"Greatest Ever" Lists - A Modern Evolution

[Agent Nationaux]

Oh AN. Deary me.

What? I'm sorry but I'm not going to accept a bunch of guys hype up some ancient guy that they have never even seen and go purely on his statistics which don't provide an accurate picture. Everyone knows that the more factors that are used in a mathematical model the more accurate the results are. For Grace not as many factors as Tendulkar or Ponting or Lara. One of the biggest factors missing from Graces time is the lack of competition.

 

[The Sean]

Agent Nationaux - I don't think we're going to change your mind on this so fair enough, it's your personal view no matter how much I might disagree with it. A genuine question - was your own top 25 list made up only of current or modern era players that you've seen? If not, who is the oldest player in your list?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

So what about the the advantages that modern players have compared to when Grace placed? Dodgey bowling actions, such as underarm bowling, mine field uncovered wickets, far lesser equipment.

Cricket helps batsmen more and more nowadays.

So bowlers with the skill level of Warne, Murali, Qadir, etc on raging turners aren't at all difficult to face, something Grace never had to. Bowlers are a lot more skilled than during the time of Grace and rely less on the pitch. Guys like Steyn, McGrath, etc could destroy batting line ups anywhere. And a brilliant ball doesn't need a sticky wicket to get someone out.

 

[GIMH]

The lack of competition appears that way because he was so dominant. But there's not much point me recycling the points that everyone else has already made and you have selectively ignored, but there is something very telling that you choose to keep comparing him to three very modern players.

 

[Flem274*]

So bowlers with the skill level of Warne, Murali, Qadir, etc on raging turners aren't at all difficult to face, something Grace never had to. Bowlers are a lot more skilled than during the time of Grace and rely less on the pitch. Guys like Steyn, McGrath, etc could destroy batting line ups anywhere. And a brilliant ball doesn't need a sticky wicket to get someone out.

R.I.P Craigos sig.

 

[fredfertang]

What? I'm sorry but I'm not going to accept a bunch of guys hype up some ancient guy that they have never even seen and go purely on his statistics which don't provide an accurate picture. Everyone knows that the more factors that are used in a mathematical model the more accurate the results are. For Grace not as many factors as Tendulkar or Ponting or Lara. One of the biggest factors missing from Graces time is the lack of competition.

There's a wee bit more to it than statistics, but the stats support the case that the memories of those who did see him play don't lie, but there's not a lot of point in hammering away on a closed door AN, so I'll leave you be in the DVD age

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Agent Nationaux - I don't think we're going to change your mind on this so fair enough, it's your personal view no matter how much I might disagree with it. A genuine question - was your own top 25 list made up only of current or modern era players that you've seen? If not, who is the oldest player in your list?

Bradman. I don't at all doubt his performance or average as being the greatest ever, but with Grace you are just pushing it a bit too much I think. Most of my list was fairly modern.

 

[smash84]

What? I'm sorry but I'm not going to accept a bunch of guys hype up some ancient guy that they have never even seen and go purely on his statistics which don't provide an accurate picture. Everyone knows that the more factors that are used in a mathematical model the more accurate the results are. For Grace not as many factors as Tendulkar or Ponting or Lara. One of the biggest factors missing from Graces time is the lack of competition.

Did you see Bradman play?

 

[smash84]

I see that you have answered that question already.

So the "modern" era to you begins from Bradman

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I admit that you can't really put a line in terms of eras but competition during Bradmans time was much better than Graces.

 

[zaremba]

I'm sorry but I'm not going to accept a bunch of guys hype up some ancient guy that they have never even seen and go purely on his statistics which don't provide an accurate picture

Yeah. I blame the guy who brought up the question of Grace's stats in the first place:

I never understand why people rate WG Grace so highly as a cricketer. No one alive has seen him play and his statistics aren't the greatest like Bradman or Sobers.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

How else do you judge him Mr Zaremba?

 

[wellAlbidarned]

This is the most spectacular case of flip-flopping I've ever seen. Are you a Salmon, by any chance?

 

[smash84]

you mean he has done a Cevno

 

[Agent Nationaux]

How is it flip flopping? His statistics aren't the greatest because not enough factors used such as multiple test playing nations, hence less competition and conditions. But at the same time there isn't any other way to judge him. So we shouldn't rate him higher than Sachin or Ponting or Kallis.

 

[marc71178]

You do realise Cricket is about more than ****ing statistics don't you?

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Even though that's true, the "his statistics aren't even good" argument has already been debunked USING STATS multiple times in this thread already.

 

[Flem274*]

 

[Agent Nationaux]

So I ask the question again, how else are you all judging Grace. Nobody has seen him play.

 

[Flem274*]

I measured his beard.