Who are the top 5 Test cricketers of the 1990s and 2000s?

[honestbharani]

as Test batsman alone, outside of CW, it surely is.

I mean if your definition of this is England, probably. Nowhere else, honestly.

 

[Johan]

I mean if your definition of this is England, probably. Nowhere else, honestly.

I don't think Pakistanis would rate Sachin over Smith either, can't vouch it's for cricketing or non cricketing reasons

 

[subshakerz]

300 @ 21 then No, less longevity, availability, not even better average in a much spicier era than all of them.

Sure but he will be discussed with them inevitably as it's a big enough sample by that point by being in the 300 club.

and Yes, Smith would be seen as a BAB candidate today, maybe not by you due to your precious Sachin but by others, not even here, but even outside here

Doubt it is seen as a serious debate in the cricket world. My sense is folks see him in the top handful ever but not at that level. Lol the other day Anderson didn't even mention him in the best bats of the era over Root and Kohli.

 

[Johan]

Sure but he will be discussed with them inevitably as it's a big enough sample by that point by being in the 300 club.

Smith is already discussed as arguably the second best after Bradman. Would, could, should etc vs Is

Doubt it is seen as a serious debate in the cricket world. My sense is folks see him in the top handful ever but not at that level. Lol the other day Anderson didn't even mention him in the best bats of the era over Root and Kohli.

Anderson doesn't like Smith very much if I have to say it out loud

 

[subshakerz]

Smith was never considered better than Sachin by any serious watcher of the game.

But I agree that Bumrah is nowhere near McGrath and we have to wait until his whole career is done to make these comparisons.

The question isn't if Bumrah is near McGrath. Obviously he isn't as he has longevity issues.

The question is if Smith poses a bigger potential threat to overtaking Sachin than Bumrah does McGrath. I think the latter.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't think Pakistanis would rate Sachin over Smith either, can't vouch it's for cricketing or non cricketing reasons

They would actually.

 

[Johan]

This Sachin miles better than Smith thing is just people grossly overrating the past and underrating the present.

 

[subshakerz]

Bowlers are different. They don't have long careers. Longevity is less of a factor. Bumrah has been sub 20 almost his entire career, unlike McGarth. But he needs to maintain that for at least 70 tests to be on similar level as Mcgrath.

Smith's avg is 56 after 115 tests. Tendulkar's was 57 after like 175 tests. Can Smith stay above 55 after 140 tests?

No they don't have to play the same amount of tests. Especially bowlers.

 

[subshakerz]

This Sachin miles better than Smith thing is just people grossly overrating the past and underrating the present.

Nobody said Sachin is miles ahead of Smith. That's mental. But a notable minor advantage in terms of wider cricket world perception of his standing.

 

[Johan]

Smith is not in Tendulkar's class.

Hmmm not miles...

 

[subshakerz]

Hmmm not miles...

Just a single opinion.

 

[Johan]

Just a single opinion.

You're an idiot.

 

[subshakerz]

You're an idiot.

Dude please don't melt down this time over Smith. He is not even English.

 

[Johan]

Dude please don't melt down this time over Smith. He is not even English.

There is no melt down, it's how you go from "Nobody said" to 'just one" without flinching that truly puts me in awe.

 

[DrWolverine]

I rate Glenn McGrath very highly. But like every great, his career wasn’t without a few minor blemishes.

The ultimate test for a fast bowler is how they perform in the subcontinent where conditions are typically least suited to pace. McGrath played 19 Tests in Asia but managed just one five-wicket haul across all those matches. His average in Sri Lanka was 29 (4 Tests), and in Pakistan it was 31 (5 Tests) are not the kind of dominance we associate with his performances elsewhere.


Another slightly underwhelming aspect is his record against the second-best team of his era(South Africa). In 17 Tests against them, McGrath took 57 wickets at an average of 27 and a strike rate of 72. Not quite the ruthlessness he showed against other sides.


If Sachin Tendulkar had averaged just 40 against Australia, he would be seen today in the same tier as a Joe Root.

If Sachin had managed only 6 centuries in 60 Tests across SENA, his legacy would be same as Inzy(5 centuries in 40 Tests).

*Sachin averaged 55 vs Aus
*Sachin scored 17 tons in SENA

 

[subshakerz]

There is no melt down, it's how you go from "Nobody said" to 'just one" without flinching that truly puts me in awe.

Well give me a break, I skipped over that post and didn't notice it otherwise I would have known what you were referring to man.

 

[Johan]

I rate Glenn McGrath very highly. But like every great, his career wasn’t without a few minor blemishes.

The ultimate test for a fast bowler is how they perform in the subcontinent where conditions are typically least suited to pace. McGrath played 19 Tests in Asia but managed just one five-wicket haul across all those matches. His average in Sri Lanka was 29 (4 Tests), and in Pakistan it was 31 (5 Tests) are not the kind of dominance we associate with his performances elsewhere.


Another slightly underwhelming aspect is his record against the second-best team of his era(South Africa). In 17 Tests against them, McGrath took 57 wickets at an average of 27 and a strike rate of 72. Not quite the ruthlessness he showed against other sides.


If Sachin Tendulkar had averaged just 40 against Australia, he would be seen today in the same tier as a Joe Root.

If Sachin had managed only 6 centuries in 60 Tests across SENA, his legacy would be same as Inzy(5 centuries in 40 Tests).

*Sachin averaged 55 vs Aus
*Sachin scored 17 tons in SENA

Horrible post.

Sachin himself averages 42 against South Africa, but Yeah McGrath with 27 is the issue. Root's issue is record in Australia, McGrath was great in South Africa too.

 

[govinda indian fan]

Um He won't be fit and won't end up as better than McGrath, Smith was also and is often discussed as better than Sachin in Tests.

Let smith retire before rating him

 

[subshakerz]

I rate Glenn McGrath very highly. But like every great, his career wasn’t without a few minor blemishes.

The ultimate test for a fast bowler is how they perform in the subcontinent where conditions are typically least suited to pace. McGrath played 19 Tests in Asia but managed just one five-wicket haul across all those matches. His average in Sri Lanka was 29 (4 Tests), and in Pakistan it was 31 (5 Tests) are not the kind of dominance we associate with his performances elsewhere.


Another slightly underwhelming aspect is his record against the second-best team of his era(South Africa). In 17 Tests against them, McGrath took 57 wickets at an average of 27 and a strike rate of 72. Not quite the ruthlessness he showed against other sides.


If Sachin Tendulkar had averaged just 40 against Australia, he would be seen today in the same tier as a Joe Root.

If Sachin had managed only 6 centuries in 60 Tests across SENA, his legacy would be same as Inzy(5 centuries in 40 Tests).

*Sachin averaged 55 vs Aus
*Sachin scored 17 tons in SENA

Also other factors:

- McGrath having significant scoreboard pressure and team support advantage whereas Tendulkar had extreme pressure on him for half his career at least

- Tendulkars teen prodigy achievements

- McGrath isn't a complete bowler for all surfaces and conditions like say, Marshall, since he lacks pace whereas Tendulkar is as complete in his skillset as a bat you can get

 

[subshakerz]

Horrible post.

Sachin himself averages 42 against South Africa, but Yeah McGrath with 27 is the issue. Root's issue is record in Australia, McGrath was great in South Africa too.

McGraths average isn't the issue against SA, he was blunted at home for whatever reason and they were likely the best batting lineup he faced overall at home. It's a minor but decent blemish along with Pak and SL.