The 2nd greatest ever ??

[Magrat Garlick]

EDIT: D*mn. LE beat me to it.

 

[luckyeddie]

here is another question...maybe Eddie will be the most suitable person to answer this...In test cricket who is better, Sunny or Sachin?

And another one...why is Sachin unable to play long innings in test matches? I think its to do with fitness.

I feel that Sachin has much more pure talent - but his strength is also his weakness (apart from the obvious first 20 minutes, of course).

Sunny was sometimes described as 'dapper' when he was at his most fluent - more often than not he would be called dour, stubborn, obdurate even - epithets which don't sit well with a description of Sachin Tendulkar.

As an opener, he was 10 times the player that Sachin would ever want to be - and therein lies the rub. He played a game more akin to Boycott than Trescothick, more Lawry than Hayden.

As a test batsman, he possessed all the great attributes of an opener - he would sooner die than give his wicket away - but I would rather watch a minute of Sachin than a lifetime of Sunny.

I just think that Sachin could do with a few ounces of Sunny's concentration - and the longer innings would come. A little more 'selfishness', if you like

 

[Richard]

This reminds me of an old joke....

In the 70's after watching the Windies play at the Gabba, Bradman was asked how he would go against the current quicks.
He replied "I would average around 50"
Only 50 was the surprised reply.
Bradman then said '"Give me a break, I am 68"

That's rather a good one.
The silly thing is, of course, that while he mightn't have averaged 50 at 68, he'd still probably have looked less at-sea than most 30-year-old grade players would against Holding, Garner, Roberts and co.
It simply isn't logically possible to deduce that Bradman was anything other than rather unique.

 

[Richard]

I am the only one to vote for George Headley.

IMO he is the West Indies greatest ever batsmen. He preformed at a time when WI were the Zimbabwe of the 30s and quite rightly desvered to average over 60.

He played 22 Test and scored 10 Test 100s and four 50s with a top score of 270 and scored runs against England at Lords, scoring a century in each innings on a couple of occasions and scored a ton in his Test debut.

No, Craig, I too believe that George Headley was the 2nd-best batsman ever.
First-Class average of nearly 70 when they essentially played on dirt in WI in the '20s, '30s and '40s, is almost beyond comprehension, just like Bradman and Sobers.

 

[Richard]

Mr. hoitnik has again (unintentionally, I'm sure) aroused some controversy.
I really can't understand how anyone could consider there was anyone who came close to Bradman. Statistics are often derided but 99.94 - it really is, whether we realise it or not, beyond all comprehension. That is all but a century every time you went to the crease.
The difficulties he faced in his day have already been discussed. IMO he would average about 150 today. Possibly he might average 300. There is no knowing, really.
However, something I would like to point-out; this, IMO, is the all-time batting pecking-order:
Bradman









Headley
A big group (inc most of david's names)
The crew who average in the mid-40s today.

 

[iamdavid]

I dont really see how I raised any controversy there.

I beleive I made it quite clear that Bradman was IMO 50% better than anyone else , ever.

However I have heard many differing views as to who is number 2 , so I made a poll of it.


Please explain where the cause of controversy comes into it ?

 

[marc71178]

Amits, if your going to look at averages, look at them properly... Matty Haydens test average is higer than sachins, and he also holds the record for most runs- but nobody is rating him higher than bradman.

Or SRT!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Please explain where the cause of controversy comes into it ?

Amits

 

[iamdavid]

Amits

Of course :duh:

Well thats Amits who caused it then , not me:P

 

[Craig]

No, Craig, I too believe that George Headley was the 2nd-best batsman ever.
First-Class average of nearly 70 when they essentially played on dirt in WI in the '20s, '30s and '40s, is almost beyond comprehension, just like Bradman and Sobers.

Same with Hobbs.

I'm surprised that Eddie Paynter is up there.

He had a good record so I would assume he was avery good player in his time, but never got enough Test opportunites.

 

[masterblaster]

Too hard to compare the second greatest ever.

I never saw the elder men bat, but Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsman I have ever seen play.

 

[Richard]

Same with Hobbs.

I'm surprised that Eddie Paynter is up there.

He had a good record so I would assume he was avery good player in his time, but never got enough Test opportunites.

Yes, the longevity of Hobbs, and Grace (WG), is again almost beyond comprehension.
I'm surprised david would include Paynter in his list - he was a good player, no-one doubted that, but he is one of those benefactors of the generally-accepted barrier for Test-averages being 2000 instead of 3000 runs. Not all-time great material.

 

[Richard]

I dont really see how I raised any controversy there.

I beleive I made it quite clear that Bradman was IMO 50% better than anyone else , ever.

However I have heard many differing views as to who is number 2 , so I made a poll of it.


Please explain where the cause of controversy comes into it ?

Amits

Yes, sorry david, yet another example of my less-than-perfect phraseology. I wasn't actually saying the controversy was your fault, just that you started the thread containing it.

 

[amits]

i dont cause any controversy.

sachin is the greatest ever. debate finished.

iamdavid, before this poll of the 2nd greatest batsman, it is better if we had the poll of the best batsman as well.

 

[Jamee999]

i dont cause any controversy.

sachin is the greatest ever. debate finished.

iamdavid, before this poll of the 2nd greatest batsman, it is better if we had the poll of the best batsman as well.

Great joke Amits LOL LOL LOL :P

 

[deeps]

geez,amits, i've seen heaps of dumb ppl in my time,but u my friend,take the cake...

 

[royGilchrist]

i dont cause any controversy.

sachin is the greatest ever. debate finished.

iamdavid, before this poll of the 2nd greatest batsman, it is better if we had the poll of the best batsman as well.

I dont think I have seen three more enigmatic and contradictory sentences uttered together

 

[iamdavid]

i dont cause any controversy.

sachin is the greatest ever. debate finished.

iamdavid, before this poll of the 2nd greatest batsman, it is better if we had the poll of the best batsman as well.

I just have a few questions for you Amits , you could say I was curious as regards you're logic.

1) who's a better keeper/batsman , Ajay Ratra or Adam Gilchrist.

2)who's the better bowler , Amit Mishra or Shane Warne.

3) I've had a hard day , please explain to me once more why Sachin is better than Bradman?

 

[Linda]

I think, and I may be wrong, :rolleyes: that amits bases his 'best ever' opinions on what country the players represent.
As a reflection of this, I also think I know which keeper and bowler he will answer with.

And amits, the debate never really began. You just disagree with what the majority of us are saying.

 

[deeps]

amits,there's a difference between a favourite player,and the best player

I'm a huge shahid afridi fan, and yet i know that he is not that good...I have the sense to admit it,as much as i like him...I hate ricky ponting,but i have the sense to admit he's a good batsman...

There's a difference between fantasy and realitiy...and ur obviously yet to realise it