Cricinfo's Greatest Intl Cricketers this Century

[Burgey]

I’m assuming Tendulkar played most of his matches after 2000, while Lara, McGrath, and Warne didn’t.... hence why those three weren't eligible.

McGrath played 250 odd international matches after 1.1.2000 and about 70 before then. He also took more wickets in the 2000s than the 90s, won two WCs, was player of the tourney in one of them and won test series everywhere. He took >400 test wickets at 20.5 in the 2000s, one of the flattest batting eras in history. In the same period he took over 250 ODI poles at 20 and an E/R of <4.

His exclusion is extraordinary. As has been noted, Dravid was included (and should have been) and he played one T20I. McGrath should have been closer to winning this whole thing than being excluded from it.

 

[OverratedSanity]

McGrath played 250 odd international matches after 1.1.2000 and about 70 before then. He also took more wickets in the 2000s than the 90s. His exclusion is extraordinary.

Warne and Lara missing out on the list is still fine, because their best days were pre 2000 (particularly for Warne) and they didn't have big WC performances. McGrath not being in the list is a massive red flag which exposes how dumb the methodology is. I'm pretty sure plenty of voters would have wanted to vote for him but couldn't because Cricinfo didn't have him part of the initial short list of 30. Dumb results like this are bound to happen when the methodology is that flawed.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah when you limit your field to 30 to begin with it's going to be limited in its utility.

 

[Johan]

There is probably some hyper-specific criteria they included just to exclude McGrath and Warne, I think it was probably something like "played atleast 10 years of international Cricket in this century".

 

[TheJediBrah]

We seem to differ on what we define as objective but again, my point stands. And glad you agree.

Yeah I wasn't disagreeing, you inferred that for some reason

But you are wrong about the definition of objective, Google it, or look up a dictionary

 

[TheJediBrah]

There is probably some hyper-specific criteria they included just to exclude McGrath and Warne, I think it was probably something like "played atleast 10 years of international Cricket in this century".

There are players on the list that didn't do that though. Gilchrist didn't even play 10 years in his whole career

 

[cricket fan 2003]

McGrath was better than any cricketer this century Tendulkar is not better than Root

 

[icyman]

It seems very much like a draft made on some forum! There's no logic behind the selections and seems to have been put together by those who were born after 2011

 

[Gob]

McGrath was better than any cricketer this century Tendulkar is not better than Root

There are at least 25 cricketers who are comfortably ahead of root this century and 30 if I push it. Tendulkar is one of them

 

[Johan]

There are players on the list that didn't do that though. Gilchrist didn't even play 10 years in his whole career

Maybe the criteria is something along the lines of "X% of career played in the 2000s" and it eliminated players like Lara/McGrath/Warne.

 

[cricket fan 2003]

25 cricketer are better than joe root in this century is the biggest joke I have ever seen in my life who are 25 cricketers give me their names

 

[Gob]

25 cricketer are better than joe root in this century is the biggest joke I have ever seen in my life who are 25 cricketers give me their names

@Burgey

 

[Adders]

There are at least 25 cricketers who are comfortably ahead of root this century and 30 if I push it. Tendulkar is one of them

Name these 25 and let's see just how dumb you actually are.

You can start with Tendulkar because he is certainly one of them.

 

[Burgey]

Do I have to stop at 25? Root isn’t even the best Pommy bat this century. Fmd

off the top of my dial while I’m getting ready for work:

McGrath
Warne
Gilchrist
Ponting
Smith
Cummins
Starc
Lyon+
Hayden
Haze^
Bumrah
Tendulkar
Dravid
Kohli
Ashwin
Jadeja
Murali
Sangakkara
Pietersen
Cook
Flintoff
Stokes
Anderson
Broad
Williamson
Lara
Steyn
Kallis
De Villiers
Amla
G Smith

+reluctant inclusion as he’s a finger spinner but 500+ wickets bowling spin on Aus decks ***** on anything the Amla impersonator has ever done

^was a bit iffy on this owing to his injuries but plainly a more influential and important player than the racist in chief

*every Pom in this list is obviously very average but all are better than Root, who has been a sack of nothingness when it’s mattered most (ie the Ashes, especially in Australia)

I would also have included Al Hacksan but he has too many decks tailor made for him to be counted

Chanders unlucky too but struck me as a bit of a stats padder, and those Carib decks were uber flat for his time in the 2000s

 

[Burgey]

If I cbf I’ll add others later depending on whether the case I’m hearing settles

 

[Adders]

If I cbf I’ll add others later depending on whether the case I’m hearing settles

I suggest you focus on boring them to tears rather than us mate.

That list is junk and you well know it. Don't think even Gob would have been stupid enough to put his name to it. Buffoon.

 

[Burgey]

Sadly I’m the one who gets bored these days

 

[TheJediBrah]

I scoffed at the idea of 25 players better than Root this century but now I'm wondering

Williamson is not better than Root though. Home track bully. Wouldn't say Amla either. But the rest, fair enough

 

[Adders]

You all might want to consider this is all 3 formats yeah?

 

[TheJediBrah]

You all might want to consider this is all 3 formats yeah?

That's why Kohli is ahead. If it was just Tests then Root > Kohli. Although Broad and Anderson might drop off the list for all formats tbf