Garry Sobers vs Imran Khan

[kyear2]

I think you might have a comprehension issue.

I never said I am wedded to the exact pundit rankings. I think when it comes to measuring greatness, they give credit to what these cricketers have contributed to the game, which is a good thing to include, but often overlook career record flaws or notably better records, which we can adjust for by dropping or upgrading a few places.

I just said I am leery of just departing too far from their consensus and coming up with my own spin, like you do when you take Marshall from 15 to 20 in their estimate to no.3 of all-time.

That's all bullshit, they look at charisma and popularity. But awful nice of you to correct them on the players you disagree with.

I'm also not looking for you to move anything, nor am I looking for validation of my rankings.

Well besides Barry damnit.

 

[subshakerz]

That's all bullshit, they look at charisma and popularity. But awful nice of you to correct them on the players you disagree with.

I'm also not looking for you to move anything, nor am I looking for validation of my rankings.

Well besides Barry damnit.

You sound so bitter man because the pundits didn't give Marshall the same treatment.

I am telling you, pundits generally like trailblazers not more of the same. Marshall was a fine bowler but he wasn't that.

 

[kyear2]

You sound so bitter man because the pundits didn't give Marshall the same treatment.

I am telling you, pundits generally like trailblazers not more of the same. Marshall was a fine bowler but he wasn't that.

There are aspects of the treatment of Marshall that does indeed piss me off, the pundits isn't one of them.

It would be interesting to know how pundits change the course of games,.or win them for that matter.

There was nothing trail blazing about Lillee. There was Lindwall, Trueman, Hall, Davidson since the war. But man did he generate excitement.

What was trail blazing about Sachin that didn't apply to Lara, besides the size of the countries they came from

What was trail blazing about Warne over Murali besides that one had more charisma, and played in the ashes.

Now don't get me wrong, Sachin was a brilliant batsman, one of the greatest ever, and I think Warne is somehow simultaneously both over and under rated, and they both walk into my and most people's all time teams without question.

But this special sauce nonsense is getting annoying. If you don't have him in your top 10, that's fine, just say so and we're golden. Just don't bring the nonsense

 

[subshakerz]

There are aspects of the treatment of Marshall that does indeed piss me off, the pundits isn't one of them.

It would be interesting to know how pundits change the course of games,.or win them for that matter.

Let's not pretend that if pundits had put Maco in the top 5 regularly that you wouldn't cite that. You would, we all know you would, no point pretending otherwise.

There was nothing trail blazing about Lillee. There was Lindwall, Trueman, Hall, Davidson since the war. But man did he generate excitement.

Lillee's aggro approach changed fast bowling forever and he was the frontman for WSC. He directly inspired Hadlee, Imran and others. He was the godfather of modern fast bowling. Reducing him to 'exciting' just shows how bitter you are.

What was trail blazing about Sachin that didn't apply to Lara, besides the size of the countries they came from

Teen prodigy part applies to Tendulkar, and his general lack of weakness in his batting, technically flawless. But Lara is also higher up there than Marshall among pundits so this doesn't really help.

What was trail blazing about Warne over Murali besides that one had more charisma, and played in the ashes.

Warne was more box office for sure. And Warne revived interest in attacking spin outside Asia, and there was never a leggie like him. Murali would be near Warne but there is the chucking angle that weighs his ranking down sadly.

But this special sauce nonsense is getting annoying. If you don't have him in your top 10, that's fine, just say so and we're golden. Just don't bring the nonsense

Dude the secret sauce formula is quite simple. If you removed a cricketer from existence, how much would his impact on the game be missed?

No, Marshall just makes my top 10 barely of greatest cricketers I think. Ahead of Warne who I downgraded. The contention was putting him at no.3.

 

[kyear2]

Let's not pretend that if pundits had put Maco in the top 5 regularly that you wouldn't cite that. You would, we all know you would, no point pretending otherwise.


Lillee's aggro approach changed fast bowling forever and he was the frontman for WSC. He directly inspired Hadlee, Imran and others. He was the godfather of modern fast bowling. Reducing him to 'exciting' just shows how bitter you are.


Teen prodigy part applies to Tendulkar, and his general lack of weakness in his batting, technically flawless. But Lara is also higher up there than Marshall among pundits so this doesn't really help.


Warne was more box office for sure. And Warne revived interest in attacking spin outside Asia, and there was never a leggie like him. Murali would be near Warne but there is the chucking angle that weighs his ranking down sadly.


Dude the secret sauce formula is quite simple. If you removed a cricketer from existence, how much would his impact on the game be missed?

