CMJ's top 100

[DingDong]

Nah, don't worry, I won't be replacing you as the worst poster in the history of Cricketweb. I wouldn't want to deprieve you of the honour that makes you sleep at night.

Ban this fool.

 

[andyc]

I thought I made a mockery out of myself with the finger spin comment until I came across your username and discovered that you couldn't even welldone properly.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Burgey]

Pietersen may not currently be in the same class as Steve Waugh but his definately be amongst the top 100 cricketers. He is criminally underrated and his record against Glenn McGrath & Shane Warne is fantastic and we're talking about a guy who also reverse slog-swept Muttiah Muralitharan over coverpoint for six!

No.

Just no.

He played well vs Warne and McGrath when both were past their best. He certainly didn't master McGrath (I often stick on the video of McGrath hitting him in the ribs in that ODI at Melbourne for a giggle when I'm feeling a bit down) and even though he played some fine knocks v Warne, there's always Adelaide day 5 in the equation as well.

He's a fine player to be sure, but not in the top 100, or anywhere near it, right now. He's played all his cricket in an era where bowling has been relatively weak, on flat decks and with cannon-like bats. Just because he slog-swept someone for a most unorthodox six doesn't mean he belongs in the top 100.

Of course, by the time he finishes he may well be up there, but I wouldn't have him there right now. .

 

[Kylez]

Jason Gilliespie should be in there.

 

[pskov]

No.

Just no.

He played well vs Warne and McGrath when both were past their best. He certainly didn't master McGrath (I often stick on the video of McGrath hitting him in the ribs in that ODI at Melbourne for a giggle when I'm feeling a bit down) and even though he played some fine knocks v Warne, there's always Adelaide day 5 in the equation as well.

He's a fine player to be sure, but not in the top 100, or anywhere near it, right now. He's played all his cricket in an era where bowling has been relatively weak, on flat decks and with cannon-like bats. Just because he slog-swept someone for a most unorthodox six doesn't mean he belongs in the top 100.

Of course, by the time he finishes he may well be up there, but I wouldn't have him there right now. .

Tough to say Warne in 2005 was past his best. In 06/07 he wasn't quite what he was, but was still a very good test bowler.

 

[bagapath]

Jason Gilliespie should be in there.

some others who have missed out are superior cricketers/bowlers to dizzy. he is not going to get into my top 100 ahead of garner, roberts, kumble and faulkner; no way

 

[bagapath]

CMJ's list's country wise distribution

ENG: 34
AUS: 24
WI: 15
IND: 8
PAK: 6
SA: 6
SL: 4
NZ: 2
ZIM: 1

 

[wfdu_ben91]

KP's record against spinners when the ball actually turns is pretty ordinary to say the least, he's been poor so far in the subcontinent. However when the ball doesn't turn he can murder em. Comparing KP with waugh is a stupid exercise, totally different types of players, in fact pretty much as different as you can get. Zaremba surely you're not arguing that KP's faced a better quality of bowling or even equal quality as Waugh did? KP never had to face at their peaks Donald, Pollock, Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop, Wasim, Waqar, even the so called second class back in the 90's and early part of this decade was a lot stronger e.g. Fanie De Villiers, Srinath (feel free to add more). I'd argue more quality spinners too, Saqlain Mushtaq, Kumble at his peak, Murali was still pretty mint back then. Notice I've left out any english or australian players and that's still a pretty impressive list, KP hasn't had to face too many top attacks in his career so far, Australia in 05 were very good, but Mcgrath was part absent, gillespie was all over the place and lee aint that good. In 06/07 Mcgrath and Warne were well past there best, by some distance in fact, so claiming that is a bit dodgy IMO. SA last year were ok, but Steyn was below his best after injury and Morkel still hasn't lived upto potential. Steyn and co in SA this winter and Johnson this summer will be big challenges and it will be very interesting to see how he fares. Regarding Murali, he scored off him in England in May on a flattie, when he faced Murali on a turning surface that series he failed. He was poor in Sri Lanka and didn't look like he had a clue against Murali, pretending otherwise is just plain denial.

