• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

Who is the best "Cricketer" ever

  • Total voters
    79
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
Satyanash89 said:
25 is still a superb average anyway, so the difference doesn't really matter at all. The problem with such stats is that, ironically, you might have rated Imran higher if he had performed slightly worse at home. Say he averaged 22 at home and 25 away.. a difference of 3 is hardly worth pointing out. The fact that he did so brilliantly at home somehow seems to work against him :laugh:

If his home average was say 18-19, and away he averaged 30+, you would have a point. Here, it's just irrelevant because he was obviously very good away as well. The fact that he was absolutely godlike in home conditions isn't a negative
Click to expand...
Exactly, which is what I was trying to point out to kyear2 that an away average of 25 isn't exactly something to sneeze at
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
H4G said:
25 is still an ATG average,stop bashing alltime greats without any reason.
Click to expand...
This coming from you is hilarious.

Never said his away average is bad, my argument is if you can average 19 at home in those conditions, you should be able to do even better in more helpful conditions. I have my theory.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
AndyZaltzHair said:
Two examples

he is in my mind still the greatest player the game has ever seen. - James Mortimer

Overall on pure statistical performance analysis, Richard Hadlee is the best pace bowler of the modern era. - Ananth Narayan

:-
Click to expand...
The second one is a statistical analyst, the first one just blows my mind. But he is a New Zealand rugby writer.

Fore everyone who believes that Murali and Hadlee were hurt because they bowled with little help, does anyone belive that if they had more assistance that they would have as many wickets, 5fers or shots at cleaning up the tail. Hadlee himself though and said that Lillee was better than him, though he didn't rate the W.I quicks too highly, actually blamed them for the death of spin bowling.
 
Last edited:
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
kyear2 said:
This coming from you is hilarious.

Never said his away average is bad, my argument is if you can average 19 at home in those conditions, you should be able to do even better in more helpful conditions. I have my theory.
Click to expand...
Everyone knows your theory, that Imran got all his wickets thanks to home umpires 8-)
 
P

Plumbinfront

Banned
hahaha, smalishah I doubt you can find a post of his that says that. In fact, in a thread he rather thought (mistakenly) I was alluding to Imran having a great record largely because of umpires and called me out on it. Geez, H4G, Ikki and yourself constantly make posts which are totally irrelevant and unsubstantiated.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Let me just say to Smali and the HGwhat ever, that is what it is like to have someone pick apart someone's record for no reason as the tirade that HG was on since he joined the site.

Truth be told as I have frequently stated I rate him very highly, do I think he was the greatest captain ever, no. The best all rounder no, but he would be an invaluable member of any ATG team with his reverse swing being difficult to handle with the old ball (bowling with Warne) and he would be a useful lower order bat.
 
H4G

H4G

Banned
kyear2 said:
This coming from you is hilarious.
Click to expand...
If you're saying that regarding my opinion regarding Sobers bowling, then I must say this comment of yours is hilarious.Sobers averaged around 50 till first 1/3 of his career,mediocre at his best during the mid years of his career then crap again at the end.Its pretty clear if selected as an allrounder in an alltime X|, he would hardly get a chance to bowl a single ball in presence of bowlers like Marshall,Hadlee,McGrath,Imran,Wasim,Ambrose etc.It simply doesn't make sense to select him or Kallis as allrounders but both of them are obviously very strong contenders to be selected as specialist batsmen.
 
Agent Nationaux

Agent Nationaux

International Coach
H4G said:
If you're saying that regarding my opinion regarding Sobers bowling, then I must say this comment of yours is hilarious.Sobers averaged around 50 till first 1/3 of his career,mediocre at his best during the mid years of his career then crap again at the end.Its pretty clear if selected as an allrounder in an alltime X|, he would hardly get a chance to bowl a single ball in presence of bowlers like Marshall,Hadlee,McGrath,Imran,Wasim,Ambrose etc.It simply doesn't make sense to select him or Kallis as allrounders but both of them are obviously very strong contenders to be selected as specialist batsmen.
Click to expand...
He may not be selected to bowl but that doesn't take away the fact that he was a good bowler who opened the bowling. I am as big an Imran fan as anyone, but would be happy to admit Sobers was the better All-rounder.
 
Ikki

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
Geez, only 9 times - that's terrible when you consider only 2 players have done it more often.

You're so full of ****e and numbers that it's almost parodying yourself now.
Click to expand...
Do you happen to read the posts before you respond? I am saying in the context that there were opportunities to take 20 wickets on offer, it's not like he is gonna get all 20 or even near it most of the time.
 
Last edited:
watson

watson

Banned
marc71178 said:
No, it's not.
Click to expand...
A bowling average of 25 is most definitely worthy of an ATG. Obviously not the Marshall or Garner standard, but still damned good just the same. Although, admittedly, it would need something like a low Strike Rate or 'Longevity' to accompany it.
 
Red

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
I rate Jason Gillespie really really high. His bowling avg is 26. And Craig McDermott's bowling average was almost 29. They were both great fast bowlers. It can be a bit easy to get too carried away with bowling averages imo. Giving away an extra 5 or 6 runs per wicket is something, but it's not overly significant.
 
watson

watson

Banned
kyear2 said:
But you wouldn't count any of them among the best ever.
Click to expand...
No, because not many ATGs can be the 'best ever'.

However, Jager introduced the concept of 'Gold Tier', 'Silver Tier', and 'Bronz Tier' ATGs which acknowledges the fact that a cricketer can still be an ATG without being on the same Tier/plane as Malcolm Marshall or Jack Hobbs.

I like Jager's concept.
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
watson said:
No, because not many ATGs can be the 'best ever'.

However, Jager introduced the concept of 'Gold Tier', 'Silver Tier', and 'Bronz Tier' ATGs which acknowledges the fact that a cricketer can still be an ATG without being on the same Tier/plane as Malcolm Marshall or Jack Hobbs.

I like Jager's concept.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the "Don Tier"
 
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
Plumbinfront said:
hahaha, smalishah I doubt you can find a post of his that says that. In fact, in a thread he rather thought (mistakenly) I was alluding to Imran having a great record largely because of umpires and called me out on it. Geez, H4G, Ikki and yourself constantly make posts which are totally irrelevant and unsubstantiated.
Click to expand...
Really?

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2666748-post75.html

go around looking in this thread a bit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top