No, Marshall just makes my top 10 barely of greatest cricketers I think. Ahead of Warne who I downgraded. The contention was putting him at no.3.

The level of projection.

 

[Slifer]

I believe Lara does in fact have more holes in his resume than Sachin but Sachin isn't as flawless as Subz would have us believe. He too made runs vs diminished attacks or are we going to ignore the runs he made vs Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. I only rank him above Lara because of his away record fwiw. Sachin made runs vs Australian series minus their ace (McGrath) plenty of times: 98, '04 etc

Lara has 50+ series home and away vs McWarne, scored damn near 700 runs in 3 tests away to Murali/Vaas over 3 tests, score 500 + vs Ntini and Pollock and Ntini was on fire in that series. Every other atg has a series like those except Sachin, that is a flaw. You bring up Bond but Lara actually averages more vs Bond. Matter of fact, and we've done this before,both Sachin and Lara averaged similarly vs Donald and the Ws ie in the 30s. Him being unproven in India is weak, he only had one opportunity to play there.

 

[sayon basak]

Bradman
Sobers
Imran
Hadlee
Sachin(very close between Hadlee, Sachin and Hobbs)
Hobbs
Marshall
Miller
Steyn
Viv
Mcgrath
Murali

Top tier golden ATGs

Kallis>Miller

 

[DrWolverine]

Except for Bradman, I do not think Kallis is less than any single cricketer in that list.

 

[Coronis]

So one was arguably the greatest match winner,

Nah, no way.

 

[subshakerz]

I believe Lara does in fact have more holes in his resume than Sachin but Sachin isn't as flawless as Subz would have us believe.

Never argued Sachin was flawless, he lacked mega series I always admitted. But it's a much lesser glaring flaw than a underwhelming away record.

I only rank him above Lara because of his away record fwiw.

Great we agree. The rest is bringing his home record of Lara which is fine but not relevant to my argument that he was underwhelming away.

 

[subshakerz]

The level of projection.

You are clearly bitter about Marshall not getting rated higher.

 

[kyear2]

You are clearly bitter about Marshall not getting rated higher.

No, I'm not the one who's spent the past decade trying to not only prove, but convince everyone that your guy is the best. It's not good enough that you believe it, you need me and everyone else to as well.

I sincerely don't care who shares my views, and I'm not trying to convince you of them either.

What I have said, is that if you believe he isn't worthy then fine, but let's use numbers, impact and rationale, not this bullshit that you've spun. The media creating narratives for their two favorite sons doesn't make them greater cricketers.

We've had discussion re Marshall and Tendulkar before, we've even had multiple polls, both won by Maco, but both incredibly close and that's heartening taking into account the 3 WI posters on the forum.

But again this projection that I view the world like you do, where I need everyone to agree with me, or that I'm bitter than few do is a creation of your own beliefs. I promise you that I don't care who else rates Maco where I do. In the last rating he was I think 7th or 8th, was actually surprised.

Now I have had a few crusades on the forum, neither of which are appreciated.
I think Barry should be recognized as he is by said pundits, because when you look into his career, he was a near unparalleled genius, especially to fast bowling and ironically his ability to score fast.
And the under rating of slip catching and now even wicket-keeping by too many. Yes, I believe that the cordon is collectively more important than a singular 5th bowler or the top of a lower order. I also believe that having a great guy at 2nd is just as critical to team success as your no. 8 or said 5th bowler.

By contract your goal has been to down play, sorry, tear down every perceived rival to Imran. Kallis, Ambrose, even Steyn's utility with the old ball, it's all targeted. It's the same for Lara and Kallis in comparison to Tendulkar. So who's bitter?

 

[subshakerz]

I sincerely don't care who shares my views, and I'm not trying to convince you of them either.

We've had discussion re Marshall and Tendulkar before, we've even had multiple polls, both won by Maco, but both incredibly close and that's heartening taking into account the 3 WI posters on the forum.

I love how you say you don't care but immediately pivot to CW polls to feel validated.

The media creating narratives for their two favorite sons doesn't make them greater cricketers.

I think Barry should be recognized as he is by said pundits

Lol so you bash pundits for rating Lillee and Warne higher but use those same pundits to justify Barry. Hypocrisy.

So who's bitter?

Everyone can see it's you

 

[kyear2]

I love how you say you don't care but immediately pivot to CW polls to feel validated.


Lol so you bash pundits for rating Lillee and Warne higher but use those same pundits to justify Barry. Hypocrisy.


Everyone can see it's you

Where did I bash them?

Q. When I spoke of them media pushing their two favorite sons I meant Warne and Sachin.

I also said Warne is simultaneously over and under rated.

