Who is the Best "Cricketer" Ever?

[Red]

(do you really believe that Marshall, Imran khan, Garner, Botham, Holding, Roberts, Dev, Hadlee,and co would've allowed him to avg 100 in 100 tests in their intimidating era?)

I don't really see any reason to think Bradman wouldn't have averaged around 100 in that era.

Playing against India he'd only have to contend with seeing off Dev. See off Hadlee and NZ don't have much else. See off Imran and its not too tough against Pakistan. Batting against England in that era was pretty easy.

But even if we come up with some random "adjusted" number, such as 85, or 87, or 79, the fact is he's still a **** load better than anyone else.

 

[centurymaker]

I don't really see any reason to think Bradman wouldn't have averaged around 100 in that era.

Playing against India he'd only have to contend with seeing off Dev. See off Hadlee and NZ don't have much else. See off Imran and its not too tough against Pakistan. Batting against England in that era was pretty easy.

But even if we come up with some random "adjusted" number, such as 85, or 87, or 79, the fact is he's still a **** load better than anyone else.

No one is denying the bolded part.

 

[Plumbinfront]

Lohmann and Bradman have significant average advantages in their specific disciplines, but no one in the history of cricket quite combined the two disciplines in the manner Jacques Henry Kallis did IMHO. He has a batting record comparable if not better than Tendulkar and Sobers and he has a bowling record that is easily comparable to blokes like Jimmy Anderson, Zaheer Khan and the like. That is just incredible. Add to it his slip catching which is again beyond compare (Mark Waugh was perhaps an equal) and his ODI record and you have a clear winner.

 

[Red]

Lohmann and Bradman have significant average advantages in their specific disciplines, but no one in the history of cricket quite combined the two disciplines in the manner Jacques Henry Kallis did IMHO. He has a batting record comparable if not better than Tendulkar and Sobers and he has a bowling record that is easily comparable to blokes like Jimmy Anderson, Zaheer Khan and the like. That is just incredible. Add to it his slip catching which is again beyond compare (Mark Waugh was perhaps an equal) and his ODI record and you have a clear winner.

Fair points. Would you have him in your ATG side?

 

[Plumbinfront]

Fair points. Would you have him in your ATG side?

Most certainly, mate.

 

[centurymaker]

I feel Kallis has had sort of like two halves as an allrounder-

one where he was very good with the bat and more than good with the ball

and the other where he has been great/excellent with the bat and merely okay with the ball.

 

[centurymaker]

Fair points. Would you have him in your ATG side?

Not really, mainly because of way he batted until around 2007 (2 thirds of his career)

His SR was 42. Since then, however, he has been excellent! (I am sure IPL has played a huge role in helping him play more freely, as well as the emergence of AB, Amla and co..)

He's been amazing overall though.

 

[Coronis]

I'd have Sobers over him. But thats me.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

It's funny - people come along every now and then with some "controversial" theory suggesting Bradman's numbers are somehow hyper-inflated in a way that no other batsman's are and that when you adjust for era, opposition, playing conditions, bowling quality and the number of spanners in a Sidchrome tool kit he's not actually that much better than anyone else. As though no one had though of that kind of analysis before.

The truth is, people (in both official and unofficial capacities) have been conducting studies along these lines for years - adjusting for all those factors and more - and the one thing that remains consistent through all of them is the end result, which is always that Bradman is absolutely miles ahead of any other batsman in Test history.

I personally think Bradman is the greatest cricketer - and, statistically, possibly the greatest sportsman - of all time. However, I can see the case for Sobers or Grace or Imran for example and if someone wants to extol their abilities and achievements to argue for them that's fine and I'll respect that. But don't just invent reasons to speculatively reduce Bradman's average (but conveniently no one else's) and then judge him on that, because you think his actual average is too high and can't possibly be true.

Don't think Bradman is statistically the greatest sportsman.

 

[Red]

I'd have Sobers over him. But thats me.

So would I. There's possibly room for both, but it's a given I'm going to have Bradman at 3, and Sobers at 6 (most people would agree). Personally, I want Viv at 5.

That leaves the number four spot open for a batsman. I tend towards one of Tendulkar, Lara, Hammond or G.Chappell for that spot.

 

[Coronis]

Don't think Bradman is statistically the greatest sportsman.

Who then?

 

[centurymaker]

Who then?

If you think about it, Bradman isn't miles ahead of the all-rounders that are being discussed here.

However, if you looked at just batting, then you have a case.

 

[Red]

If you think about it, Bradman isn't miles ahead of the all-rounders that are being discussed here.

However, if you looked at just batting, then you have a case.

Bradman is miles ahead. Miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiles.

 

[BackFootPunch]

If Bradman isn't the best cricketer then there's no way you can definitively call any other player the best ever. Bradman is pretty much the only one whose career, stats, achievements etc. are compelling enough to put him above anyone else.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Who then?

Jahangir Khan. He won 555 games consecutively over a period of 5 years in squash (a sport more physically demanding than cricket, football, tennis, etc). This is the largest winning streak by a sportsman or a team. At one point he was known as the fittest man on the planet.

To me he is the greatest sportsman in history.

 

[benchmark00]

Jahangir Khan. He won 555 games consecutively over a period of 5 years in squash (a sport more physically demanding than cricket, football, tennis, etc). This is the largest winning streak by a sportsman or a team. At one point he was known as the fittest man on the planet.

To me he is the greatest sportsman in history.

Heather McKay > whoever that bloke is

 

[benchmark00]

"When she retired in 1981 at the age of 40, McKay had gone nearly 20 years undefeated (with the only two defeats to her name occurring at the beginning of her career). Since retiring from the top-level game, she has remained active in international Masters level events, and has won two over-45 world championship titles and two over-50 world championship titles."

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Why are you bringing female sport into this?

 

[benchmark00]

Imran Khan had been brought up so I thought that was all the rage.

 

[Gowza]

don't care that he did play much international cricket, procter, one of the most gifted cricketers ever. bradman, gilchrist, sobers, miller, imran, murali up there.