Brian Lara a true Gent

[smash84]

Of course you can't pick your team based on that but you don't pick your team based on who is a good slip fielder either.

 

[karan316]

Pakistani batting great, Hanif Mohammed recently said "I am one of those fortunate people who has seen both Bradman and Tendulkar bat in my lifetime and in my opinion Tendulkar is the best batsman I have seen in my life". Do you agree to this?

I think that is not the question here. I can understand a lot of posters here analyse the game well and their views are very good at times. But when it comes to ex cricketers or experts, you can't just pass unwanted comments because you don't like what they said, I know a minority (5 or 10 percent) of them might be biased or sometimes get carried away and say some nonsense, but most of them have more knowledge than any of the keyboard warriors who post online.

Regarding Lara, you can't just make fun of him coz he rates Sachin so highly.

And Hanif Mohammed might be suggesting about the videos of Bradman that he might have seen.

 

[kyear2]

No

The second half was sarcasm.

 

[kyear2]

Of course you can't pick your team based on that but you don't pick your team based on who is a good slip fielder either.

Not as the primary criteria, but certainly as a tie breaker between otherwise equal candidates.

The same way a bowlers batting prowess alone wouldn't get him selected, but can be used as a tie breaker between similar candidates.

 

[smash84]

yes, but it is extremely difficult to split fielding between any two good fielders which is usually not the case in bowling or batting.

 

[Red]

I'd choose Greg Chappell at #4 over Sachin in an ATG team. No doubt. Better (ok, equal) batsman, and a great slip fielder. Slip fielding is vital, and anyone who thinks it isn't is deluded.

 

[centurymaker]

Thats just you though.

Very large majority of ex crickters and cricket fans would go with Tendukar in a blink.

 

[harsh.ag]

Chappell was very easy on the eye. There isn't much between him and Tendulkar at all. His performances in WSC, however little they might mean to some here, were staggering. He was a model of consistency, save for a couple of years. But would I want him in a team ahead of Sachin and another great number 4, Graeme Pollock? Nope. If I was looking for a specialist number 5, neither of Lara and Richards would be there. They did their best work at number 3. It would probably be Waugh,Border or (as today's cricinfo article suggests) Chanders.

 

[watson]

Chappell was very easy on the eye. There isn't much between him and Tendulkar at all. His performances in WSC, however little they might mean to some here, were staggering. He was a model of consistency, save for a couple of years. But would I want him in a team ahead of Sachin and another great number 4, Graeme Pollock? Nope. If I was looking for a specialist number 5, neither of Lara and Richards would be there. They did their best work at number 3. It would probably be Waugh,Border or (as today's cricinfo article suggests) Chanders.

If specialists are needed then the ATG batting order should have the batsman with the highest average in each batting position;

Blogs: Batsmen with highest averages at each position in Tests | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

01. Herbert Sutcliffe - 61.11
02. Len Hutton - 56.48
03. Don Bradman - 103.63
04. Everton Weekes - 63.62
05. Steve Waugh - 56.28
06. Shivnarine Chandrpaul - 65.94 (updated)
07. Adam Gilchrist - 46.45
08. Bowler
09. Bowler
10. Bowler
11. Bowler

Note: Daniel Vettori comfortably wins the No.8 spot with an average of 42.29 for that position. Not an ATG bowler though. Next best are Boucher and Kapil Dev.

The above author has qualified each batting position with a minimum number of runs. For example, Openers must have scored >3000 runs, and No.4s >2000 runs. If that qualification is removed, and we make 20 innings the cut-off then the line-up would look like the following - from what I can gather;

01. Herbert Sutcliffe - 61.11
02. Len Hutton - 56.47
03. Don Bradman - 103.63
04. Garry Sobers - 63.75
05. Frank Worrell - 59.45
06. Shivnarine Chanderpaul - 65.94
07. Adam Gilchrist - 46.45 / Brian McMillan - 58.38
08. Bowler
09. Bowler
10. Bowler
11. Bowler



Brian Lara's natural batting position appears to be No.4 if his percentage of runs in that position are also taken into account - not just his higher average at No.3;

Blogs: Test batting position averages: a follow-up | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[kyear2]

Actually believe Sobers would make an ideal #4 in an ATG lineup. Especially in a line up of
Hobbs
Richards
Bradman
Sobers
Tendulkar
Gilchrist
Imran
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Muralitharan

 

[Red]

Thats just you though.

Very large majority of ex crickters and cricket fans would go with Tendukar in a blink.

Anyone who wanted to pander to the massive Indian fanbase obviously would. Tendulkar is a great, no doubting that at all.

But if you want to write an article or a quote that'll generate readers and therefore advertising $$, select Tendulkar.

IMO opinion Tendulkar and G.Chappell are on par as batsmen.

 

[uvelocity]

Done time for a crime that didn't deserve time, now a symbol of unity across the land.