Lillee has become a victim of analysis by checklist, but the reality is that he probably didn't leave himself enough places, especially unhelpful ones. But before Marshall took it from him, he was the GOAT.

And again, and becuse common sense. Barry played 4 tests and while there are numbers to justify his status, he relies more on peer ratings and anecdotal evidence than others.
I don't understand how this is hard to grasp.

He was a player that was rated the best in the world the first half of the 70's, despite playing only 4 tests and this was prior to his WSC exploits. So yes, it's important to use his peer ratings to illustrate that.

I also want to be clear about the Warne thing. As mush as he was lushed and I don't by the secret sauce bullshit, he was brilliant and I've said I rate him a hair above Murali because he didn't have the helpful home conditions that his rival had, and less access to minnows.
The only reason I rate him lower is that he's not in the goat conversation and I don't rate spinners on a curve.

Lillee was the GOAT, you don't need to bring in the rest of the stuff, he wasn't the father of anything. Willis and Snow were around.

That's my point.

 

[subshakerz]

Where did I bash them?

Q. When I spoke of them media pushing their two favorite sons I meant Warne and Sachin.

Yeah but pundits are part of that media that you use for Barry

And again, and becuse common sense. Barry played 4 tests and while there are numbers to justify his status, he relies more on peer ratings and anecdotal evidence than others.
I don't understand how this is hard to grasp.

I don't mind you rating Barry but just admit that Marshall is not rated by pundits anywhere near enough to justify a no.3 rating.

I also want to be clear about the Warne thing. As mush as he was lushed and I don't by the secret sauce bullshit, he was brilliant and I've said I rate him a hair above Murali because he didn't have the helpful home conditions that his rival had, and less access to minnows.
The only reason I rate him lower is that he's not in the goat conversation and I don't rate spinners on a curve.

You need to accept that secret sauce is also part of greatness and not just a media creation.

Lillee was the GOAT, you don't need to bring in the rest of the stuff, he wasn't the father of anything. Willis and Snow were around.

That's my point.

No, there is plenty of player testimonial on how Lillees aggro set him apart and his inspiration for the post 70s fast bowler gen.

Hadlee would literally ask himself, what would Lillee do?

Imran cites seeing Lillee in England as the reason he wanted to become a fast bowler rather than medium pacer.

It's no secret that after witnessing Lillee and Thommo, Lloyd went all in on a pace strategy.

Lillee was in your face, abusive, and liable to do bouncer vollies. He influenced that entire pace generation.

 

[kyear2]

✂️ body line

60 seconds · Clipped by kirksland · Original video "Empire of Cricket - West Indies - Part 5" by Jack Joe

youtube.com

 

[kyear2]

Yeah but pundits are part of that media that you use for Barry



I don't mind you rating Barry but just admit that Marshall is not rated by pundits anywhere near enough to justify a no.3 rating.


You need to accept that secret sauce is also part of greatness and not just a media creation.


No, there is plenty of player testimonial on how Lillees aggro set him apart and his inspiration for the post 70s fast bowler gen.

Hadlee would literally ask himself, what would Lillee do?

Imran cites seeing Lillee in England as the reason he wanted to become a fast bowler rather than medium pacer.

It's no secret that after witnessing Lillee and Thommo, Lloyd went all in on a pace strategy.

Lillee was in your face, abusive, and liable to do bouncer vollies. He influenced that entire pace generation.

I probably rate Lille higher than you do, and right there with Imran, Donald, Wasim, O'Reilly, and I understand what you're saying, but it wasn't because he was an asshole on the pitch.

That's all I'm saying.

 

[smash84]

I love this revisionist history from kyear2, that Marshall was the one who propelled WI to number 1 in world cricket.

He really freaking didn't.

 

[kyear2]

I love this revisionist history from kyear2, that Marshall was the one who propelled WI to number 1 in world cricket.

He really freaking didn't.

Did I say that.

That was Lloyd, Richards, Holding.

He was the one that from '83 onwards was easily the best player on the team and kept them there and took them from best team in the world, the at the time, the greatest ever.

Same with McGrath, Australia isn't in the conversation without him.

 

[smash84]

Did I say that.

That was Lloyd, Richards, Holding.

He was the one that from '83 onwards was by far the best player on the team and kept them there and took them from best team in the world, the at the time, the greatest ever.

Same with McGrath, Australia isn't in the conversation without him.

When people think of the greatest team ever, they are thinking of the WI team of the quartet of the late 70s and early 80s, not the one with Marshall in 1988. At least I do.