Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Players => Topic started by: cd0070 on April 04, 2010, 01:33:04 AM
-
Your thoughts?? Sachin would have to be it for me..
-
Sachin Tendulkar
-
In recent times Tendulkar but ever, it's got to be Sir Donald Bradman. His average was so much better than everyone else's and that was before the improved bats we have today.
-
Best cricketer - Sir Garfield Sobers
Could bat at any position, could open the bowling or bowl left arm spin, one of the best close catchers or his era.
In terms of best batsman, no doubt its Don Bradman.
-
Lara must be up there for his 400*
-
and 501 playing county cricket.
-
oh yeah forgot about that one :)
-
Best batsman ever - Bradman
Best all-rounder - Garfield, Beefy, Kallis. Would say Garfield but his bowling wasn't up to Beefy/Kallis standard!
Best keeper/batsman - Gilly
Best bowler - not an easy one, and there are a number I would have up there. To choose 1 or 2 would be impossible!
Best fielder - Jonty
Best all round fielder, bowler, batsman (total cricketer) - WG Grace
And special mention for Sachin - who would be the best batsman ever if it hadn't been for Bradman! And is without doubt the best batsman in all formats of the modern era!
-
Imagine Viv Richards with todays bats, shame I never saw him in his prime.
-
Sachin Tendulkar
-
Tendulkar, given all the cricket played in this era and the coverage it gets along with the backroom staff working out every players weaknesses; he has just got better and better!
-
ponting
-
bradman didnt have rock hard pitches or modern equipment and his average is still nearly twice that of tendulkar
-
Bradman for batsman. hands down. Keeper alone? Godfrey Evans maybe. All-round cricketer would be Sir Odie, by which of course I mean Sir Garfield. Bowler? depends really. Warne/O'reilly for spinner, seamer would be well back, tyson/trueman/spofforth. Of the modern day would be different. Punter for batsman, Flower for keeper/batsman, prasanna jayawardene for keeper, warne for spinner, donald/steyn/mcgrath for seamer, and kallis/botham for all-rounder.
-
Batsman has to be bradman on uncovered pitches etc
cricketer has to be sobers anyone that can avg 60 in the top order then open the bowling then if needed bowl either chinaman or orthodox spin at international level is pretty special
-
iam the best batsman ever roco is the quickest bowler and peterhosk has the best bats ever...
time to take kids to easter party
in truth
bradman batsman
bowling any west indian in there pomp i will go for holding/ambrose
keeper/// in modern history healy
-
Brian Charles Lara & Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Ian Terence Botham
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne & Muttiah Muralitharan
-
Best all-rounder - Garfield, Beefy, Kallis. Would say Garfield but his bowling wasn't up to Beefy/Kallis standard!
Really, ahead of Kapil Dev, Imran Khan, Ian Botham??
-
Best batsman ever - Sir Donald Bradman
Best all-rounder - Sir Garfield Sobers
Best keeper/batsman - Gilly
Best bowler -WARNE
Best fielder - Jonty Rhodes
Much like Pete, but surely Warne must get Best Bowler!
-
Ponting
-
Really, ahead of Kapil Dev, Imran Khan, Ian Botham??
He has to be averaged late 50's, captained the West Indies, opened the bowling, bowled seam, leggers and slow stuff. The best cricketer ever, only perhaps behind Bradman and Grace.
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/52946.html
-
Trevor Penny was as good as rhodes
-
sobers and kapil dev are in different leagues in terms of quality
-
Not Sir Garfield more about the other two...
-
botham was not all that to be honest a bit like flintoff had his moments of greatness but not longevity at all
-
They were big game players did little unless they had the stage but no one could turn it on like beefy when it was needed
-
if you think about it to be truely a world great yes botham is a icon but not a true world great not in the same class as some mentioned on here at all.
-
I'm afraid your very very wrong about Sir Ian, perhaps you need to have a look at what he did a bit deeper as he was world class.
-
Botham statistically might not be a great, much like Flintoff, but both had the ability to turn games on their heads and force unlikely victories. That is why they are being mentioned. In a players career is it just down to statistics?
-
Ya I just dont see how Kallis can be compared to them?
Hate to admit it but I think Imran Khan was better than Botham and Dev.. He had such a big impact on the game in his country...
-
Imran Khan was a better player in my opinion what beefy
my top players
Bradman,Grace,Lara,Gavasker,Tendulkar,Ponting,
ALL Rounders
Sobers, less so Waugh S did not bowl much later on
Bowlers
Holding,Ambrose,Warne,McGrath,Murali,Akram
-
AB de Villiers is the best fielder I've ever seen. Slip,gully backward point,mid-on and long on he fields brillantly anywhere. Quality hands, direct hits while laid down-the lad is absolute class. Can bat abit too....
Sachin
Kallis
Gilchrist
-
Like I said beefy was a match winner and you can't judge a player just on stats due to different eras as before 2-3 runs an over was good now teams look at 4-5 for me a great is some one who turned it on when was needed like viv failed with bat in one world cup final but ran 3 players out
-
Grace revulutionised the modern technique, so hes in my top 3 along with Sobers and Warne.
-
Steve Waugh as an all rounder i just wet my pants
-
RICH apart from the 1 ashes series botham did very little i agree he is a icon bit similar to Beckham but not a patch on the top all time all rounders in my opinion .
no i just think botham was a match winner no doubt like the ashes but to be called world class i think is a little high praise.
imran khan dragged his side to world cup glory after being down and out.
anyhow my top cricketers are roger harper and brad hodge so bang goes my theory
-
rich steve waugh started as a bowler who could bat
-
RICH apart from the 1 ashes series botham did very little i agree he is a icon bit similar to Beckham but not a patch on the top all time all rounders in my opinion .
no i just think botham was a match winner no doubt like the ashes but to be called world class i think is a little high praise.
imran khan dragged his side to world cup glory after being down and out.
anyhow my top cricketers are roger harper and brad hodge so bang goes my theory
Hey now, Beckham was pure class, best crosser of the ball ever, Bothem was average at his sport compared to Becks!
-
Never mind Dave as i say you cant educate pork only cure it. :D
-
Don't say things line that becks best crosser of a ball I have ever seen plus a good England captain but not a patch on the greats of football not in pele or marradonna or usabio's class
-
collingwood best fielder
-
love it opinions love it all i can say is brad hodge best cricketer ever in my mind
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AVs8ywsTTM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WMEXP4G9sM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN3UnF1alvI
-
Hayden's catch best catch in cricket history.. I don't know how that can be topped..
-
With regards to the Kapil Dev, Imran Khan, ian Botham and Richard Hadlee debate.
I don't really include Hadlee as a full all rounder, he was a bowler who batted a bit. That side, Hadlee was the best bowler of the 4, by a mile. No one can argue with that.
I rate Kapil higher than Imran and Botham purely on the fact he was the only world-class fast bowler India has ever had. Imran and Botham had other very good quick bowlers in their sides. Yet, India only had Kapil. Coupled with the fact he was captain at a very young age. His 175no at the 1983 WC is the stuff of folklore. As was Kapil hitting foor consecutive sixes at Lords, to avoid the follow on.
-
MANOJ PRABKAHER
-
Why Brad Hodge Procricket?
-
It has to be Bradman, to look past him is to be quite naive. His conversion rate is staggering, no-one will ever match him in all honesty.
-
MANOJ PRABKAHER
best match fixer more like
-
Why Brad Hodge Procricket?
not the best not a bad one though just a top bloke the times i have meet him always had time for a few of us a top bloke
-
I think everyone mentioning Bradman I think you must remeber that the bowling (bar. certian people-larwood) was much worse than today the whole standard of the game was much worse
-
I think everyone mentioning Bradman I think you must remeber that the bowling (bar. certian people-larwood) was much worse than today the whole standard of the game was much worse
Yes I agree with you on that, however the standard of bats and protection was far worse, these days players play with almost no fear. Back Then one mistake could land you in hospital.
