch balls directly into the stands.Lillian Thomson said:When Lillee was in his prime Glenn MacGrath wouldn't even have made the team at all.
Maybe that's why you rate McGrath so high, you haven't grown up seeing real pace bowlers like Lillee, Marshall, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Thomson, Willis, etc. etc.silentstriker said:Nah, they don't exist.
silentstriker said:Yea, Thommo would have been picked instead for his ability to launch balls directly into the stands.
PhoenixFire said:Spot on. I knew sanity was coming your way.
I've seem most of them bowl, and they were all great. But none of them live, except the 90's bowlers such as Allan Donald, Waqar, Wasim, etc.aussie tragic said:Maybe that's why you rate McGrath so high, you haven't grown up seeing real pace bowlers like Lillee, Marshall, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Thomson, Willis, etc. etc.
#2 after McGrath. And its close, thats why I don't really get on adharcric. I can see why he would be rated higher, I just disagree.PhoenixFire said:Would I be right if I said that SS rates Marshall very highly?
Yeah but with respect, that's the flaw in your logic, you seem to just rate stats. I saw quite a few pace bowlers live in the 80's and 90's and Lillee was by far the best IMO. It's only since Marshall retired that I placed him ahead of Lillee and I still cringe that I have now placed Warne ahead of him on the bowlers list.silentstriker said:Lillee, I really can't. He beats Lillee in most statistical categories despite playing in an era with more aggressive batsman and roads for pitches (how many average 50+ now, compared with then, whats the average RR now, compared with then?).
I think thats a bit unfair to some bowlers because Dennis Lillee was a much more '***y' bowler. I think it would be fairer, instead of going by what is written, to compare him with his peers in terms of statistics. Only 60 points of stats and 40 points of potential hype is unfair.aussie tragic said:Yeah but with respect, that's the flaw in your logic, you seem to just rate stats. I saw quite a few pace bowlers live in the 80's and 90's and Lillee was by far the best IMO. It's only since Marshall retired that I placed him ahead of Lillee and I still cringe that I have now placed Warne ahead of him on the bowlers list.
I think a much fairer system would be as follows:
60 points for stats (i.e. 600/ave = 30 points; 750/SR = 15 points; 3* Wkts/match = 15 pts)
20 points from what is written (e.g. by Cricinfo/Wisden)
20 points from what peers thought of them (i.e. where they compared within their era, or how the pitches were).
I'm up for tweaking this system if you want to establish who is better once and for all, so that we at least give the perception we're mature
btw, I'll even up McGrath's Aussie rating if that what it shows
I realize that, and thats why despite his record I still put him in the top ten bowlers of all time.Lillian Thomson said:People from the sub-continent tend to be down on Lillee because he never achieved anything in that part of the world. But injury and other circumstances meant he only played one series there and that was on rolled mud where the much heralded Imran took only a handful of wickets in two matches. The spinners did the bulk of the bowling and the star man was the less than immortal Iqbal Quasim.