Lack of Stars?

[stumpski]

Either way, I've always utterly hated the phrase "transitional"; "good" and "not so good" do fine.


Me too - every team is in transition, all the time. Retirements take their toll every year (Bang/Zim will be less affected in the near future, as most of their players are so young). Too often used as an excuse for poor performances.

 

[Engle]

I suppose it depends on what's your perception of a star. It has to be someone who performs well fairly consistently, excites the crowds and brings some 'star' or 'it' quality, from beyond the boundary.

Can any recent batsman match a Richards, an all-rounder a Botham, or a fastie a Lillee ? Not exactly, but we did see a Gilchrist and a Warne, so they do tend to come around, tho by def not in bunches.

 

[Agent TBY]

Shoaib and Flintoff are when they're fit. Ganguly has only become one again recently having not been for a fair while. Same true of Tendulkar. Dravid's currently somewhat on the wane. Dhoni is very far from a star in the Test-match game. Asif is still relatively at the start of his career, brilliant though that start has been. Lee has only this season suggested he has it in him to be a star, and likewise Dale Steyn.

Kallis, Sangakkara, Ponting, Muralitharan and, sadly, Hayden are the only ones I'd say you've a point on TBH. 4 batsmen and 1 bowler. Not exactly fantastic, but as I say - things have been better the last 2 seasons than for a while before then.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

A star's a star.

 

[Richard]

A star at cricket is someone good at cricket.

To be a star at Tests, you have to be very good at them. Dhoni isn't.

Personally, he may be a star, a massive one indeed, but UIMM that's not solely what Manraj is on about.

 

[Flem274*]

Jesse Ryder has achieved cult status over here. Proof to the public that fat people that don't turn up to practice can succeed in life.

Its also a big risk to degrade McCullum and Oram in public.

 

[Jamee999]

A star at cricket is someone good at cricket.

To be a star at Tests, you have to be very good at them. Dhoni isn't.

Personally, he may be a star, a massive one indeed, but UIMM that's not solely what Manraj is on about.

Not really, I'd say that Tufnell was a star more than (say) Thorpe, despite the fact that the latter was the better player.

 

[Manee]

I think Manee was referring to genuine popular culture and media "stars" in the classic sense of the term. Not necessarily just the best cricketer, but rather the blokes who are famous with the average man or woman in the street even if they don't follow cricket.

Yes. That is what I mean.

 

[Richard]

Not really, I'd say that Tufnell was a star more than (say) Thorpe, despite the fact that the latter was the better player.

Tufnell was never a star personality-wise anyway, really, until the infamous IACGMOOH escapade.

Thorpe wasn't a personality star either, of course he wasn't, he hates that sort of thing.

Thorpe was a star player and Tufnell wasn't, however.

 

[howardj]

It's not just cricket, it's the same in practically every sport. Modern sport lacks stars or any real characters. It's a result of professionalism I guess.

Yeah, I agree. Players are less accessible nowadays, and they are generally more pre-packaged. Mens tennis is another example in that regard. There are plenty of good players, but very few stars.

 

[Jono]

A star at cricket is someone good at cricket.

To be a star at Tests, you have to be very good at them. Dhoni isn't.

Personally, he may be a star, a massive one indeed, but UIMM that's not solely what Manraj is on about.

No you don't.

A star is an individual of recognisable character to the public. The term 'star' may also be used as someone good at what they do, but in general, it refers to their popularity and marketability.

Love it or hate it, Dhoni is a star.

Its just like how Brett Lee was a star throughout 2004 and 2005 when he wasn't even able to get into the test team, but was constantly shown in TV ads with the whites on. I do not recall Kaspa being in any ads at that time, yet he was playing test cricket and Lee wasn't.

 

[masterblaster]

No you don't.

A star is an individual of recognisable character to the public. The term 'star' may also be used as someone good at what they do, but in general, it refers to their popularity and marketability.

Love it or hate it, Dhoni is a star.

Its just like how Brett Lee was a star throughout 2004 and 2005 when he wasn't even able to get into the test team, but was constantly shown in TV ads with the whites on. I do not recall Kaspa being in any ads at that time, yet he was playing test cricket and Lee wasn't.

Yeah I agree with that statement. Dhoni's a star either way and soon enough we'll see him have an increasing impact on test cricket with regards to his batting.

 

[haroon510]

for me a superstar is a player that puts people on the seat in studium and entertain them while watching at home.. certain player has that ability and those players are shahid afridi, adam GilChrist, Keven Pieterson, Andrew Symonds, Sachin Tendulkar, Yuvraj singh, Sanath Jaysuraiya, bret Lee, Shoaib akhter, Murali, Vrindar Sehwag, Andrew Flintoff, Chris Gayle, and afew others..

i don't think i would consider Dravid or kallis stars no mater what states say..

