Greatest cricketers since 1980

[vcs]

Doesn't seem right to put Kallis in the same tier as Flintoff.

 

[Anil]

I quite like this list.

I'd probably have Laxman a tier lower, Pietersen not on it at all. And Crowe perhaps in tier 3.

I also reckon that the difference between tier 1 and tier 2 is probably the shortest gap in any of the stages. I would have Ponting, Border, Miandad and Dravid a rung lower than
the others but I'd say they only just miss out while they are far ahead of tier 3.

agreed about pietersen, i edited my list...

 

[Jono]

One LOL vs a successive rant about someone's subjective list? Get off my ****.

Lol, what did you think was going to happen in this thread? Bagapath ASKED for people to criticise his list.

CW... it's for discussion

 

[Jono]

Btw, don't be so sensitive Ikki. Thought you didn't like that as a fan.

 

[Himannv]

Kallis deserves to be Level 1 IMO. Far better than the likes of Flintoff, Stewart, Dhoni and Cairns.

 

[Spark]

Kallis earnt his spot in Level 1 a while ago.

 

[bagapath]

Kallis earnt his spot in Level 1 a while ago.

only if you consider onedayers. as a test all rounder he is in the hadlee class - which is great by the way - excellent in one discipline, merely effective in the other.

 

[Athlai]

Hadlee as a bowler > Kallis as a batsman

Get what you're saying though.

 

[Dissector]

I would definitely have Kallis, Pollock and Hadlee in the top tier.

 

[marc71178]

I guess it all depends on how big a tier you want.

If, as Bagapath has done, you only want 5 or 6 in the top tier then some players will have to drop down a level.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Only started watching in 1990 so my list is based on that. (excluding Imran,Hadlee et all who retired in the early 90s).

Greatest cricketers


Tier 1 (in no order)

1.Muralitharan
2.Shane Warne
3.Allan Donald
4.Glenn McGrath
5.Sachin Tendulkar
6.Brian Lara
7.Wasim Akram
8.Curtly Ambrose
9.Waqar Younis
10.Jacques Kallis

Tier 2 (again no particular order)

1.Ricky Ponting
2.Rahul Dravid
3.Dale Steyn
4.Shaun Pollock
5.Courtney Walsh
6.Mahela Jayawardene
7.Kumar Sangakkara
8.Virender Sehwag
9.Mathew Hayden
10.Adam Gilchrist


Tier 3 (no order)

1.Daniel Vettori
2.VVS Laxman
3.Anil Kumble
4.Shane Bond
5.Shoaib Akhtar
6.Mohammad Yosaf
7.Chaminda Vaas
8.Inzamam ul Haq
9.Sanath Jayasuriya
10.Chris Cairns

Tier 4 (no order)

1.Saeed Anwar
2.Sourav Ganguly
3.Andrew Flintoff
4.Harbhajan Singh
5.Saqlain Mustaq
6.Herschelle Gibbs
7.Mohammad Azharuddin
8.Mohammad Asif
9.Stephen Fleming
10.Justin Langer

Tier 1/2 were easy...3 and 4 are pretty much interchangable.

 

[honestbharani]

Agree mostly with all your lists, bags..


And I m too tired to be arguing on a player missing out on level 4 or shud have been in 3 rather than 4. For me, the greats matter.. Almost never try to rank the rest in any real order, for some reason.

 

[Ikki]

Lol, what did you think was going to happen in this thread? Bagapath ASKED for people to criticise his list.

CW... it's for discussion

Discussing it is fine but the tone Migara was giving to bagapath was not warranted.

Btw, don't be so sensitive Ikki. Thought you didn't like that as a fan.

I'm not, I just don't like guys on my lap.

 

[Kylez]

For the bowlers list I would have Gillespie in the number 3 group. If Reid and Mcdermott can make it, then so should he.

 

[Ikki]

Gavaskar's record post 80: Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

He's averaging 38 away from home, just a bridge too far for tier 1.

I don't see how people are placing him above Border, Waugh, Dravid, Ponting or Kallis.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Well, read Level 1 as all time greats. Level 2 as greats. Level 3 as very good. and Level 4 as "get the **** off my lawn"

AWTA
z

 

[weldone]

There's no way Ponting belongs in level two.

If Miandad, Border and Steve Waugh are there in level 2, I can't see how Ponting can be called 'unarguably' better than all of them (yes, against Dravid or Kallis I can see the point).
So, either keep Ponting in level 2, or keep all 3 of them in level 1, too. I chose the first option (otherwise, level 1 would have 9 players, which also sounds acceptable to me).

 

[weldone]

batsmen(no particular order except for the tiers)

tier 1

sachin tendulkar
brian lara
vivian richards
sunil gavaskar
greg chappell

tier 2

allan border
steve waugh
ricky ponting
javed miandad
rahul dravid

tier 3

mathew hayden
virender sehwag
kumar sangakkara
jacques kallis
v.v.s laxman

tier 4

aravinda de silva
andy flower
martin crowe
inzamam ul haq
graham gooch

This one seems wuite an acceptable list. Might swap Laxman and Inzamam there.

 

[GotSpin]

If Miandad, Border and Steve Waugh are there in level 2, I can't see how Ponting can be called 'unarguably' better than all of them (yes, against Dravid or Kallis I can see the point).
So, either keep Ponting in level 2, or keep all 3 of them in level 1, too. I chose the first option (otherwise, level 1 would have 9 players, which also sounds acceptable to me).

Arguably Ponting is just as good/equal to that of Tendulkar or Lara. I can see where you are coming from but I would say Ponting is a step ahead of Miandad, Border and Waugh.

 

[Ikki]

If Miandad, Border and Steve Waugh are there in level 2, I can't see how Ponting can be called 'unarguably' better than all of them (yes, against Dravid or Kallis I can see the point).
So, either keep Ponting in level 2, or keep all 3 of them in level 1, too. I chose the first option (otherwise, level 1 would have 9 players, which also sounds acceptable to me).

The problem is many of the other tier 1 players aren't 'unarguably' better than them also. Especially when you have Gavaskar in tier 1 and especially when you cannot split Ponting's contemporary opponents, in Tendulkar and Lara, with him.