This is the problem about comparing players from nowadays to players of different eras - You know every single waking detail that goes against KP's success whilst you don't know every single waking detail that would've gone against Steve Waugh's success. As zaremba said, Walsh and Waqar averaged well above their career against Australia, so you can't claim that they were at their absolute best against Australia?

Nice try. You'll not be lasting long around here if you keep posting idiotic attacks on some of the most respected posters on the forum, so here's a bit of advice: cut it out, or just disappear now and save everyone in Mod positions the trouble.

Well, you're the one attacking my posts, not the other way round - I'm merely defending myself from your unprovoked rubbish. Go back and read through, because you did start it. Really, if anyone deserves to be punished it's you. Not like you're one of the most knowledgable either - I've come across more then several members that know more then you and I personally don't like the majority of them. So go ahead and cook the fact that you believe that you are the most respected member on this forum and continue to let me laugh it up.

Ban this fool.

Give up, kid.

No.

Just no.

He played well vs Warne and McGrath when both were past their best. He certainly didn't master McGrath (I often stick on the video of McGrath hitting him in the ribs in that ODI at Melbourne for a giggle when I'm feeling a bit down) and even though he played some fine knocks v Warne, there's always Adelaide day 5 in the equation as well.

He's a fine player to be sure, but not in the top 100, or anywhere near it, right now. He's played all his cricket in an era where bowling has been relatively weak, on flat decks and with cannon-like bats. Just because he slog-swept someone for a most unorthodox six doesn't mean he belongs in the top 100.

Of course, by the time he finishes he may well be up there, but I wouldn't have him there right now. .

Only Tendulkar has played McGrath & Warne (apart from a few Indians, who played played Warne better but not McGrath) better then what Pietersen has. I wouldn't say that even Lara did as well, because there were many times where Warne & McGrath were allover him. Pietersen also has a good record against Muttiah Muralitharan. Hell, out of any player that has played more then 10 Tests against McGrath & Warne - Pietersen has the highest average.

Cricinfo Statsguru - Test matches - Batting records

You can't claim Pietersen has dominated weak attacks when he always performs against the best opposition. Really, Pietersen has done better against the best bowlers of this era then say Rahul Dravid or Jacques Kallis, who average well below their career against McGrath, Warne & Murali, but they would be in many people's top 100's. Dravid's 3 lowest averages are against South Africa, Australia & Sri Lanka - Probably the 3 best bowling attacks of his generation, but I'm sure that many people wouldn't hold that against him? Kallis has also never scored a 100 against Sri Lanka - People wouldn't hold that against him?

 

[Burgey]

Only Tendulkar has played McGrath & Warne (apart from a few Indians, who played played Warne better but not McGrath) better then what Pietersen has. I wouldn't say that even Lara did as well, because there were many times where Warne & McGrath were allover him. Pietersen also has a good record against Muttiah Muralitharan. Hell, out of any player that has played more then 10 Tests against McGrath & Warne - Pietersen has the highest average.

Cricinfo Statsguru - Test matches - Batting records

You can't claim Pietersen has dominated weak attacks when he always performs against the best opposition. Really, Pietersen has done better against the best bowlers of this era then say Rahul Dravid or Jacques Kallis, who average well below their career against McGrath, Warne & Murali, but they would be in many people's top 100's. Dravid's 3 lowest averages are against South Africa, Australia & Sri Lanka - Probably the 3 best bowling attacks of his generation, but I'm sure that many people wouldn't hold that against him? Kallis has also never scored a 100 against Sri Lanka - People wouldn't hold that against him?

<*sigh*>

You're not suggesting Warne & McGrath from 2005 onwards were > or = to Warne & McGrath in their mid-20s to early 30s are you?

Pietersen has done well against the better attacks around in his time, but my point is those attacks aren't as good as some of the attacks of the, say 80s & 90s. That's not his fault, of course, it's an historical accident.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

<*sigh*>

You're not suggesting Warne & McGrath from 2005 onwards were > or = to Warne & McGrath in their mid-20s to early 30s are you?