-
uncovered pitches and have you seen snippets of laker and others hardly poor bowling is it...
i suspect anybody in any form of cricket even school ground cricket is averaging 99.9 surely can not be classed as anything apart from world class
-
uncovered pitches and have you seen snippets of laker and others hardly poor bowling is it...
i suspect anybody in any form of cricket even school ground cricket is averaging 99.9 surely can not be classed as anything apart from world class
Surely most people average at least 99.9 in schools cricket?
and that is a school boy error!! 99.9??????????? 99.4!! If you don't know that you don't know anything!
-
Surely most people average at least 99.9 in schools cricket?
What a stupid post
-
I averaged 300 nd something last year only got out once
-
ok put it this way if your playing any cricket not micky mouse under 12 4 over stuff and averaging 99.4 (just for you) then your doing something right but to average this on uncovered pitches in test cricket then you my son you are world class
-
The Don used to practice with a stump and a golf ball, . . . . wonder how many modern greats could do what he used to with them.
-
Ive wondered what would happen if lets say kevin pietersen went back and played a match, I think he would totally out class them, the standard is so much higher
-
its all hypothetical. cricketing prowess is relative to the era.
Got to say though i still think Don Bradman was the best of all time.
-
apple you could not compare it at all a daft comment in my book. the standard is so much better now so why did nobody else average nothing like bradman did.
in the modern era there a few we call worldclass all averaging similar tendulkar,lara,ponting
but in bradman day nodoby got near to averaging near to him so he stood head and shoulders above anybody by a mile so he has to be a cricketing great.
remember as well most of today middling technique is due to the great man as well
and it is no suprise his middling technique were all using today was born from him.
remember advances have been made in both batting,bowling ,fielding,pitches but he must have been ahead of his time to average what he did
-
i read somewhere that WG Grace scored every score between 0 and 200.
-
apple you could not compare it at all a daft comment in my book. the standard is so much better now so why did nobody else average nothing like bradman did.
in the modern era there a few we call worldclass all averaging similar tendulkar,lara,ponting
but in bradman day nodoby got near to averaging near to him so he stood head and shoulders above anybody by a mile so he has to be a cricketing great.
remember as well most of today middling technique is due to the great man as well
and it is no suprise his middling technique were all using today was born from him.
remember advances have been made in both batting,bowling ,fielding,pitches but he must have been ahead of his time to average what he did
Im not saying that Bradman wasnt a great, he was the best for his time but is he the best who has ever lived?
for his Era and for the standard he played yes, but if a test player was playing in that era hyperthaticly speaking, they would probley be leagues above everyone, with only bradman close to them.
-
What a stupid post
Well 99.9% (or was it 99.4?) of the stuff I post is crap.....
-
Bradman, also he could slog - he once made a 100 of 22 balls in a club match.
-
whatever you say about the don like "all the bowlers were crap" his average is almost twice that of our modern day icons. surely if the standard was so poor there would be a spaight of players with such critical acclaim and such high averages... this is not the case. cricket is a numbers game it is not a question of "how?" but a question of "how many?", on this basis there is no arguement that could lead to a conclusion of anything other than Sir Donald Bradman
-
There were excellent bowlers then too!
The quality of bowlers is probably deeper now, right down to lower County level.
But the International bowlers were no worse than nowadays!
Not sure if Bradman would have adapted to T20 or ODI formats. But in Tests there's no doubt that Bradman was the best ever.
-
What alot of people are overlooking is the simple fact of the # of matches being played today.. The physical aspect of the game not just the pace and power increase but the stamina to play so many matches and to be able to adapt to finishing a test match and going to a T20 format to a ODI format or in any order.. The players in this era have to adapt and change their style so much more.. Not taking anything away from the players of the past but the truth is with evolution of anything in life newer is always better..
For majority of Sachin's cricket career the idea of T20 cricket didn't exist but soon as the format of the game changed he changed with it and would still be one of the top picks for everyone in this format...
-
whatever you say about the don like "all the bowlers were crap" his average is almost twice that of our modern day icons. surely if the standard was so poor there would be a spaight of players with such critical acclaim and such high averages... this is not the case. cricket is a numbers game it is not a question of "how?" but a question of "how many?", on this basis there is no arguement that could lead to a conclusion of anything other than Sir Donald Bradman
A large number of them were
-
A large number of them were
I vote the Don as batsman - he was also playing and scoring runs on uncovered wickets which were nothing like the batsman friendly roads we have now. Plus his bats/protection/shoes were nothing like as good and light as they are now. His record is truly awsome.
