Ian Botham vs Dennis Lillee

[Johan]

Warne is argued as the greatest of all time a lot more often than Hadlee and Murali, by peers and journalists.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Warne is argued as the greatest of all time a lot more often than Hadlee and Murali, by peers and journalists.

I like Warne, but that's largely for flair. He most likely is argued to be the GOAT more than any other bowler, probably more so than Marshall and Lillee, definitely McGrath.

 

[Johan]

I like Warne, but that's largely for flair. He most likely is argued to be the GOAT more than any other bowler, probably more so than Marshall and Lillee, definitely McGrath.

Yeah, so if the basis for being tier 1 is having the argument to be the GOAT, Warne should be the first name you write down in it even if you think McGrath or Marshall have a better case.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah, so if the basis for being tier 1 is having the argument to be the GOAT, Warne should be the first name you write down in it even if you think McGrath or Marshall have a better case.

I simply don't think Warne has that strong a GOAT case. Peer rating sucks.

 

[Johan]

I simply don't think Warne has that strong a GOAT case. Peer rating sucks.

then Murali doesn't either, because he doesn't even have peer rating going for him.

 

[capt_Luffy]

then Murali doesn't either, because he doesn't even have peer rating going for him.

I don't count peer rating for modern players at all. A non factor. Murali has the sheer scale of numbers going for him. 800 wickets at a 6+ WPM

 

[Johan]

I don't count peer rating for modern players at all. A non factor. Murali has the sheer scale of numbers going for him. 800 wickets at a 6+ WPM

their numbers are literally identical without the minnow bashing Murali did in Asia my guy. You youself said the gap is negligible, so a peer of Warne with 1/10 the peer rating has GOAT argument but Warne doesn't, as I said, bullshit.

 

[capt_Luffy]

their numbers are literally identical without the minnow bashing Murali did in Asia my guy. You youself said the gap is negligible, so a peer of Warne with 1/10 the peer rating has GOAT argument but Warne doesn't, as I said, bullshit.

It's my list make your own. All 5 of those in tier 1 each have reasons to be the GOAT. For Murali, it's the sheer scale of his numbers, be it no of wickets or WPM. He is also, undoubtedly, the GOAT bowler at Home. Don't think by skill or career I would put them separately, but Warne lacks the X Factor to be in tier 1.

 

[Johan]

It's my list make your own. All 5 of those in tier 1 each have reasons to be the GOAT. For Murali, it's the sheer scale of his numbers, be it no of wickets or WPM. He is also, undoubtedly, the GOAT bowler at Home. Don't think by skill or career I would put them separately, but Warne lacks the X Factor to be in tier 1.

Ok, your list sucks, Mine's WAY better.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Tier 1:
Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Barnes, Murali

Tier 2:
Warne, Steyn, Ambrose, Imran, O'Reilly, Akram, Donald

Tier 3:
Holding, Garner, Lindwall, Lillee, Trueman, Bumrah, Cummins, Davidson

Tier 4:
Waqar, (van der Bijl), Walsh, Pollock, Anderson, Roberts, Spofforth, Ashwin, Grimmett, Procter, Bedser, Laker

Tier 5:
Verity, Tayfield, Larwood, Statham, Kumble, Gibbs, Hazlewood, Snow, Lohmann, Bishop, Willis, Philander, Johnston, Underwood, Chandrasekhar, Hall, Adcock, Mahmood, Bedi, Pollock, Rhodes, Lyon, Tate

Tier 6:
Kapil, Botham, Broad, Richardson, Gillespie, Croft, Clarke, Cowie, Akhtar, Tyson, Turner, Jadeja, Herath, Wagner, Boult, Shami, Trumble, Blythe, Wardle, Johnson, Constantine, Bowes, McDermott, McKenzie, Swann, Mushtaq, Gupte, MacGill, Peel, Prasanna, Ntini, Thomson, Vogler, Streak,Gough, Asif, Starc, Harris, Bond, Southee, Ramadhin, Vaas, Morkel, Briggs, Lock, Ferris, C Griffith, H Griffith, Voce, Freeman

Tier 7:
Lockwood, Foster, Reid, Aldermann, Valentine, Jamieson, de Villiers, Daniel, Taylor, Amar, Nissar, Hughes, Heine, Collinge, Motz, Maharaj, Appleyard, Qasim, Srinath, Fraser, Hughes, Lee, McDonald, Gregory, Cairns, Hoggard, Hendricks, Caddick, Brown, Higgs, Farnes, Lee, Martindale, Roach, Flintoff, Zaheer, Ishant, Seales, Jansen, Schultz, Hall, Abbott, Toshack, Mallett, Mailey, Yadav, Qadir, Mushtaq, Singh, Shah, Ironmonger, Yardley, Faulkner, Peate, Clark, Patterson, Nortje, Boland, Pattinson, Kaneria, Titmus, Nash, Walker, Palmer, Lawson, Harmison, Francis, Gilchrist, Hasan, Cairns

You forgot Rabada

 

[Johan]

there's literally no way Tony Lock was better than Iqbal Qasim.

