Debate thread for 2024 Ranking of batsmen poll

[kyear2]

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.

The top 7 are there because they have few of any arguments against them.

The ones outside less so.

Richards. The slope, then the cliff he fell off of.

Murali / Warne. They got destroyed unlike any others in this class.

Imran. Away performances not up to upper tier guys standards, overall he was prime in Pakistan and great to very good outside. Will be questioned about this so might as well explain. For example Marshall didn't average over 22 vs any country, Imran averaged under 24 in only 1. Didn't average under 24 in any country but Pakistan and minnow SL.

Steyn. Gets credit for the batsman era, but mainly thrived at home. He was less consistent than the others and was the most hittable.

Lara. Struggled a bit vs the Donald's and Wasim's of the world, especially a bit more so than his contemporary.

Hutton. Didn't dominate like the others on this list, especially by post war standards.

Ambrose. 2nd half wasn't as penetrative as the first. s/r like a couple others, a bit high compared to the other performers in this level.

Smith. Career still ongoing, is his slide associated with the passage of time of the end of the dead pitch era? He can still go up with a resurgence.

And please, not saying any of these guys aren't true top tier ATGs, just below the 7 referenced.

 

[Socerer 01]

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.

bruh

 

[Coronis]

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

Well of course not. He’d stink up the place.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well of course not. He’d stink up the place.

Famously never did his own washing up either.

 

[kyear2]

Do we really believe thata line up including Sutcliffe, Hammond and Kallis is preferred to guys that can change gears when required?

 

[subshakerz]

Do we really believe thata line up including Sutcliffe, Hammond and Kallis is preferred to guys that can change gears when required?

They do. It's all digits on a screen

 

[ataraxia]

Do we really believe thata line up including Sutcliffe, Hammond and Kallis is preferred to guys that can change gears when required?

We're not selecting a lineup?

 

[kyear2]

We're not selecting a lineup?

True, but

1. Which is more beneficial, a 38 s/r guy or a batsman that could change gears as required, let's say a Tendulkar / Smith.

2. Which requires more skill, the guy who can switch gears or the guys who have to cut out shots or restrict / eliminate risk taking to score.

 

[ataraxia]

True, but

1. Which is more beneficial, a 38 s/r guy or a batsman that could change gears as required, let's say a Tendulkar / Smith.

2. Which requires more skill, the guy who can switch gears or the guys who have to cut out shots or restrict / eliminate risk taking to score.

Not going to touch on the first point; everyone has their own answer to that one.

The second point is irrelevant: this ranking is not about who is the most talented, but who is the most effective. If anything, your insinuation that being more defensive requires less skill for the same results is surely a point in favour of playing defensively?

 

[PlayerComparisons]

True, but

1. Which is more beneficial, a 38 s/r guy or a batsman that could change gears as required, let's say a Tendulkar / Smith.

2. Which requires more skill, the guy who can switch gears or the guys who have to cut out shots or restrict / eliminate risk taking to score.

The first question is relevant. The second is not.

 

[kyear2]

Not going to touch on the first point; everyone has their own answer to that one.

The second point is irrelevant: this ranking is not about who is the most talented, but who is the most effective. If anything, your insinuation that being more defensive requires less skill for the same results is surely a point in favour of playing defensively?

I must respectfully disagree, this poll isn't who was the most effective batsmen, it's who was the best and the greatest.

 

[kyear2]

The first question is relevant. The second is not.

Both are relevant. As evidenced by the question above yours.

 

[Line and Length]

I was pleasantly surprised that Hutton rated so highly. Criticism of his post-war batting (not aggressive enough) fails to recognise he was the mainstay of England's batting despite having his shot selection restricted following his wartime injury. To average over 55 despite this plus, like Bradman, missing 6 years of his cricketing career, speaks volumes.
As for Richards, he was one of the most aggressive and attractive batsman to watch but wasn't as vital to his team as Hutton was to his. Viv will undoubtedly rank in the Top 10 and deservedly so be rated as an ATG.
As yet, I haven't lodged a vote for Smith as, as is evidenced by my bowler voting, I am reticent to evaluate incomplete careers. In 2022 Smith was ranked number 10. He will probably improve on that despite averaging 39.4 since 2022.

 

[howitzer]

I was pleasantly surprised that Hutton rated so highly. Criticism of his post-war batting (not aggressive enough) fails to recognise he was the mainstay of England's batting despite having his shot selection restricted following his wartime injury. To average over 55 despite this plus, like Bradman, missing 6 years of his cricketing career, speaks volumes.
As for Richards, he was one of the most aggressive and attractive batsman to watch but wasn't as vital to his team as Hutton was to his. Viv will undoubtedly rank in the Top 10 and deservedly so be rated as an ATG.
As yet, I haven't lodged a vote for Smith as, as is evidenced by my bowler voting, I am reticent to evaluate incomplete careers. In 2022 Smith was ranked number 10. He will probably improve on that despite averaging 39.4 since 2022.

It may have been in a losing cause, but Hutton's performance in difficult batting conditions, against an ATG bowling attack in 50-51 is right up there with the greatest individual performances in a single series.

 

[subshakerz]

Pretty astonishing to me that Smith also isn't a lock in the top half dozen. Undisouted best of his time, good to great record everywhere, ATG series, averaging 75 plus in his peak, I mean what exactly is he lacking here?

 

[centurymaker]

Duration.

And the reason he isn't a lock in the top half dozen is because there are at least 6 batsmen (half dozen batters) slightly better than him. Don, Tendy, Sobers, Viv, Hobbs and Lara.

While Hutton is probably same level.

 

[centurymaker]

If Viv had retired a few years sooner... his average would have been like 54 playing in THAT era.. The fact that he played on a little longer is what has hurt his rank in the eyes of the new generation who go off numbers alone, sometimes just raw numbers.

 

[kyear2]

I was pleasantly surprised that Hutton rated so highly. Criticism of his post-war batting (not aggressive enough) fails to recognise he was the mainstay of England's batting despite having his shot selection restricted following his wartime injury. To average over 55 despite this plus, like Bradman, missing 6 years of his cricketing career, speaks volumes.
As for Richards, he was one of the most aggressive and attractive batsman to watch but wasn't as vital to his team as Hutton was to his. Viv will undoubtedly rank in the Top 10 and deservedly so be rated as an ATG.
As yet, I haven't lodged a vote for Smith as, as is evidenced by my bowler voting, I am reticent to evaluate incomplete careers. In 2022 Smith was ranked number 10. He will probably improve on that despite averaging 39.4 since 2022.

I am a fan of Hutton, and over coming that wae time injury couldn't have been a cake walk. He's definitely worthy of a top 10 spot and I personally have him 8th. Great player.

 

[howitzer]

If Viv had retired a few years sooner... his average would have been like 54 playing in THAT era.. The fact that he played on a little longer is what has hurt his rank in the eyes of the new generation who go off numbers alone, sometimes just raw numbers.

Yeah but then that would mean him lacking longevity compared to most ATG batsmen. It would make me start to hit him with the same stick I hit Chappell with, just on a batsman with a higher average than Chappell.

 

[subshakerz]

Duration.

And the reason he isn't a lock in the top half dozen is because there are at least 6 batsmen (half dozen batters) slightly better than him. Don, Tendy, Sobers, Viv, Hobbs and Lara.

While Hutton is probably same level.

What is the case for putting Lara above Smith exactly, except for duration?