• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Debate thread for 2024 Ranking of batsmen poll

Bolo.

International Captain
You guessed right. Perhaps Pollock never played test cricket at his peak.


45/50 names on that list averaged higher than their overall careers between 26 and 32
Ya, I kinda think of 28-32 as the most typical absolute peak for bats, but it often extends either side of this. And the smaller the date range, the fewer the number of bats it will correspond to- form slumps happen even in what should be peak years.

OFC, you get the odd late bloomer and the odd bat who starts fast and falls away, but neither of these apply to him.
 

ma1978

International Debutant
Genuine question - why do people rate Graeme Pollock who never had a great career over the likes of Waugh or Dravid or Miandad who actually had great careers.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Barrington over Dravid and Miandad who put up similar numbers for as long against better bowlers would be a travesty. Williamson also.
 

ma1978

International Debutant
Barrington not a serious pick - he wasn’t rated in his own era. Just stat nerds who look at the average
 

Coronis

International Coach
Richards being mentioned… ugh. Why weren’t people voting for Procter as a bowler then? Almost double the sample size, same excellent peer rating but nope, not a single mention. Disgusting all round.
 

kyear2

International Coach
Richards being mentioned… ugh. Why weren’t people voting for Procter as a bowler then? Almost double the sample size, same excellent peer rating but nope, not a single mention. Disgusting all round.
Ok, where's the bias. From the same country, same era, same everything.
 

Top