Thala_0710
State Vice-Captain
Yeah he's there too, although I find it hard to rate pre WW players, but he's like that version of Sachin. Maybe Hobbs and Sachin for no 2, although I'd still go SachinWhat about Hobbs??
Yeah he's there too, although I find it hard to rate pre WW players, but he's like that version of Sachin. Maybe Hobbs and Sachin for no 2, although I'd still go SachinWhat about Hobbs??
I don't remember. But I rate Ponting in my top 15.@sayon basak btw didn't you vote Trumper over Ponting?
Trumper was of the previous generation really. It's like saying Sachin and Smith were of the same GenHobbs was averaging 57 when the second best batter of his generation (Trumper) was averaging 39, He's another breed.
Gavaskar way too low, especially behind Hammond and Headleymy top 15 ignoring active players
1. Donald Bradman
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Sachin Tendulkar/Viv Richards
4. Sachin Tendulkar/Viv Richards
5. Garfield Sobers
6. Len Hutton
7. Brian Lara
8. Wally Hammond
9. George Headley
10. Sunil Gavaskar
11. Herbert Sutcliffe
12. Greg Chappel
13. Ricky Ponting/Jack Kallis
14. Ricky Ponting/Jack Kallis
15. Graeme Pollock
alright, Hobbs was averaging 57 while some of the best batters in the world were averaging 40 while having more favourable home conditionsTrumper was of the previous generation really. It's like saying Sachin and Smith were of the same Gen
I rate Headley quite highlyGavaskar way too low, especially behind Hammond and Headley
Yeah, me too. But I find both him and Hammond tough to place in the BAB tier as they never really faced any Great pacers in Tests arena. A lot of good ones, but not a single with a Great Test career.I rate Headley quite highly
if they were both a couple years younger we'd have got to see them vs Lindwall and Miller, sighYeah, me too. But I find both him and Hammond tough to place in the BAB tier as they never really faced any Great pacers in Tests arena. A lot of good ones, but not a single with a Great Test career.
It's not a good analysis. Shouldn't be using a metric like match factor when one has a far far better bowling attack - which helps significantly reduce the match averages and in turn considerably boost the match factor. It's only a valid metric if two players have a similar strength bowling attack and similar strength batting unit. You'll be hard pressed to find such cases. So it's a crap metric.Was just about to post this. Kimber makes the case what we am have been saying. You cant get past Tendulkar's longevity.
But perhaps Smith has a case over some others like Lara, Hutton etc.
One played 80 more tests & 7.5 more years than the other. It's too big a differential to overcome imo unless the other avgs like 4-5 points more.daily reminder that Sachin and Viv averages about the same in actuality, Sobers is weird though
think Tendulkar vs Viv is just another case of longetivity vs Peak, Sobers is an interesting discussion, I generally rate both below either but his record is actually superior to eitherOne played 80 more tests & 7.5 more years than the other. It's too big a differential to overcome imo unless the other avgs like 4-5 points more.
Nah they don't. Also different career lengths. Viv overrated.daily reminder that Sachin and Viv averages about the same in actuality, Sobers is weird though
No one belittles him lol. Some just think he wasn't definitively better than Lara or Gavaskar or Chappell or Barrington.....This is the only Cricketting community that I've ever come to see on Internet that actively belittles Viv Richards, you hate to see it.