Pietersen has done well against the better attacks around in his time, but my point is those attacks aren't as good as some of the attacks of the, say 80s & 90s. That's not his fault, of course, it's an historical accident.

You're not suggesting that Warne wasn't at his best during the 2005 Ashes? Or that McGrath wasn't at his best during the Lords Test where Pietersen saw him off and scored runs? You also seem to be forgetting that Stuart Clark in the Ashes 2006/07. He bowled aswell as McGrath ever has during that series. Of course, Clark isn't anywhere near as good as McGrath overall, but Clark was phenonmenal during that series. I wouldn't write off McGrath or Warne, no matter what age they were at. They were still mighty fine bowlers, who were complemented well by Lee & Clark.

To say that the modern bowling attacks aren't as strong as the 70s, 80s or 90s is the biggest myth in cricket. In the 70s & 80s, the actual bowlers of 70s & 80s were better then the bowlers of the modern age, but overall, bowling attacks of the modern day are better, because despite having better bowlers, they were surrounded by crap (except Windies & for a small period of time England). The only 3 bowling attacks that haven't had atleast 3 decent bowlers in the side since 2000 is Bangladesh, Zimbabwe & West Indies.

 

[Burgey]

You're not suggesting that Warne wasn't at his best during the 2005 Ashes? Or that McGrath wasn't at his best during the Lords Test where Pietersen saw him off and scored runs? You also seem to be forgetting that Stuart Clark in the Ashes 2006/07. He bowled aswell as McGrath ever has during that series. Of course, Clark isn't anywhere near as good as McGrath overall, but Clark was phenonmenal during that series. I wouldn't write off McGrath or Warne, no matter what age they were at. They were still mighty fine bowlers, who were complemented well by Lee & Clark.

To say that the modern bowling attacks aren't as strong as the 70s, 80s or 90s is the biggest myth in cricket. In the 70s & 80s, the actual bowlers of 70s & 80s were better then the bowlers of the modern age, but overall, bowling attacks of the modern day are better, because despite having better bowlers, they were surrounded by crap (except Windies & for a small period of time England). The only 3 bowling attacks that haven't had atleast 3 decent bowlers in the side since 2000 is Bangladesh, Zimbabwe & West Indies.

Yeah I am suggesting just that. McGrath had done all the damage he could conceivably do in his spell, and while Warne was great in that series, he wasn't as great a bowler as he was in his pomp. He was probably more cunning, but I don't think he was greater as such.

Stuart Clark bowled well in the 06-07 series, but wasn't up to McGrath-at-his-best standards imo.

We differ on the issue of strength of bowling attacks then. It's a real batsman's era atm in my opinion, but these things tend to be cyclical.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Yeah I am suggesting just that. McGrath had done all the damage he could conceivably do in his spell, and while Warne was great in that series, he wasn't as great a bowler as he was in his pomp. He was probably more cunning, but I don't think he was greater as such.

Stuart Clark bowled well in the 06-07 series, but wasn't up to McGrath-at-his-best standards imo.

We differ on the issue of strength of bowling attacks then. It's a real batsman's era atm in my opinion, but these things tend to be cyclical.

I strongly disagree with your sentiment that Warne wasn't at his very best during the 2005 Ashes. Was superb on surfaces that offered very little to him, his control was great and he truly got the ball to rip. He definately wasn't one of those cricketers who showed much detieteration and was great for the majority of his career. In the '05 Ashes, Warne took more wickets then he ever has in a Test series.

 

[oitoitoi]

No.

Just no.

He played well vs Warne and McGrath when both were past their best. He certainly didn't master McGrath (I often stick on the video of McGrath hitting him in the ribs in that ODI at Melbourne for a giggle when I'm feeling a bit down) and even though he played some fine knocks v Warne, there's always Adelaide day 5 in the equation as well.

