Debate thread for 2024 Ranking of batsmen poll

[OverratedSanity]

Please provide proof of the 3 bad decisions against Lara. I dont believe you @honestbharani .

Oh yeah, looked it up, 3 wrong decisions from rudi koertzen and darrell hair. Australians just screwing over the best touring batsmen to win by cheating as usual.

 

[Sunil1z]

Yea there were upto 3 poor decisions in that 99 series out of his 6 innings. People wonder why Tendulkar doesn't have any 'super standout' series during his peak, when in fact poor decisions as well as marginal decisions were a regular theme during his career. He was the most popular player ever and A LOT of people were bitter and couldn't digest how good and gifted and technically perfect he was.

Even in 2011 in the 4th test vs England, he was on 90 and on his way to his 100th ton at the Oval when the mf rod tucker immediately raised his finger on a really marginal lbw decision.

He was already feeling the burden of needing to score his 100th ton but imo falling short like that messed with him and it kick started a chain of innings where he fell short. The chase for the 100th 100 destroyed the last 2 years of his career. But we underestimate how a critical bad decision can derail someone's entire career.

I think you guys are slightly over reacting. Most people consider Tendulkar top3/4/5 bat . This is a very high praise considering the batsmen against whom he is competing.

 

[centurymaker]

It actually does. Bradman is in a league of his own so it's effectively top five. Not having Viv up there (who used to be a closely fought with Tendulkar once upon a time) in an all-time list looks so odd if he is below Hutton, Lara. And the worst thing is that I know the undeclared judgment on CW is basically if Viv averages 52 instead of 50 he would have auto jumped up a couple places.

Frankly just spoils the exercise, it's like doing a the bowlers list and putting Marshall at 4 or 5. List doesn't hold much legitimacy after an infraction like that. At least gets the basics right.

Well Viv should have been top 5 but he will be top 7/8 now, given how a lot of people here have somehow gone anti-viv and rate him probably outside top10 as seen by the voting pattern as well as the comments about him in recent times.

 

[Sunil1z]

Oh yeah, looked it up, 3 wrong decisions from rudi koertzen and darrell hair. Australians just screwing over the best touring batsmen to win by cheating as usual.

Please watch this video and post here

Kudos to Cricket Australia for uploading even not out ones . Not many boards would have done it

 

[centurymaker]

Oh yeah, looked it up, 3 wrong decisions from rudi koertzen and darrell hair. Australians just screwing over the best touring batsmen to win by cheating as usual.

It was revealed later that Australia did use to deploy these underhand tactics, (which were actually more common in previous eras).

I wish there was DRS back then, Australian dominance of 90s and 00s may have fallen well short of the mark. Look, I don't think India would have won a single series in Australia if we still didn't have DRS!

India was robbed once in 1985 when home umpires refused to give Allan Border out on multiple occasions in the 3rd innings of this match at MCG when Australia was staring at a certain defeat.

AUS vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Melbourne, December 26 - 30, 1985

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, AUS vs IND, India tour of Australia 1985/86 at Melbourne Cricket Ground dated December 26 - 30, 1985.

www.espncricinfo.com

Series ended 0-0.

 

[Burgey]

Wasn't aware Rudi Koertzen was Australian tbh, but you never stop learning in life I suppose.

 

[Sunil1z]

It was revealed later that Australia did use to deploy these underhand tactics, (which were actually more common in previous eras).

I wish there was DRS back then, Australian dominance of 90s and 00s may have fallen well short of the mark. Look, I don't think India would have won a single series in Australia if we still didn't have DRS!

India was robbed once in 1985 when home umpires refused to give Allan Border out on multiple occasions in the 3rd innings of this match at MCG when Australia was staring at a certain defeat.

AUS vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Melbourne, December 26 - 30, 1985

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, AUS vs IND, India tour of Australia 1985/86 at Melbourne Cricket Ground dated December 26 - 30, 1985.

www.espncricinfo.com

Series ended 0-0.

This is not the right thread to post these and would further derail this thread . Please don’t

 

[Sunil1z]

I believe stronger Teams always get more number of decisions in their favour because of the number of chances they create . There isn’t a conspiracy theory going on .
@OverratedSanity is clearly joking . Don’t take that post seriously .

 

[centurymaker]

Home umpiring was prevalent in previous eras.

Also I don't think India would have won the home series in 2001. Would have drawn or even lost with better umpiring. Harbhajan being the biggest beneficiary.