 

[kyear2]

Let's look at the candidates who can be argued with:

- Tendulkar: Lara, Smith
- Marshall: Barnes, Bumrah
- Imran: Wasim, Hadlee
- Gilly: Knott, Sanga

I think after Sobers, the closest lock would be Hobbs except for fringe opinions like @kyear2

I love how you drop Imran in there, he's not in that category and you know that. But I digress.

@vidiq I start with the owns who makes Cricinfo's Wisden's and ours. That leaves

Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Marshall and Warne. More, that's not the list, just the ones who even enter the argument. A very strong argument can also be made for Gilchrist, but I've also seen and shared strong arguments against him.

Richards is the easiest and first elimination
Despite his peer rating and making the Wisden top 5 players of the century, his rating here and in the general public is waning from the spread sheet generation. In any event, he's not nearly automatic and definitely has competition and argument, namely Lara and Smith.

Warne is the most divisive and yet comprehensive battle. There's definitely a battle here, but don't think I've seen Murali make an AT XI over Warne. But still there are many here that would argue it here and so can be seen as competition, but I don't think there's a scenario where Warne doesn't make it.

As I've mentioned Gilchrist, similar to Warne he's going to make it, but there's plenty of argument for Knott for those who prefer a specialist and better keeper. Especially considering the batting lineup that precedes him.

So that leaves us with... Hobbs, Tendulkar and Marshall to join the obvious two of Bradman and Sobers.

So if I'm being objective, those are the 3 to join Bradman and Sobers as being without competition or argument.

Tendulkar and Marshall have basically the same case. There's two spots open for Sachin and there aren't two middle order batsmen rated higher. So regardless of pretense Viv, Smith and Lara are fighting over the other spot. There are 2 opening bowling spots open for Maco and there's not 2 opening bowlers rated higher than him, nor combine his skill set and aggression up front.

Hobbs doesn't make my XI, for no other reasons than I've never seen him bat and his bona fides come from before WWI. No disrespect to his greatness, I just don't know how he fares in all conditions vs all opponents.

But that's me, and so my 4 would be Bradman, Sobers, Marshall and Tendulkar. But overall Hobbs is definitely in there.

Realistically though, Gilchrist and Warne are also in there, just with completion and argument.

So basically there's 7 players selected before the exercise even begins.

Sir John Hobbs

Sir Donald Bradman ©
Sachin Tendulkar

Sir Garfield Sobers^⁵
Adam Gilchrist +

Malcolm Marshall ¹
Shane Warne ⁴


If you want it in tiers?

Bradman | Sobers
Marshall | Tendulkar | Hobbs

Gilchrist | Warne

 

[kyear2]

How about ones with Barry Richards??

Quite a few actually.

Makes more than Sutcliffe and Boycott combined.

 

[kyear2]

We really don’t need to do that. I don’t need the exact same post yet again.

No one forces you to read them.

I know you don't appreciate inconvenient facts.

 

[kyear2]

Why?? They are kinda cute in a very try hard way.......

(Btw started Simpsons, will tell you how I feel after I finish S2)

Like your Gavaskar / Ashwin / Kapil posts?

Well you definitely do try hard, lol

 

[kyear2]

If Hobbs can be considered an automatic pick, then Sydney Barnes should be considered as well.

Is it what we're considering or the players that actually make such teams?

Figure there should be taking both into consideration. And Barnes is often not found in many. Definely some though.

 

[Johan]

Richards is the easiest and first elimination
Despite his peer rating and making the Wisden top 5 players of the century, his rating here and in the general public is waning from the spread sheet generation. In any event, he's not nearly automatic and definitely has competition and argument, namely Lara and Smith.

not sure if true.

 

[subshakerz]

There are 2 opening bowling spots open for Maco and there's not 2 opening bowlers rated higher than him, nor combine his skill set and aggression up front.

Marshall doesn't make many ATG XIs like Benaud and Dickie Bird because there are a few who are rated ahead like Lillee or Barnes. And soon Bumrah might. He isn't unanimous even if we rate him best.

Just because he is your favorite and rated high on CW doesn't mean you can invent facts.

 

[subshakerz]

not sure if true.

Yeah based on the ATG XI analysis of current and former players, Viv's standing is still pretty strong. In fact several who argue between Lara and Tendulkar will say Viv is the best.

 

[sayon basak]

there's literally no way Tony Lock was better than Iqbal Qasim.

Tony Lock wasn't even a bowler.