He's a fine player to be sure, but not in the top 100, or anywhere near it, right now. He's played all his cricket in an era where bowling has been relatively weak, on flat decks and with cannon-like bats. Just because he slog-swept someone for a most unorthodox six doesn't mean he belongs in the top 100.

Of course, by the time he finishes he may well be up there, but I wouldn't have him there right now. .

Totally AWTA.

 

[Burgey]

I strongly disagree with your sentiment that Warne wasn't at his very best during the 2005 Ashes. Was superb on surfaces that offered very little to him, his control was great and he truly got the ball to rip. He definately wasn't one of those cricketers who showed much detieteration and was great for the majority of his career. In the '05 Ashes, Warne took more wickets then he ever has in a Test series.

Cool then, we'll differ on this one

 

[oitoitoi]

Only Tendulkar has played McGrath & Warne (apart from a few Indians, who played played Warne better but not McGrath) better then what Pietersen has. I wouldn't say that even Lara did as well, because there were many times where Warne & McGrath were allover him. Pietersen also has a good record against Muttiah Muralitharan. Hell, out of any player that has played more then 10 Tests against McGrath & Warne - Pietersen has the highest average.

Pietersen's record against murali was is only good in the 2 tests he played in may in england, after that it's poor, also he was poor in Sri Lanka which is the key. Lara and Tendulkar (Lara especially) have been awesome/good in sri lanka i.e. they've done it in Murali's back yard, even Pietersen recognises that runs away are much more valuable to your career than runs at home. Can't say I remember Warne ever being 'all over' lara, Pietersen definitely faced him past his best, 05 included, he was well past it in 06/07. No other player played 10 tests against those 2 when they were so past their prime (and he hasn't actually played 10 tests against mcgrath). Personally I'm 100% convinced that he would have seriously struggled against ambrose, mcgrath (the broken ribs ball is exactly what I'm talking about), donald at their peaks, or even just when not in decline. Their strengths (ability to deliver balls consistently full or back of a length on off stump) are his weakness, even the likes of Dilhara Fernando and Jerome Taylor have troubled him with such deliveries, his off stump awareness is poor and his penchant for trying to work everything through midwicket would have gotten him out consistently against better bowlers. IMO he's the epitome of 50 being the new 40. Also Aravinda de Silva played them both pretty well too, well enough for Glenn to rate him in the best XI he's ever played.

 

[oitoitoi]

You have to bear in mind that with the 05 ashes (and pretty generally) England are truly hopeless against top quality spin. That merlin machine seemed to make them even worse than usual. Looking forward to when they next play Murali and Mendis.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Warne's achievement in bowling so well in the Ashes of 2005 was that he did so without the weapons that he used to have, and usually having to come onto bowl when there were little inroads made by the pace bowlers early (after Lords).

He bowled very well, but not as devastatingly and as well as he did in other tours, where his leg break was much more lethal and he had far more weapons.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Pietersen's record against murali was is only good in the 2 tests he played in may in england, after that it's poor, also he was poor in Sri Lanka which is the key. Lara and Tendulkar (Lara especially) have been awesome/good in sri lanka i.e. they've done it in Murali's back yard, even Pietersen recognises that runs away are much more valuable to your career than runs at home. Can't say I remember Warne ever being 'all over' lara, Pietersen definitely faced him past his best, 05 included, he was well past it in 06/07. No other player played 10 tests against those 2 when they were so past their prime (and he hasn't actually played 10 tests against mcgrath). Personally I'm 100% convinced that he would have seriously struggled against ambrose, mcgrath (the broken ribs ball is exactly what I'm talking about), donald at their peaks, or even just when not in decline. Their strengths (ability to deliver balls consistently full or back of a length on off stump) are his weakness, even the likes of Dilhara Fernando and Jerome Taylor have troubled him with such deliveries, his off stump awareness is poor and his penchant for trying to work everything through midwicket would have gotten him out consistently against better bowlers. IMO he's the epitome of 50 being the new 40. Also Aravinda de Silva played them both pretty well too, well enough for Glenn to rate him in the best XI he's ever played.