 

[kyear2]

Think they are rightly behind Bradman, Sachin, Hobbs, Sobers, Hutton. I have them both behind Lara as well, though that one is arguable I suppose.

Both strong contenders for top 10 slots which, you know, is pretty high.

Don't think Hutton is better than Viv, Lara or Smith.
He didn't face better bowlers than any of them, even in his day was criticized for not being able to change gears and dominate attacks.
I do think he's the 2nd best opener, but doesn't deserve to be above those guys that faced better attacks and dominated them.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hutton in the post war 50s period faced and succeeded against several great attacks.

 

[Coronis]

Hutton in the post war 50s period faced and succeeded against several great attacks.

Not great enough apparently.

 

[kyear2]

Hutton in the post war 50s period faced and succeeded against several great attacks.

Never said he didn't, but not as good as what Viv and Lara in particular faced.

Lindwall and Miller, Ramadhin and Valentine, a little of Davidson.

Again, he also didn't dominate any of those attacks.

 

[subshakerz]

"If a player had done better than they actually did, they would have been ranked slightly higher than they are" isn't exactly a damning critique on the exercise.

Nah. It kinda is because the longer time passes, the more lazy posters will be to do blind average reading and allow a point or two to decide rankings superifically. Viv never played minnows but that won't stop posters from docking him despite not having any weaknesses in his record.

You may be literally the only person in the cricket observing world who considers it illegitimate to rank Lara over Richards - I’m sure others would share your opinion but only you in your wild biases would consider it beyond the pale

I could maybe live with Lara. Not with Hutton that's bonkers.

Don't think Hutton is better than Viv, Lara or Smith.
He didn't face better bowlers than any of them, even in his day was criticized for not being able to change gears and dominate attacks.
I do think he's the 2nd best opener, but doesn't deserve to be above those guys that faced better attacks and dominated them.

Here is the thing. It's not really Lara or Hutton getting a reputation boost. It's Viv who is being downgraded despite being the far and away number one bat of his era, and based on silly criteria. The idea of Viv not being in the best of the best, in defiance of the entire cricket consensus outside CW based on a 1 or 2 average points, is just is an eyesore. I had better expectations of CW.

 

[kyear2]

Nah. It kinda is because the longer time passes, the more lazy posters will be to do blind average reading and allow a point or two to decide rankings superifically. Viv never played minnows but that won't stop posters from docking him despite not having any weaknesses in his record.


I could maybe live with Lara. Not with Hutton that's bonkers.


Here is the thing. It's not really Lara or Hutton getting a reputation boost. It's Viv who is being downgraded despite being the far and away number one bat of his era, and based on silly criteria. The idea of Viv not being in the best of the best, in defiance of the entire cricket consensus outside CW based on a 1 or 2 average points, is just is an eyesore. I had better expectations of CW.

I'm not sure if I have him absolutely best of the best. For me there's 4 batsmen and 3 bowlers that set themselves apart, but he's the first outside of the S tier for me.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I'm not sure if I have him absolutely best of the best. For me there's 4 batsmen and 3 bowlers that set themselves apart, but he's the first outside of the S tier for me.

Pretty much same for me too, just add Imran as I think he's close enough as a bowler and his batting a significant boost, and well, Grace.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm not sure if I have him absolutely best of the best. For me there's 4 batsmen and 3 bowlers that set themselves apart, but he's the first outside of the S tier for me.

I think we have Viv around the same ranking, since I have Bradman, Tendulkar, Hobbs and Sobers ahead of him, but I still call him S tier.

 

[ma1978]

Hutton averaged 57 in a 18 year career, and was successful everywhere.

if rate Viv over him but come on, it’soerfectly plausible to feel the other way about the GOAT opening bat

 

[kyear2]

Hutton averaged 57 in a 18 year career, and was successful everywhere.

if rate Viv over him but come on, it’soerfectly plausible to feel the other way about the GOAT opening bat

I kinda feel, and always have, that even if you're slower by nature, should possess that 2nd or even 3rd gear and be able to dominate an attack, that's kinda important. He think he definely one of the two greatest openers ever, and in that top tier of 8 batsmen for me, but he's definely last there.

Know everyone sees it differently, that's just how I do.

 

[kyear2]

I think we have Viv around the same ranking, since I have Bradman, Tendulkar, Hobbs and Sobers ahead of him, but I still call him S tier.

I have the three after Bradman tied and if forced I rank them by quantity of bowlers faced. So Tendulkar, Sobers, Hobbs. Or can just rank by order of appearance.