Most overrated cricketer

[Slifer]

Warne gets rated the best bowler ever which is crazy.

Agreed.

 

[subshakerz]

Viv's doesn't have stat issues per say to be considered an ATG bat, it's just for the reputation he has(in most people's argument for best after Bradman with Sachin, Sobers, Hobbs, Lara etc) he doesn't really have the numbers to back it up. Scored 5 tons in his last 40 tests averaging low 40s, still useful to the team but that's a pretty long time to have less than ATG level output. Basically turned into Ian Bell by the end

Viv's career had three phases,early insane peak for around 40 tests, then a long middle period of around 62 tests where he averaged 47 in the mid 80s, then his last 19 tests in which he dropped off, averaging 36. Tendulkar had a similar latter period in which he was just as bad for a couple of years. But from debut to 88 Viv ranged from excellent to very good so to me that is long enough to secure his legacy.

 

[Chubb]

Not necessarily on here but I’ve long felt Mitchell Johnson is overrated by casual fans. Because he had two ATG series people forget how average he was for most of his career, and how inconsistent. Not taking anything away from those series tho.

 

[mr_mister]

Viv's career had three phases,early insane peak for around 40 tests, then a long middle period of around 62 tests where he averaged 47 in the mid 80s, then his last 19 tests in which he dropped off, averaging 36. Tendulkar had a similar latter period in which he was just as bad for a couple of years. But from debut to 88 Viv ranged from excellent to very good so to me that is long enough to secure his legacy.

You can pinch some of the tests from the middle period to add to the final drop off period, it's arbitrary where we draw that line anyway right? He might have had only his final 19 tests averaging as low as 36, but I think had well over his last 35 tests averaging ~42

Again, not saying he became useless at that stage, but Lara and Sachin I don't think had a period that long averaging that low, certainly Hobbs didn't

 

[ankitj]

Harold Larwood and Victor Trumper.

 

[Coronis]

I always thought Gary Sobers was over rated in that his record doesn't justify the tag of the greatest all rounder ever.

He was a truly brilliant batsman and a fine bowler but 230 odd wkts at 34 a piece isn't an all time great record.

A brilliant cricketer - absolutely - but a better all rounder than Kallis, Imran or Botham - I'm not so sure.

Yeah I always thought 3807 runs @ 37 was an ATG record too. An ATG all rounder doesn’t need to have an ATG record as a batsman and a bowler, and (shockingly) we’ve never had one*, that expectation is ridiculous.

*In tests, lets not get into Grace’s FC peak.

 

[Gob]

He played one match in India in 2004.

4th test Scored 11 and 12 in 1st and 2nd innings respectively.

In the 08 tour he scored 266 runs @38 to his credit tho.

Yes I'm well aware of that. What made you think it's not totally idiotic to bring up an average from a one match especially when it was played on a pitch where the most average left arm spinner can take 6 for 9

 

[Prince EWS]

Yes I'm well aware of that. What made you think it's not totally idiotic to bring up an average from a one match especially when it was played on a pitch where the most average left arm spinner can take 6 for 9

he failed

 

[subshakerz]

You can pinch some of the tests from the middle period to add to the final drop off period, it's arbitrary where we draw that line anyway right? He might have had only his final 19 tests averaging as low as 36, but I think had well over his last 35 tests averaging ~42

Again, not saying he became useless at that stage, but Lara and Sachin I don't think had a period that long averaging that low, certainly Hobbs didn't

Not really arbitrary since you can tell when a player is past their peak. Such as Smith after the Ashes 2019, Ponting 2007 onwards or Tendulkar after the World Cup 2011.

89 onwards Viv's performances went off a cliff. And I recall Imran writing that Viv should have retired in 88 since he was still in top form and after that didn't have the reflexes to consistently perform.

 

[Kirkut]

Malcolm Marshall and Sachin Tendulkar.

Both hold divine status among general cricket fans, but I'm certain that there are atleast 5 bowlers and batsmen who are qualitatively as good as they are even though they do not match stats wise.

 

[Kirkut]

Not a cricketer but a factor that is highly overrated is bowling speeds. Gives a very one dimensional view of fast bowling.

What speed guns show is not directly proportional to what a batsman experiences.

 

[subshakerz]

Malcolm Marshall and Sachin Tendulkar.

Both hold divine status among general cricket fans, but I'm certain that there are atleast 5 bowlers and batsmen who are qualitatively as good as they are even though they do not match stats wise.

Maybe but none are as universally acclaimed aside from Bradman and Sobers.

 

[subshakerz]

Not a cricketer but a factor that is highly overrated is bowling speeds. Gives a very one dimensional view of fast bowling.

What speed guns show is not directly proportional to what a batsman experiences.

Strangely enough I think pace has lost some of it's luster since 90 mph bowlers are so common now.

This occurred to me during the India-Pak game last month when, even without Bumrah, you had 4-5 bowlers from both sides consistently bowling 140mph.

 

[social]

Any early era great

They’re rated on their contribution to the game rather than quality

Grace v anyone in the last 100 years is a complete mismatch

 

[GIMH]

It's definitely Lillee historically. Trueman, Ponting and Viv also up there.

It's Starc if we're talking current players, but obviously not on CW. If anything CW might slightly under-rate him, but mostly just because of TJB and trundler skewing it so much.

I nominate Stokes if we're talking CW-only. Fight me @GIMH.
EDIT: And Ajaz ****ing Patel. A great example of not playing enhancing one's reputation more than playing would.

You're a mole, you vote Green, go and get ****ed you slut.

 

[BazBall21]

Any early era great

They’re rated on their contribution to the game rather than quality

Grace v anyone in the last 100 years is a complete mismatch

It is up to the individual how they assess greatness though. Benaud once said “always go for players who changed the game”

 

[Prince EWS]

You're a mole, you vote Green, go and get ****ed you slut.

Mind your manners, gentleman.

 

[social]

It is up to the individual how they assess greatness though. Benaud once said “always go for players who changed the game”

That’s fine but let’s not pretend that WG was any good by 2022 standards as a cricketer

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Mind your manners, gentleman.

They don't have any up there.

 

[Slifer]

Malcolm Marshall and Sachin Tendulkar.

Both hold divine status among general cricket fans, but I'm certain that there are atleast 5 bowlers and batsmen who are qualitatively as good as they are even though they do not match stats wise.

Completely disagree. Except for here on CW, most cricket fans I've seen go for the likes of Lillee and Akram. And nobody, even my biased self has ever made the claim that Malcolm is the undisputed greatest fast bowler. Anyway, he's definitely top 5. If that's overrated, then all of fast men are overrated as well.