CW Ranks the Batsmen

[SJS]

Trumper

 

[honestbharani]

Miandad
Gavaskar

again.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Ranji
Miandad

 

[Pothas]

Herbert Sutcliffe
Everton Weekes

 

[silentstriker]

Gavaskar
Sutcliffe

Ranji, Weekes, Barrington next.

 

[nightprowler10]

Gavaskar
Weekes

 

[pasag]

Trumper
Gavaskar

 

[Fusion]

Sutcliffe
Gavaskar

 

[Slifer]

gavaskar
Sutcliffe

 

[BoyBrumby]

1) KS Ranjitsinhji
2) H Sutcliffe

Don't want to sound like the broken record, but think it's criminal Ranji isn't getting more support. Herb the only man other than Sir Donald to end with over 4000 test runs at over 60, which must count for something. Can only think his lack of a second initial has irked the southern snobs.

Still this, please.

 

[fredfertang]

Still these two please

Back to

1. Herbert Sutcliffe
2. Denis Compton

 

[Michaelf7777777]

1. Bert Suttcliffe (NZ)
2. Barry Richards (SAF)

 

[rivera213]

I can't really do a top 10, but my all time XI would be (so draw your own conclusions):

Gavaskar (just ahead of B.Richards)
Boycott
Tendulkar
G.Pollock
V.Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist (WK)
Warne (C)
Wasim or Waqar (can't split 'em)
Lillee
Ambrose (just ahead of Joel Garner)


I'm 24 and am not going to put names like Bradman, Hutton, Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Barrington, Hammond etc in the all-time XI when I haven't seen anywhere near as much footage from them as I have the guys who were (or would've in the case of the South African players) playing test level in the 70's.

People who put those players in are putting them in because of stats only & stats don't tell the full picture. They're only good in comparing all the players from 1 era.

 

[adharcric]

People who put those players in are putting them in because of stats only & stats don't tell the full picture. They're only good in comparing all the players from 1 era.

Welcome to CW. Most of the people here are not rating the old-timers purely based on stats (and even there, not on an absolute scale but relative to the stats of contemporaries), but also on what was written about them and how highly they were rated by contemporaries.

 

[adharcric]

1. Pollock
2. Ranji

Gavaskar - 14
Sutcliffe - 11
Trumper - 8
Ranji - 5
Pollock/Miandad - 3 each
Weekes/B Sutcliffe - 2 each
Compton/Richards - 1 each

 

[rivera213]

Welcome to CW. Most of the people here are not rating the old-timers purely based on stats (and even there, not on an absolute scale but relative to the stats of contemporaries), but also on what was written about them and how highly they were rated by contemporaries.

Thanks for the welcome.

How much credence do you give to the comments from fellow players of an era though?

It's just hard for me to put Bradman (who've all I've seen is good, no plays and misses or badly timed shots since only 2% of his career was filmed) above Tendulkar who I've seen90% of the career of- the good and the bad.

Bradman being the best of his era may equate to being the 10th best in the 70's, yet his stats make the majority of people utter the words "he's the best ever".

I'm not talking about yourself, or anyone on CW in particular, just in general.

 

[Johnners]

Ponting
Gavaskar

 

[Noble One]

Gavaskar
B Richards

 

[DaRick]

1) Ricky Ponting
2) Herbert Sutcliffe

 

[SJS]

Its easy to deny history after all there are those who deny the holocaust and that took place (if it did) a decade after Bradman made his debut. The beauty of such denials is that if you do it long enough and often enough, you will find enough people who are too intellectually lazy to find out for themselves whether the denial stands the an objective and thoughtful scrutiny. Again we have millions who now believe the holocaust never took place just as there are millions who believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy hatched in the USA by the Jews.

I met Mr Cricket-Loving-Ahmedi-Nijad the other day and our discussion ran something like this . . . .

CLAN : Bradman never existed. What proof do you have of there ever being a person of that name?

SJS : Well, sir, someone by that name did and many of us have seen pictures and movies and even live telecast of an old man supposed to be of that name and a player from Australia so we have to assume that much is true.

CLAN : How do we know he is the guy who played for Australia ?

SJS : Well there are those who played with and against him who lived like him beyond his playing days, kept in touch with him and were seen with him on many occasions and in pictures and videos so unless we assume all of them are a part of a conspiracy, we would have to concede this old man was the same cricketer.

CLAN : Aha ! So there are those who actually saw him play? What do they think of him a batsman?

SJS : Well, without a single exception all of them think he is the greatest batsmen they ever saw.

CLAN : That doesn't prove a thing. Who else did they see? What do they know of players in the 70's ? What do they know of Sobers, Pollock, Viv Richards, Boycott and Gavaskar?

SJS : Well, many of them have written extensively on the game till well into the 70's and beyond and they continue to maintain their opinion on Bradman's supremacy over all others by a massive distance. Cricketer writers like Fingleton (1908 - 1981) , Bailey (1923 - ), Bedser(1918 - ), O'Reilly (1905 - 1992), Hutton (1916 - 1990), Miller (1919-2004) and Lindwall (1921-1996) come readily to mind. There are many others too.

CLAN : Ha! What do these ignoramuses know of cricket? They aren't even members of any cricket forum ?​

SJS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ​