Only 3

[honestbharani]

Gavaskar
Viv Richards
Greg Chappell

 

[CricAddict]

Post war top 8

Gary Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Shane Warne
Ravindra Jadeja
Jacques Kallis
Joel Garner

Marshall and Mcgrath lose out to Garner and Jadeja as overall cricketers due to their inability to bat though they are slightly better as bowlers.

 

[kyear2]

Post war top 8

Gary Sobers
Sachin Tendulkar
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Shane Warne
Ravindra Jadeja
Jacques Kallis
Joel Garner

Marshall and Mcgrath lose out to Garner and Jadeja as overall cricketers due to their inability to bat though they are slightly better as bowlers.

Not sure if you're serious.

But Marshall had a higher average than Warne and Garner, but ok.....

 

[Nintendo]

Surprised Gilchrist isn't being given more credit. 20+ runs better than an average #7, fantastic keeper and can captain. Guess its more a case of him being the ideal 4th/5th pick.

 

[ankitj]

Surprised Gilchrist isn't being given more credit. 20+ runs better than an average #7, fantastic keeper and can captain. Guess its more a case of him being the ideal 4th/5th pick.

When you put it that way, it does make Gilchrist's case strong. Although Gilchrist will always be a great cherry rather than the cake. And this poll is about the cake.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Excluding WG and Barnes

Sobers
Bradman
Procter

Gavaskar
Hadlee
Sachin

Viv
Imran
Akram

 

[271 & 16/166]

Casted my vote, just leaves Steve Smith with no votes now

 

[shortpitched713]

Gavaskar
Viv Richards
Greg Chappell

You activated my trap card. You had to go back in time to find some batsmen, because you know damn well that a player like Ponting or Dravid can't really match any of the high level bowlers who were contemporaneous to them at the time when you were most watching cricket, ( i. McGrath, Donald, Wasim ).

It's okay, bowler > batsmen is just a fundamental truth . Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

 

[honestbharani]

You activated my trap card. You had to go back in time to find some batsmen, because you know damn well that a player like Ponting or Dravid can't really match any of the high level bowlers who were contemporaneous to them at the time when you were most watching cricket, ( i. McGrath, Donald, Wasim ).

It's okay, bowler > batsmen is just a fundamental truth . Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

Sure... But I love batting more than bowling.

 

[kyear2]

Not that it is, but if it were a top 5 ranking it would prove @shortpitched713 right to a certain degree.
Bradman, a do it all freak of a player and three bowlers who can handle a bat are the only ones in double figures.

Do you guys believe they are probably the top 5 cricketers ever? Or at least a better 5 than Wisdens?

Hadlee - Imran - Marshall
Or
Hobbs - Richards - Warne

 

[capt_Luffy]

Not that it is, but if it were a top 5 ranking it would prove @shortpitched713 right to a certain degree.
Bradman, a do it all freak of a player and three bowlers who can handle a bat are the only ones in double figures.

Do you guys believe they are probably the top 5 cricketers ever? Or at least a better 5 than Wisdens?

Hadlee - Imran - Marshall
Or
Hobbs - Richards - Warne

Yeah, Hadlee-Imran-Marshall are better; but I think Wisden's 5 was always iffy with Shane Warne as one of the top players from the 20th century..... I would replace Warne and Richards with Imran and Hadlee in my Top 5.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah, Hadlee-Imran-Marshall are better; but I think Wisden's 5 was always iffy with Shane Warne as one of the top players from the 20th century..... I would replace Warne and Richards with Imran and Hadlee in my Top 5.

Yeah, Richards nor Warne really belonged there, though definitely in the top 10.
Just watched over Warne's legends of cricket episode, there's nothing there to warrant it.
Bradman , Sobers, Marshall, Hobbs, Hadlee for mine. Hadlee though didn't t impact world cricket in the ways the other did (not his fault), that's why McGrath for me sometimes takes the spot.

 

[smash84]

Yeah, Richards nor Warne really belonged there, though definitely in the top 10.
Just watched over Warne's legends of cricket episode, there's nothing there to warrant it.
Bradman , Sobers, Marshall, Hobbs, Hadlee for mine. Hadlee though sint impact world cricket in the ways the other did (not his fault), that's why McGrath for me sometimes takes the spot.

Imran's impact off the field was far greater than Marshall, Hobbs, or Sobers.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Imran's impact off the field was far greater than Marshall, Hobbs, or Sobers.

I mean, others aren't really trying to be elected Prime ministers....

 

[smash84]

I mean, others aren't really trying to be elected Prime ministers....

I am not even talking about the politics stuff.

He started his philanthropic endeavours in his cricket playing days (remember the worst victory speech in WC history? ). Also he brought a significant amount of female fan following to cricket in pakistan (and outside as well). Helped create conservation areas for animals and raising awareness for preserving forests (which he continued doing quite successfully as PM as well).

 

[capt_Luffy]

I am not even talking about the politics stuff.

He started his philanthropic endeavours in his cricket playing days (remember the worst victory speech in WC history? ). Also he brought a significant amount of female fan following to cricket in pakistan (and outside as well). Helped create conservation areas for animals and raising awareness for preserving forests (which he continued doing quite successfully as PM as well).

Really I was just joking about the political stuff; the fact that he had massive contributions in the development of the W's is enough for his outside field work; not to mention his Sachinesque stature in Pakistan.

 

[howitzer]

Crazy that only 3 of the 100 voted for Marshall in that list. Sure, I wouldn't have picked him but he'd absolutely have been first reserve and only behind Hobbs on a couple of tie-breakers, namely wanting to cover the whole century better and not wanting to have 3 players primarily known for pace bowling there.

 

[shortpitched713]

Not that it is, but if it were a top 5 ranking it would prove @shortpitched713 right to a certain degree.
Bradman, a do it all freak of a player and three bowlers who can handle a bat are the only ones in double figures.

Do you guys believe they are probably the top 5 cricketers ever? Or at least a better 5 than Wisdens?

Hadlee - Imran - Marshall
Or
Hobbs - Richards - Warne

I think CW consensus on this question would be pretty straightforward.