MrPrez
International Debutant
This.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Which 4 heads would you put on a cricketing Mount Rushmore?
- Thread starter mr_mister
- Start date
smash84
The Tiger King
This.
Imran is head of state now, so his name should be first on Mt Rushmore. All other pretenders can suck it
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Does it still count if he's been **** at it thoughThis.
Imran is head of state now, so his name should be first on Mt Rushmore. All other pretenders can suck it
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
Mt. Rushmore was sculpted on stolen Indian lands.
Teddy Roosevelt was a good friend of the sculptor, Gutzon Borglum.
That's the only reason he's there...lol
Teddy Roosevelt was a good friend of the sculptor, Gutzon Borglum.
That's the only reason he's there...lol
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
England
Grace , Hobbs , Barnes , Botham
Unlucky - Ranji , Hammond , Hutton
Australia
Bradman , Lillee , Warne , Miller
Unlucky - McGrath , Trumper
South Africa
Procter , G.Pollock , Richards , Kallis
Unlucky - Steyn , Rice
West Indies
Sobers , Viv , Lara , Marshall
Unlucky - headley
India
Sachin , Gavaskar , Kapil , Dhoni
Unlucky - kohli
Pakistan
Imran , Akram , Waqar , Miandad
Unlucky - Hanif
Sri Lanka
Murali , Sanga , De Silva , Jayasurya
Grace , Hobbs , Barnes , Botham
Unlucky - Ranji , Hammond , Hutton
Australia
Bradman , Lillee , Warne , Miller
Unlucky - McGrath , Trumper
South Africa
Procter , G.Pollock , Richards , Kallis
Unlucky - Steyn , Rice
West Indies
Sobers , Viv , Lara , Marshall
Unlucky - headley
India
Sachin , Gavaskar , Kapil , Dhoni
Unlucky - kohli
Pakistan
Imran , Akram , Waqar , Miandad
Unlucky - Hanif
Sri Lanka
Murali , Sanga , De Silva , Jayasurya
mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Sri Lankas is real easy isn't it lol. Possibly Vaas unlucky due to being insanely far ahead of their next best paceman
Zimbabwe
Houghton, Andy Flower, Grant Flower, Streak
Bangladesh
Bashar, Tamim, Shakib, Mushy
Afghanistan
Nabi, Afghan/Stanzaki, Rashid, Shahzad
Ireland
Kevin O'Brien, Niall O'Brien, Joyce, Stirling
Kenya
Tikolo, Odumbe, Otenio, Odoyo
Zimbabwe
Houghton, Andy Flower, Grant Flower, Streak
Bangladesh
Bashar, Tamim, Shakib, Mushy
Afghanistan
Nabi, Afghan/Stanzaki, Rashid, Shahzad
Ireland
Kevin O'Brien, Niall O'Brien, Joyce, Stirling
Kenya
Tikolo, Odumbe, Otenio, Odoyo
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
Bangladesh:
Rafique, Mortaza, Shakib, Tamim
Windies:
Sir Frank Worrell, Sir Garry Sobers, Rohan Bholalall Kanhai, Malcolm Marshall
Rafique, Mortaza, Shakib, Tamim
Windies:
Sir Frank Worrell, Sir Garry Sobers, Rohan Bholalall Kanhai, Malcolm Marshall
a massive zebra
International Captain
Reasons for picking Kanhai over Headley, Weekes, Richards, Ambrose, Lara etc?
a massive zebra
International Captain
I think it is ridiculous to pick two guys with a combined total of 11 Tests over someone who was the undisputed number one fast bowler in the world for many years and has the best strike rate of any bowler with over 200 wickets. Of course Procter and Richards had the talent, but they simply did not get the chance to prove themselves at Test level and should not be in contention here. If we go by first class stats, George Hirst, Tich Freeman, Bob Appleyard, Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash should be seriously considered for England, which of course is absurd.
Last edited:
a massive zebra
International Captain
If it was Tests only, I think I might pick Mahela over Jayasuriya. Obviously Jayasuriya was leagues ahead in ODIs and that gives him the edge as an overall cricketer.
Last edited:
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
The same reason Teddy Roosevelt is on the real Mt Rushmore.
It's based on the bias. Kanhai's hometown is a few villages away from mine
andruid
Cricketer Of The Year
Had to make those adjustments cause there legit are two Tikolos, two Odumbes, and a **** load of Otienos in Kenyan Cricket
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
Killamanjaro!
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
If you include super tests Barry Richards played 9 tests between 8 yrs and averaged 75 .
Available evidences suggests he is an ATG.
Mike procter
Tests 7
25 with bat , 15 with ball
Row Vs England
5 matches
48.7 with bat , 23.9 with ball
Super Tests
4 matches
30.3 with bat 16 with ball
16 matches .. more than a decade .. Procter clearly among greatest of the allrounders.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
This for the World Mt Rushmore.
Each country has its own:
Aus:
Trumper
Bradman
Benaud
Warne
Eng:
Grace
Jardine
Hobbs
Anderson
SA:
Nourse
G Pollock
Kallis
Steyn
Ind:
Mankad
Kapil
Tendulkar
Kohli
Pak:
Younis Khan
Imran
Wasim
Waqar
WI:
Headley
Sobers
Worrell
Marshall
SL:
Ranatunga
Murali
Sangakkara
Herath
NZ:
Hadlee
Crowe
Vettori
Williamson
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Some reasoning behind my picks.