For me in the moden era Tendulkar seems to be like a fine wine - playing more match winnning innings now that at any time in his career, which should be counted as more important than just volume of runs. But Ponting, Viv and Steve Waugh also played a huge number of match winning knocks.
-
Viv Richards for me. Best bat ever in Tests and ODI's. Was years ahead of his time. Just imagine what he would have done in 20/20 !!! Never wore a helmet and this was when fast bowlers were fast, no law on one bouncer per over and all that. Had the privilege of watching him lots at Somerset in the glory years, so guess I'm a bit biased.
-
Well 99.9% (or was it 99.4?) of the stuff I post is crap.....
Neither, it was 99.94. if you're going to bring stats into it, at least get them right!
-
Viv Richards for me. Best bat ever in Tests and ODI's. Was years ahead of his time. Just imagine what he would have done in 20/20 !!! Never wore a helmet and this was when fast bowlers were fast, no law on one bouncer per over and all that. Had the privilege of watching him lots at Somerset in the glory years, so guess I'm a bit biased.
he would be a huge draw at 2020- with his lollypop bowling too and wonderful fielding
what a legend
-
Viv Richards would certainly be top of the list for 'most entertaining cricketer'!! :D
Would be awesome viewing - especially in T20! CRUNCH!
-
In my lifetime of 40 plus years IVA Richards is tops. When he used to come to the crease as an England fan you used to shudder because you knew he was going to Destroy you. The WCF in 1979 was probably the best example with England in control he smashes 138 no. I remember him hitting the last ball of the innings off Mike Hendrick into the Tavern Stand.
He was also one of the greatest fielders the game has ever seen.
However, for impact on the game and standing in the sport as a whole, Bradman is way above anyone.
-
i would put lara above tendulkar: discuss (cue angry indians... bring it :D)
-
Hi fella - I'm not an Indian, and certainly not angry.
And I can see that on Lara's best day when he's on top form, he is capable of being as good as anyone including Tendulkar.
But I really do rate Tendulkar as number 2 in my list of all time test cricketers (behind Bradman) as Lara was not as consistant!
-
Lara carried his hole team, where as sachin has had support from other great players. lara's 401* and 501* records will never be surpassed and sachin is yet to get that elusive test triple hundred, maybe if he got that i would reconsider
-
if you are going to talk triple hundreds, then Sehwag is your man... Mr Cricket, I know what you are saying, but I have tendulkar above Lara, also I think Lara did as much harm to WI cricket as he did good...
-
Sehwag could be one of the greatest players ever in a decades time, no doubt he has revolutionised your typical opener role.
-
Lara carried his hole team, where as sachin has had support from other great players. lara's 401*
Who won the match?? Not saying that knock shouldn't count or be looked down upon but maybe his obsession with 400 caused his side a chance to win a match... as a captain (or any player on the team) team victories are much more important than personal records..
-
if my memory serves me correct wi declared on 750-5 just after lunch on day 2, leaving another 2 and a half days to take 20 wickets, which was the best way to win the test as any less runs and it wouldnt have been enough and any less time would not have been wnough either
-
1) Tendulkar
2) ponting
-
if my memory serves me correct wi declared on 750-5 just after lunch on day 2, leaving another 2 and a half days to take 20 wickets, which was the best way to win the test as any less runs and it wouldnt have been enough and any less time would not have been wnough either
Declared after lunch on day 3...
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64080.html
-
sorry, thats what i meant... leaving 2 and a half days to take 20 wkts
-
if a pitch is flat enough for one man to make 400 runs then surely its too flat for a result
-
if a pitch is flat enough for one man to make 400 runs then surely its too flat for a result
So the pitch scored the 400 not the man.. ;-)
-
So the pitch scored the 400 not the man.. ;-)
find me an actual pitch that can score 400 runs.
-
it was a joke hence the wink..
-
it was a joke hence the wink..
as was mine! but even on a flat pitch, you've still gotta put the bad deliveries away!