 

[masterblaster]

for me a superstar is a player that puts people on the seat in studium and entertain them while watching at home.. certain player has that ability and those players are shahid afridi, adam GilChrist, Keven Pieterson, Andrew Symonds, Sachin Tendulkar, Yuvraj singh, Sanath Jaysuraiya, bret Lee, Shoaib akhter, Murali, Vrindar Sehwag, Andrew Flintoff, Chris Gayle, and afew others..

i don't think i would consider Dravid or kallis stars no mater what states say..

I'm sorry, Rahul Dravid is a star and so is Jacques Kallis. You clearly just seem to like explosive strokemakers and have no patience or appreciation for tenacious, disciplined and technical batting. Have you ever even seen a full test match from start to finish?

 

[haroon510]

I'm sorry, Rahul Dravid is a star and so is Jacques Kallis. You clearly just seem to like explosive strokemakers and have no patience or appreciation for tenacious, disciplined and technical batting. Have you ever even seen a full test match from start to finish?

so u r saying just because i don't consider Dravid and Kallis star i havent watched any test match fully.. for ur information i am a big fan of Kumara sangakara, younis khan, Mohmmad yousuf, Ricky Pointing,sachin Tendulkar and afew others who play solid and technical and disciplined Innings..and i rate these guys higher than Dravid and Kallis because they can play innings that is full of entertainment and have the ability to keep people interested in the game..That is what dravid and Kallis lack..they might be consider good cricketers but never star for me because their batting style is totaly the opposit of my describtion of what a super star means..

 

[Richard]

No you don't.

A star is an individual of recognisable character to the public. The term 'star' may also be used as someone good at what they do, but in general, it refers to their popularity and marketability.

Love it or hate it, Dhoni is a star.

Its just like how Brett Lee was a star throughout 2004 and 2005 when he wasn't even able to get into the test team, but was constantly shown in TV ads with the whites on. I do not recall Kaspa being in any ads at that time, yet he was playing test cricket and Lee wasn't.

As I say - that, to me, is about being a star as a person (though not neccessarily because of personality at all).

You can be a star of the game (as opposed to a star because of the game) and not be a star in any other way. Someone like Graham Thorpe is the perfect example of that. And Brett Lee circa 2004 an example of the opposite (being a star despite eminently not being a star of the game).

Anyway - Manraj has now mentioned that he was on about being a star as a person - ie, recognisability. So it's not terribly important.

 

[Richard]

I'm sorry, Rahul Dravid is a star and so is Jacques Kallis.

Dravid certainly always has been with the girls UIMM. And Kallis enough so to date a Miss South Africa.

 

[river end]

As I say - that, to me, is about being a star as a person (though not neccessarily because of personality at all).

You can be a star of the game (as opposed to a star because of the game) and not be a star in any other way. Someone like Graham Thorpe is the perfect example of that. And Brett Lee circa 2004 an example of the opposite (being a star despite eminently not being a star of the game).

Maybe it's best if the term "cricket celebrity" is used for a cricketer who is a star OFF the field and "cricket star" for one who is a star ON the field.

 

[Richard]

Indeed, a nice summation.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Maybe it's best if the term "cricket celebrity" is used for a cricketer who is a star OFF the field and "cricket star" for one who is a star ON the field.

Broad and Anderson were the most popular among the ladies on the recent nude cricketers calendar.

 

[slugger]

I am not too sure if it is a valid point but I have noticed that since the 1980s, there has been a decrease in world wide recognised cricketing stars. Back in the 1980s, there were people such as Michael 'Whispering Death' Holding who had the reputation of a film star as superb in their field of play even to those who don't watch the sport. More recently, there was Waqar and Wasim, the two W's of reverse swing. They had an enigma of controversy and of swing like no other before them. Others include:
- Dennis Lillee
- Shane Warne
- Richard Hadlee
- Imran Khan
- Kapil Dev
- Sachin Tendulkar
- Ian Botham

However, these days there are few players of such calliber and reputation. What do you CW members believe is the cause for a lack of cricketing superstars. Or do you think that my judgement of the reputation of past cricketers may be overstated from never actually being alive whilst they played.

simple they play far more cricket than they did before, every decade more and more games are added to the calendar... players rise and fall .. often they just burn out quicker.. they could be great players for a limited time... but cant keep it up on a constant..