The "Mt Rushmore" is not about stats, but about influence. For Australia, Trumper, Bradman and Benaud pick themselves. The final spot was between Border and Warne. Warne pips him just because Border wouldn't want the limelight anyway and Warne is one of those guys who the universe seems to gravitate around. Warne's superstar factor wins it for him.
England get Grace, Jardine and Hobbs, who were instant picks. For the fourth pick I wanted someone who had played in modern times. That really (IMO) made the choice between Anderson and Botham. Botham probably should have got the nod, but Anderson now has the world record for number of wickets from a non-spin bowler. He's the quintessential English bowler and honestly has been responsible for more English wins than any other bowler. I could easily accept someone picking Botham over him though.
South Africa was relatively straight forward. Nourse was their best player for most of their early history. G Pollock was the face of what could have been were it not for apartheid. Kallis was one of the two greatest batting all rounders of all time. The best South African batsman by far for a very long time and a bowler who would make it as a third seamer in most sides around the world. Steyn picks himself.
India was easy too. Mankad is the only player in the game's history to have something named after him. He's also an early Indian superstar with the bat as well. Kapil or Gavaskar was the next choice and Kapil wins out on account of him being the reason India did so well in the 1983 WC, which kicked off India's love affair with the sport. Tendulkar was Tendulkar and can't be left off. Kohli is the new Tendulkar.
Pakistan was harder. Imran, Wasim and Waqar pick themselves. I was torn between Miandad, Misbah and Younis for the final spot. I went with Younis more for the weight of runs and the fact that I didn't want all 4 players to have overlapping records. Misbah was very unlucky given his services to the sport.
The West Indies was the hardest of all. Headley was easy. The "black Bradman", he was the most notable early pioneer of West Indian cricket. Sobers picks himself. Worrell simply has to be there. So that leaves one spot for Marshall and Richards. In the end I didn't feel right about a West Indian Rushmore without a fast bowler on it. So Marshall just pips Richards for the final spot.
Sri Lanka was easy. Murali and Herath are miles ahead of the rest of their bowlers and were by far the MVP in their side during their careers. Sangakkara was their best bat of all time. The final spot was therefore between Ranatunga and de Silva. But I decided that Rantunga gets it, in spite of how much I personally preferred de Silva as a player. Ranatunga was the bloke who stood up for Sri Lanka and gave them their two biggest coming of age moments - walking off when Murali was called for chucking and winning the 1996 WC. He was the leader that made Sri Lanka a cricketing nation.
New Zealand was straightforward. Their two best bowlers. Their two best batsmen. Fleming possibly a shade unlucky given his reputation, but he wasn't that influential really.
The "Mt Rushmore" is not about stats, but about influence. For Australia, Trumper, Bradman and Benaud pick themselves. The final spot was between Border and Warne. Warne pips him just because Border wouldn't want the limelight anyway and Warne is one of those guys who the universe seems to gravitate around. Warne's superstar factor wins it for him.
England get Grace, Jardine and Hobbs, who were instant picks. For the fourth pick I wanted someone who had played in modern times. That really (IMO) made the choice between Anderson and Botham. Botham probably should have got the nod, but Anderson now has the world record for number of wickets from a non-spin bowler. He's the quintessential English bowler and honestly has been responsible for more English wins than any other bowler. I could easily accept someone picking Botham over him though.
South Africa was relatively straight forward. Nourse was their best player for most of their early history. G Pollock was the face of what could have been were it not for apartheid. Kallis was one of the two greatest batting all rounders of all time. The best South African batsman by far for a very long time and a bowler who would make it as a third seamer in most sides around the world. Steyn picks himself.
India was easy too. Mankad is the only player in the game's history to have something named after him. He's also an early Indian superstar with the bat as well. Kapil or Gavaskar was the next choice and Kapil wins out on account of him being the reason India did so well in the 1983 WC, which kicked off India's love affair with the sport. Tendulkar was Tendulkar and can't be left off. Kohli is the new Tendulkar.
Pakistan was harder. Imran, Wasim and Waqar pick themselves. I was torn between Miandad, Misbah and Younis for the final spot. I went with Younis more for the weight of runs and the fact that I didn't want all 4 players to have overlapping records. Misbah was very unlucky given his services to the sport.
The West Indies was the hardest of all. Headley was easy. The "black Bradman", he was the most notable early pioneer of West Indian cricket. Sobers picks himself. Worrell simply has to be there. So that leaves one spot for Marshall and Richards. In the end I didn't feel right about a West Indian Rushmore without a fast bowler on it. So Marshall just pips Richards for the final spot.
Sri Lanka was easy. Murali and Herath are miles ahead of the rest of their bowlers and were by far the MVP in their side during their careers. Sangakkara was their best bat of all time. The final spot was therefore between Ranatunga and de Silva. But I decided that Rantunga gets it, in spite of how much I personally preferred de Silva as a player. Ranatunga was the bloke who stood up for Sri Lanka and gave them their two biggest coming of age moments - walking off when Murali was called for chucking and winning the 1996 WC. He was the leader that made Sri Lanka a cricketing nation.
New Zealand was straightforward. Their two best bowlers. Their two best batsmen. Fleming possibly a shade unlucky given his reputation, but he wasn't that influential really.