Will be played by Morgan Freeman in the motion picture.

only because clyde from any which way but loose cbf

 

[kyear2]

Anyone who wanted to pander to the massive Indian fanbase obviously would. Tendulkar is a great, no doubting that at all.

But if you want to write an article or a quote that'll generate readers and therefore advertising $$, select Tendulkar.

IMO opinion Tendulkar and G.Chappell are on par as batsmen.

More or less I agree.

 

[smash84]

I'd choose Greg Chappell at #4 over Sachin in an ATG team. No doubt. Better (ok, equal) batsman, and a great slip fielder. Slip fielding is vital, and anyone who thinks it isn't is deluded.

Who said it isn't important but you don't get into sides based on something so subjective. If somebody thinks that slip fielding is the most important factor in team selection then they are deluded.

 

[centurymaker]

Anyone who wanted to pander to the massive Indian fanbase obviously would. Tendulkar is a great, no doubting that at all.

But if you want to write an article or a quote that'll generate readers and therefore advertising $$, select Tendulkar.

IMO opinion Tendulkar and G.Chappell are on par as batsmen.

You talk about objectivity and yet you see no difference between someone like Tendulkar playing for 24 years and Chappell who only played about half as long, which was 13 years. It's true that playing longer allowed Tendulkar to amass his tallies but he maintained his excellence more or less throughout. If someone else had tried to play that long, they wouldn't have even finished with a 50+ average. Moreover, it's easy to ignore or dismiss that no cricketer in the history of the game has had to deal with more pressure and expectations but the reality is that having such a following is a big obstacle to deal with and that too for so long. It would wear anyone down. Anything less than a 100 was treated as a failure. Look at Dhoni, he's now had white hair for a good 3 years, yet he's still so young.

It's funny how he performed and looked much better in his final innings than he had in the last 2 years. I think the knowledge that it didn't matter what he got since it was his last innings allowed him to play with freedom and entertain like he used to. This shows what an impact expectations can have on you. Also the periods the struggled the most in his career were when he was going from 34 tons to 35 to break sunny's record, and when he was trying to get the 100th ton, which is again evidence of what a difficult thing expectation is to bear. Only haters or illogical people would play down such significant things. You always hear commentators and media talking about him carrying the weight of expectations of 100s of millions of fans. They are not stupid. They know Tendulkar has had it much harder in this sense at least.

Back to Sachin v Chappell-
it's 200 Tests vs 87 Tests. And out of the 87 Chappell played, 55 were at home and just 4 in the Subcontinent. Furthermore, Chappell retired relatively early at 35, while Tendulkar began early at 16 and retired late at age 40. How he has managed to maintain his stats over such length is mind-boggling. It's an easy thing to do to retire early and preserve your stats so that you are remembered better.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

And I am not even taking in account the millions of ODIs Tendulkar has played and contributed so much in that format. You may ignore ODIs too but ODIs appealled to a far great audience over his career and were seen just as important in the Sub-continent, so Tendulkar delivered there as well.

Hence, for me at least there's no way Chappell is above Tendulkar.

 

[centurymaker]

it is a big nuisance handling indian fans.

 

[watson]

Greg Chappell began with an average of 56.00 after his first ever Test match against the West Indies in 1973, and finished with an overall average of 56.00 against the West Indies in 1982 (nice coincidence). In all, he played 17 Test matches against the West Indies, but after 12 Test matches averaged a superb 82.80 on the 5th December 1979;

1st Test: Australia v West Indies at Brisbane, Dec 1-5, 1979 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

It is this dominance of some pretty formidable pace bowlers for a large part of the 1970s that helps put Greg Chappell on the same level as the very best batsman. Including Sachin Tendulkar.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Can't wait for the equivalent thread about Kallis so that I can argue that weight of runs, longevity and wickets make him The Greatest Cricketer of All Time!!! Oh Yeah!!

 

[Teja.]

Greg Chappell began with an average of 56.00 after his first ever Test match against the West Indies in 1973, and finished with an overall average of 56.00 against the West Indies in 1982 (nice coincidence). In all, he played 17 Test matches against the West Indies, but after 12 Test matches averaged a superb 82.80 on the 5th December 1979;

1st Test: Australia v West Indies at Brisbane, Dec 1-5, 1979 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

It is this dominance of some pretty formidable pace bowlers for a large part of the 1970s that helps put Greg Chappell on the same level as the very best batsman. Including Sachin Tendulkar.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

If you had the choice to pick for Australia an ATG batsman for the next generation tomorrow, both would average about 55 and are remarkably complete batsman with no obvious and glaring weaknesses, one is slightly better at playing the best pace bowlers, one plays for 24 years, the other for 13, would you pretend that it is even a choice?

Unless of course, the value that a batsman adds to the team isn't a primary criterion to define greatness for you.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Slip fielding is vital,

It's important, yes

anyone who thinks it isn't is deluded.

Ridiculous. Don't enforce this on everyone. There will be people who think slip fielding as important as you. I think it's important but nowhere near 'vital' to have the best possible slip fielders in your side. As long as they're safe enough, it's ok