Who's the greatest left handed batsman of alltime?

[Johnners]

Border >> Hayden though

 

[SJS]

Border >> Hayden though

Absolutely.

 

[Johnners]

One could argue a case for Michael Bevan...because he is untouchable as the greatest left-hander in ODI's imo

 

[steve132]

Lara faced stiffer opposition than did Sobers

I don't think I would agree with this. Sobers faced Lindwall, Miller, Trueman, Statham, Davidson, Snow, Lillee, Laker, Benaud, Gupte, Bedi, Chandrashekar and Underwood during his career. This is at least as impressive a list as Lara's opponents.

 

[Chubby Rain]

So? India and Pakistan were perfectly Test-class sides at the time.

Would you have rated Lara as highly as he is if his batting average was padded up by averaging 80 against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe over 30 tests?

 

[SJS]

I don't think I would agree with this. Sobers faced Lindwall, Miller, Trueman, Statham, Davidson, Snow, Lillee, Laker, Benaud, Gupte, Bedi, Chandrashekar and Underwood during his career. This is at least as impressive a list as Lara's opponents.

Far more impressive in fact.

You could add to that Fazal Mehmood, Graham Mckenzie, Ian Johnson, Prasanna, Venkitraghavan, Statham, Bob Willis, Vinoo Mankad and Tony Lock.

 

[Slifer]

not exactly. These are the great/good bowlers lara would have faced in his career:

RSA: Pollock, Donald, Ntini
India: Kumble
Pakistan: Saqlain, Waqar, Wasim, Mustaq
NZL: Bond
Zim: Streak
Eng: Fraser, Gough, Caddick
SRL: Murali, Vaas
Aust.: Mcgrath, Gillespie, fleming, Mcdermott, Warne, Riffel, Macgill

 

[Matt79]

Frankly the only thing that keeps Border there is his final tally of test runs. He wouldnt make most all time Aussie XI's while Morris and Harvey would make most.

Disagree with Harvey or Morris being considered as clearly better than Border.

 

[oz_fan]

I think Lara is the greatest left handed batsmen of all time but he isn't much ahead of Sobers. Pollock would be close to the top as well but it is hard to compare him with those who were able to have full careers but he was definately outstanding and IMO a clear 3rd.

 

[Perm]

Disagree with Harvey or Morris being considered as clearly better than Border.

Neil Harvey would make a fair few All Time XI's, while Arthur Morris probably wouldn't. Harvey>Border>Morris IMO.

 

[Matt79]

I'd say Harvey>Border, but not by so much that its "clearly better"...

 

[Ikki]

Close between Lara and Sobers. I'd put Gilchrist on that list before Hayden, TBH.

 

[iamdavid]

I disagree with Border being ranked below greats of yesteryear (ie Harvey, Morris etc), dont see what evidence can really be produced particularly by people who never saw those two play (remember Border is statistically superior to both). The attacks around the world during Border's heyday in the 80's were just about as strong as they have ever been and he was for a long period of time Australia's only world-class player, he carried the team on his back, Border belongs right in the top echelon for me, his batting may not have been as easy on the eye as Harvey or Morris but he is certainly up there with the best.

Also dont agree with all the assertions that Hayden is 'way out of his league', in this company. Hayden-bashing has always been rife on this forum, and while I'm not exactly his biggest fan, on paper (which is what really matters in the end) Matthew Hayden has scored nearly 8000 test runs at an average of 53 over 89 tests with 27 centuries. Now that puts him right up there alongside the greatest opening batsman of all time. Now say what you will about standard of opposition bowlers these days, excellent pitches, short boundaries, poor runs of form...but at the end of the day Hayden's record is outstanding so he certainly deserves a mention in this sort of poll. I'm not for a moment going to suggest he's the best left-hander ever, but if you were to select a top 10-15 or so then he gets in.

Sobers for me btw...with Lara second. Pollock, as good as he may have been, never did himself justice in test cricket, of course that wasnt his fault but I just struggle to rate him so highly when he never had this chance to be tested in the same way Sobers/Lara were.

Lara is another, like Hayden, who I feel will go down in history as "oh he scored heaps of runs in the 2000's when the pitches were flat and the attacks were crap". In his case this really dosent do him justice, against the three outstanding attacks of his time (South Africa and Pakistan up until about 2003 and Australia up until present) he has averaged 49, 53 and 51 respectively.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If we're talking lesser known Kiwi lefties, then step forward Mr Martin Donnelly. Greater than Sutcliffe, IMO, though with sadly fewer Test opportunities.