I really fail to see how you think Warne was past it in 2005, when he took more wickets in that Ashes series then he ever did before? Not only that, but he actually took those wickets against a team that was challenging Australia, so that counts for more. Warne was never well past it, nor was McGrath.

Epitome of 50 being the new 40? That's why he single-handedly carries the English batting lineup and performs well against the best opposition? Note, he only got troubled by the short-ball because he ran at Glenn McGrath? Pietersen is one of the few of the modern era who deserves a 50+ average. I'd only take Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Hayden, Dravid & Kallis ahead of Pietersen from this generation.

 

[oitoitoi]

I really fail to see how you think Warne was past it in 2005, when he took more wickets in that Ashes series then he ever did before? Not only that, but he actually took those wickets against a team that was challenging Australia, so that counts for more. Warne was never well past it, nor was McGrath.

Epitome of 50 being the new 40? That's why he single-handedly carries the English batting lineup and performs well against the best opposition? Note, he only got troubled by the short-ball because he ran at Glenn McGrath? Pietersen is one of the few of the modern era who deserves a 50+ average. I'd only take Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara, Hayden, Dravid & Kallis ahead of Pietersen from this generation.

What you don't rate Sangakkarra (IMO the best test bat around right now, except for perhaps sachin) or Yousuf? Jayawardene ain't bad either? I'm not saying pietersen is bad at the short ball, he's bad at the back of a length ball (that delivery was back of a length really) on off stump, especially if it moves a bit. Please note he hasn't really performed against the 'best' opposition 06/07 aside (even that attack wasn't taht good really with warne and macgrath on their last test quality legs), there haven't been to many top class bowlers around for him to face. He's generally struggled against the top bowlers outside england. Steyn this winter and johnson this summer are big tests, if he passes them I shan't have a word against him and shall be filled with praise. My opinon of pietersen is that he cashes in really really well when the conditions and bowling suit him (very entertaining to watch in such conditions), but quite reliably fails when they don't, that jamaica match was a prime example, by the 2nd innings it had become low and skiddy, taylor got one full on off swinging away, kp tried to muscle it through the on side instead of defending and off stump went for a walk. IRC he's never gotten the richy benaud accolade like tendulkar, lara, sangakkarra, dravid or even recently JP Duminy, that's always a pretty good acid test.

 

[Migara]

Charged up - That's like saying that bowling to Gilchrist, Gayle, Sehwag, etc are harder to bowl then Tendulkar, Lara & Ponting, because they are all more destructive then the latter when onform. Then again, facing Shoaib Akhtar and Brett Lee is equally as tough as facing Donald, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose and Walsh because they were faster. Hell, Akhtar on form was as good as any bowler that has ever played the game because he could bowl inswinging yorkers at 155kph.

Unfortunately you are talking rubbish. We all know McGrath was unable to produce quick demolition jobs that above bowles were famous of, at least McGrath did it lot less than the above. Spells like & wickets for 1 run (Ambrose), we have not seen from McGrath. But he was always getting his 4-4 top order wickets per innings, and due to that he's a great. And you'll definitely agree that when Gilchrist and Sehwag are on offensive, they are much harder to bowl than Hayden or Tendulkar, but the latter are more consistent. Same case with McGrath.

BTW, your claim for Pietersen being 'cooked for dinner' by Murali in Sri Lanka is a load of rubbish. Murali dismissed Pietersen twice in 6 innings and his 3 other dismissals were all from pace bowlers. He also averaged 25 not under 20.

Why don't you look at the original post, and see it was edited long time back? The way you reply implies that you have not seen that series. Murali pressurized him so much, that his wafted outside off to Vaas and got out once. Other two occasions he sledged and provocated Fernado and Malinga, and got two jaffas from them (who are pretty docile creatures being fast bowlers). Murali was just weaving the magic around him.

Not only that, even in ODIs and T20s after that, Murali kept on picking up Pietersen almost every time they met.