Where do you rank Shivnarine Chanderpaul in all-time best batsmen?

[The Hillside]

I always felt he had an incredible record in Tests, ODIs and domestic circuit...often not discussed....also most of his feats came when West Indies cricket was decaying from it's golden era...so where do you rank him in all-time best batsmen list...this has to take in both his ODI and Test performances and records...

1-5...that's for Tendulkar, Kohli, Sangakarra, Ponting and Kallis....

5-10....that's for Jayawardene, Dravid, Lara, Border and Gavaskar...

10-15...I will fit him somewhere here....in the league of Amla, Steve Waugh, Inzamam ul Haq and Ab Devilliers...I would rank him at no.15...

 

[PlayerComparisons]

He's probably in the second group with Jayawardene and Border

 

[TheJediBrah]

Don't care about Chanderpaul but your rankings suck

Lara is easily better than everyone you have in your first group except Tendulkar. And you have a lot of the rest backwards as well.

Though I agree with your policy of cricket not existing before 1999 (Border and Gavaskar aside for some reason?)

 

[Coronis]

Don't care about Chanderpaul but your rankings suck

Lara is easily better than everyone you have in your first group except Tendulkar. And you have a lot of the rest backwards as well.

Though I agree with your policy of cricket not existing before 1999 (Border and Gavaskar aside for some reason?)

Everyone with a trophy should be exempt.

But seriously he mentions taking both Tests and ODIs into account so that would reasonably be a thought for having modern players there. No Viv is a headscratcher though.

 

[Prince EWS]

Everyone with a trophy should be exempt.

But seriously he mentions taking both Tests and ODIs into account so that would reasonably be a thought for having modern players there. No Viv is a headscratcher though.

Means a lot coming from you, too.

 

[Qlder]

1-5...that's for Tendulkar, Kohli, Sangakarra, Ponting and Kallis....

5-10....that's for Jayawardene, Dravid, Lara, Border and Gavaskar...

10-15...I will fit him somewhere here....in the league of Amla, Steve Waugh, Inzamam ul Haq and Ab Devilliers...I would rank him at no.15...

So I guess Greg Chappell, Javed Miandad and Viv Richards were hacks in your eyes?

Chanderpaul wouldn't even be in the top 5 of West Indies batsmen but you only have Lara ahead of him

 

[Line and Length]

How can an "all time best" ignore greats from the past? This isn't a discussion about "all time" players as superstars such as Bradman, Hobbs, Hutton et al are ignored. Re-name the thread or include the real ATGs.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Means a lot coming from you, too.

They got that all screwed up. He meant:

"No? Viv is a headscratcher, though!

 

[Coronis]

They got that all screwed up. He meant:

"No? Viv is a headscratcher, though!

Possibly your best post on here.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Not as good as Martin Crowe who is also missing from your list

 

[The Hillside]

How can an "all time best" ignore greats from the past? This isn't a discussion about "all time" players as superstars such as Bradman, Hobbs, Hutton et al are ignored. Re-name the thread or include the real ATGs.

I mentioned this in one thread before that I have not seen any cricket before 1996...Border and Gavaskar are mentioned coz of their popularity after 1996.

 

[Line and Length]

I mentioned this in one thread before that I have not seen any cricket before 1996...Border and Gavaskar are mentioned coz of their popularity after 1996.

I've watched cricket since the early '50s but that doesn't mean I overlook past greats from earlier years.

 

[Coronis]

I mentioned this in one thread before that I have not seen any cricket before 1996...Border and Gavaskar are mentioned coz of their popularity after 1996.

Lots of players have been popular since 1996

 

[Migara]

If you consider Tendulkar, we know his weaknesses as well as strengths. Same with Lara, Ponting or Sangakkara. They had weaknesses, they had strengths.

Chanderpaul is an enigma. Other than for staying power, there are not much strengths to show, nor weaknesses.

 

[Chin Music]

Surely Chanderpaul is more a 'very good' rather than a great in all time terms. Don't know if he is even a Windies great given the players they had between the 50s to early 90s.

 

[Flem274*]

Chanderpaul is definitely an ATG, though with the caveat that he was always reluctant to move position for the team. In his later career they should have at least considered giving their best player more time and influence on the innings than can be achieved at #5, but then we saw what happened to Clarke and guys like Border were all good at #5 in weaker sides.

Very few ATG batsmen have had to contend with such a shower for batting mates as he did post-Lara. Generally world class batsmen appear in pairs or even trios.

Maybe I'd pop him on the ATG side of the boundary between ATG and ATVG. Just make sure someone below him can either bat time or bat quickly to maximise team output.

 

[Qlder]

Very few ATG batsmen have had to contend with such a shower for batting mates as he did post-Lara. Generally world class batsmen appear in pairs or even trios.

I'm at a loss as to what this means?

 

[ataraxia]

I'm at a loss as to what this means?

His teammates were a lot taller than him so for Chanderpaul to perform as he did despite being physically overshadowed in the shower is a testament to his ability. (Lara was the same height so it wasn't as bad then.)

 

[Coronis]

Chanderpaul is an enigma. Other than for staying power, there are not much strengths to show, nor weaknesses.

Rightio…

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think Chanderpaul is probably a Top 50......