Martin Donnelly?

Played test Rugby for England too, I feel strangely compelled to add.

To the question in hand I instinctively want to go for Lara because he's probably the player who's given me the most pleasure to watch in cricket over the years; touched by the hand of god is the expression I'd use. He just looked to have a different gear he can click into that mere mortals don't.

Of cricket observers who have seen both he & Sir Gaz play tho most seem to opt for the latter. Obviously I have seen Sobers bat in clips & Legends of Cricket type shows, but I've never had the pleasure to watch one of his innings from start to finish as I have with Lara, which is a pity. On balance I'm going to defer to their opinion, if only because if Sir Garfield is ranked above Lara by people who know the game he must've been quite some player indeed.

WRT Pollock I think it raises the issue of how many test innings are necessary for a career to be considered in all-time lists. If, god forbid, Mike Hussey walked out in front of a bus tomorrow he'd be left with a career test average of a fraction under 80 from 16 tests. I think most statistically minded people would probably consider this too shallow a sample, but Pollock's entire career was only 7 tests more in total. Is 23 tests really enough for Pollock's average to be up there? I'm not saying it is or it isn't, but would be interested to know what others think.

 

[Matt79]

One difference being the volume of play these days means that players get to the magical 20 test threshold that is generally used a fair bit quicker. Huss got to 16 tests within two years of his debut.

One thing with Pollock, as The Sean pointed out earlier is that he's one of the few greats of the WSC and ROW match period whose average is actually significantly worse if you include those matches - adds to the feeling that his nevertheless brilliant record in Tests would have reverted to the mean more if he'd been able to play another 20-30 tests... Still right up there, and clearly in the top 5 lefties of all time.

On Huss, looking forward to see how he goes this season - by the end of it I think we'll have a better idea of whether he'll be remembered as a great, or as a good player who merely had a very good start.

 

[Matt79]

Got a feeling it might have been done not that long ago, but an all leftie XI could be a pretty decent unit - something like
Morris
Hayden
Harvey
Lara
Pollock/Border
Sobers
Gilchrist
Davidson
Wasim
Voce/Reid
Bedi

 

[neville cardus]

Disagree with Harvey or Morris being considered as clearly better than Border.

Braddles thought that they were.

 

[Matt79]

Bradman also showed, like almost all former players turned hypothetical "selector with access to a time machine", a marked preference for players he had played with, or against. He certainly wasn't alone in doing so, but I disagreed with several of his selections in his book.

As I said in a later post, Harvey is just ahead of Border in my books. Morris was an opener, and I tend to think of them separately from middle order bats - I think its a specialised position and its often not comparing apples with apples to contrast someone who played at 4 or 5 for their career with an opener. That said, Morris was an extremely fine batsman and a pillar of a great side - but his record is, IMO, not as consistent as a Border for instance - if we are to make comparisons.

 

[archie mac]

Bradman also showed, like almost all former players turned hypothetical "selector with access to a time machine", a marked preference for players he had played with, or against. He certainly wasn't alone in doing so, but I disagreed with several of his selections in his book.

As I said in a later post, Harvey is just ahead of Border in my books. Morris was an opener, and I tend to think of them separately from middle order bats - I think its a specialised position and its often not comparing apples with apples to contrast someone who played at 4 or 5 for their career with an opener. That said, Morris was an extremely fine batsman and a pillar of a great side - but his record is, IMO, not as consistent as a Border for instance - if we are to make comparisons.

I think a fair argument could be made to say at the end of the 1948 season Morris was the best batsman in the world, and that would include Bradman, Hutton and Compton (please remember Bradman was at the end of a great career and we are talking a very short time frame), his wife was soon found to have cancer and I am sure the worry and financial worries contributed to his decline, I could be wrong though

 

[Anil]

I disagree with Border being ranked below greats of yesteryear (ie Harvey, Morris etc), dont see what evidence can really be produced particularly by people who never saw those two play (remember Border is statistically superior to both). The attacks around the world during Border's heyday in the 80's were just about as strong as they have ever been and he was for a long period of time Australia's only world-class player, he carried the team on his back, Border belongs right in the top echelon for me, his batting may not have been as easy on the eye as Harvey or Morris but he is certainly up there with the best.

completely agree!