CW Ranks the Batsmen

[Uppercut]

1. WG Grace
2. J Hobbs

 

[Indipper]

1. Sobers
2. Hobbs

 

[Evermind]

1) Ponting
2) Tendulkar

 

[zaremba]

1. Hammond
2. Hobbs

 

[Fusion]

1. Viv Richards
2. Jack Hobbs

 

[Anil]

1. gary sobers
2. jack hobbs

 

[The_Bunny]

1. Jack Hobbs
2. Garry Sobers

 

[NUFAN]

1 Jack Hobbs
2 Patsy Hendren

 

[Michaelf7777777]

1. W. G. Grace
2. Bert Suttcliffe

 

[Trumpers_Ghost]

1. Dean Jones
2. Victor Trumper

 

[Athlai]

Hobbs - 26
Grace - 10
Sobers - 9
Richards - 6
Tendulkar - 5
Lara - 1
Hammond - 3
Sutcliffe -3
Ponting – 2
Hendren – 1
Jones – 2
Trumper - 1

 

[adharcric]

Hobbs - 26
Grace - 10
Sobers - 9
Richards - 6
Tendulkar - 5
Lara - 1
Hammond - 3
Sutcliffe -3
Ponting – 2
Hendren – 1
Jones – 2
Trumper - 1

Looks like I've found my vote-counting bitch for the rest of the contest.

Nah, thanks a lot. On another note, shall I use an "early blowout" rule so that I can call a race with a lead of 15 or 20? Or just let them run for two days?

 

[bagapath]

20 point lead sounds fine

 

[vic_orthdox]

1 Garf
2 Richo

 

[BoyBrumby]

Have to go with the local boy. His longevity was staggering too, but for the years lost to WW1 he'd have in excess of 200 hundreds.

Personal favourite gets second. BCL, at his zenith, is the best I've ever seen. Left one feeling awestruck. Weilded his bat like a surgeon and utterly dissected attacks.

1) Jack Hobbs
2) Brian Lara

 

[DaRick]

Personal favourite gets second. BCL, at his zenith, is the best I've ever seen. Left one feeling awestruck. Weilded his bat like a surgeon and utterly dissected attacks.

At his best, Lara was one of the best batsman ever (with nine double-centuries). But his outrageous inconsistency should count against him.

 

[BoyBrumby]

At his best, Lara was one of the best batsman ever (with nine double-centuries). But his outrageous inconsistency should count against him.

A fair point. It's always a problem with these kind of comparisons across the generations, does one compare players at their peaks or across their entire careers? Obviously some players' (Botham & Waqar are two obvious examples) records don't really give the full measure of how good they once were because they played on after their best days were behind them.

Lara didn't really do that, but as you say, didn't have the consistency of (say) Sachin or Sutcliffe.

 

[bagapath]

A fair point. It's always a problem with these kind of comparisons across the generations, does one compare players at their peaks or across their entire careers? Obviously some players' (Botham & Waqar are two obvious examples) records don't really give the full measure of how good they once were because they played on after their best days were behind them.

Lara didn't really do that, but as you say, didn't have the consistency of (say) Sachin or Sutcliffe.

do you guys realize lara averages more than sachin if you take out the minnows? also he averages more runs per test than tendulkar. there was a statistical study in cricinfo on peaks of great batsmen. lara's graph was one of the steadiest. he didnt fail too badly even when he was out of form. even i thought he was an abject failure between 98 and 02. but this study threw new light on his career. i dont think he was as inconsistent as waqar and botham at all.

 

[SJS]

1. Sobers
2. Hobbs

 

[adharcric]

Vote for #3 batsman of all-time

Hobbs takes it comfortably.

1. Don Bradman
2. Jack Hobbs

The vote for the #3 batsman of all-time begins now.