DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

[TheJediBrah]

A lot of contrasts with the original AB actually

TOTAB:
- minimally talented
- soaked every bit of achievement from an ordinary side he could in his career
- gave everything for his country and served more than anyone could have expected

ABdV:
- immensely talented
- should have gotten more out of his career, never even reached a WC final despite being in one of the strongest sides
- abandoned his country in a time of relative need and left them in tatters relatively speaking


edit: don't want to come across as hating on ABdV here. Can't really fault him in any way as a cricketer or person from what little I'm aware of. I guess his hairline is a shocker so there is that

 

[Migara]

A lot of contrasts with the original AB actually

TOTAB:
- minimally talented
- soaked every bit of achievement from an ordinary side he could in his career
- gave everything for his country and served more than anyone could have expected

ABdV:
- immensely talented
- should have gotten more out of his career, never even reached a WC final despite being in one of the strongest sides
- abandoned his country in a time of relative need and left them in tatters relatively speaking


edit: don't want to come across as hating on ABdV here. Can't really fault him in any way as a cricketer or person from what little I'm aware of. I guess his hairline is a shocker so there is that

Sentimental point, but yeah, sentiments do have place in the game.

 

[Starfighter]

De Villers I think will always remembered as someone who should have done more, and quite rightly I think. Seems a bit mind-boggling that someone with his stupendous talent only just managed to scrape their average over 50 too. The most naturally talented and adaptable batsmen I have seen, but far from the most fulfilled career.

 

[sunilz]

All of Steve waugh, Dravid and Chanderpaul are getting slightly over rated in this ratings due to various reasons. Hope they come soon . None of them deserve top 15 positions imo. Kohli should be next.

 

[Cabinet96]

I think being one of the four best ever ODI batsman and getting up to 21st on a test only ranking is pretty good going. Says a lot that people still think he could've done more. I think it's somewhat understandable too. Probably in the top five batsmen ever when it comes to pure ability.

 

[ankitj]

AB's last year added greatly to his legacy. Screwed over both India and Australia in those series. Shame he didn't play more.

Yes. His stats, once adjusted for era, may be underwhelming but he could do things with bat very few batsmen could. When on song looked a class above his most celebrated contemporaries which included Kohli and Smith.

 

[Flem274*]

sunilz is so good. the aussies know they shouldnt but they just can't help themselves.

 

[trundler]

Days a lot about his talent when people say he underachieved with an average of 50. He wasn't even one of those patchy/inconsistent players. Just a very exciting batsman.

 

[Slifer]

All of Steve waugh, Dravid and Chanderpaul are getting slightly over rated in this ratings due to various reasons. Hope they come soon . None of them deserve top 15 positions imo. Kohli should be next.

Excuse me but Steve Waugh definitely deserves to be ranked in the top 15 if he ends up being ranked that high. He was the batting heart and soul that lead Australia to batting dominance in the 90s and this too vs world class attacks. He pretty much single handedly won Oz the 95 series in the WI, he also did well vs Pakistan's WW, and South Africa's Donald and Pollock (better than both Lara and SRT fwiw) etc.

 

[ankitj]

So top 20 will be made up of 5 English, 5 West Indian, 4 Australian, 4 Indian, 1 South African and 1 Sri Lankan.

 

[Spark]

Days a lot about his talent when people say he underachieved with an average of 50. He wasn't even one of those patchy/inconsistent players. Just a very exciting batsman.

He was a bit patchy/inconsistent for quite a while tbf.

 

[sunilz]

Excuse me but Steve Waugh definitely deserves to be ranked in the top 15 if he ends up being ranked that high. He was the batting heart and soul that lead Australia to batting dominance in the 90s and this too vs world class attacks. He pretty much single handedly won Oz the 95 series in the WI, he also did well vs Pakistan's WW, and South Africa's Donald and Pollock (better than both Lara and SRT fwiw) etc.

My main criticism of Waugh is that he should have batted in top 4 position. His average of 50 is boosted by lots of not outs. He was superior test batsman to Mark Waugh yet he batted below him . Imagine Tendulkar batting below
Laxman or Lara batting below Hooper . This is my opinion. You may disagree.

 

[stephen]

My main criticism of Waugh is that he should have batted in top 4 position. His average of 50 is boosted by lots of not outs. He was superior test batsman to Mark Waugh yet he batted below him . Imagine Tendulkar batting below
Laxman or Lara batting below Hooper . This is my opinion. You may disagree.

He batted in the position he felt most comfortable in. Australia had top quality openers for the 90s and 00s when Waugh was in his prime. Mark Waugh was definitely right for the number 4 position. So that means that he'd have had to bat 3, which Boon, Langer and Ponting were better suited to for much of his career.

I think in a weaker batting lineup Waugh may have batted higher out of necessity but number 5 suited his game and numbers 1-4 were mostly filled by players who were better suited to those roles.

 

[Coronis]

So top 20 will be made up of 5 English, 5 West Indian, 4 Australian, 4 Indian, 1 South African and 1 Sri Lankan.

Decadal Breakdown
1900’s 1
1910’s 1
1920’s 4
1930’s 5
1940’s 4
1950’s 4
1960’s 2
1970’s 3
1980’s 4
1990’s 7
2000’s 8
2010’s 8

Every country of those has been represented in the 21st century, except England. (not even close)

 

[ankitj]

1970s must be 3 – Sobers, Richards, Gavaskar.

 

[Coronis]

1970s must be 3 – Sobers, Richards, Gavaskar.

Right, forgot he made it to the 70’s.

 

[Slifer]

My main criticism of Waugh is that he should have batted in top 4 position. His average of 50 is boosted by lots of not outs. He was superior test batsman to Mark Waugh yet he batted below him . Imagine Tendulkar batting below
Laxman or Lara batting below Hooper . This is my opinion. You may disagree.

Really?? He batted where he batted because it was in the teams best interest. That has absolutely nothing to do with his output which in the context of his contemporaries was outstanding and peerless. And I honestly don't get the notout comment. Almost every top batsman's average takes a hit if not outs are removed.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Really?? He batted where he batted because it was in the teams best interest. That has absolutely nothing to do with his output which in the context of his contemporaries was outstanding and peerless.

It literally has everything to do with his output if he's getting fewer runs than his contemporaries despite averaging about the same. I'd have Waugh top 15 personally but yeah.

 

[sunilz]

Really?? He batted where he batted because it was in the teams best interest. That has absolutely nothing to do with his output which in the context of his contemporaries was outstanding and peerless. And I honestly don't get the notout comment. Almost every top batsman's average takes a hit if not outs are removed.

The difference between batting average and RPI for Steve Waugh is 9 . That is almost 18% of his batting average. Let's wait for 1 more week . We will know where he stands.

 

[Coronis]

Surely Weekes has to be next, from what I’ve seen most people rate Walcott at or above his level.