kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, don't see how Murali is a while tier above Shane Warne. Nah.
-
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.
Ian Botham vs Dennis Lillee
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
BazBall21
International Captain
Yep. They can't be a tier apart.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
Murali / Warne is a mirror argument of Tendulkar / Viv.
Without the minnow bashing Warne and Murali isn't that far apart and Murali had much more friendly home conditions.
Can't see Murali in separate tier to Warne.
But I also differ from that point that I don't think either has an argument to be the GOAT.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Let's can the Murali/Warne stuff or move it to the right thread, please.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No agenda here. I just think you need to justify tiers
You can.make an argument for a top tier but overall it's more arbitrary IMO than for bats. Like you put Lillee and Trueman in different tiers. Honestly the differences between them don't make sense. Especially as we see blemishes in the supposed top bowlers too.
But if you twisted my arm I would say:
Tier 1 - Well rounded ATG bowlers
Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, Imran, Warne, Murali
Tier 2 - ATG bowlers with gaps
Lillee, Ambrose, Akram, Trueman, Donald, Lindwall, O'Reilly
Tier 3 - Greats short of ATG
Holding, Garner, Cummins, etc.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I am reading this again and again to see if you really mean this.
5 wickets in two tests at a cheap average isn't a successful series.
It's a small sample and can't be held for or against him really.
But the fact that you can consider that little a haul a success and ignore hauls with maybe three times as many wickets because of a slightly higher average shows the root of why you read bowling stats totally wrong.
Arguably 3rd best spinner.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Lyon perpetually underestimated
Lyon is not getting enough opportunity to bowl in the day 5 pitches like Warne , murali in majority of matches because majority of matches ends at day 3 or Day 4.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yes. And the 2010s were dead flat pitches in Aus. Yes Lyon has won games not just in Aus but across the world. In fact he has won games in more countries then Warne and Murali.
Last edited:
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Bill O Reilly
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
is this comment satire?
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No. Not saying he is better away than Murali or Warne but he does have a bit more of a smattering of games won across locations.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
You say many and choose 2.
Benaud took pains to point out that it wasn't a best XI, that it was his XI. I can procure the expect clip for you if you like.
But let's look at a vast array of teams I've managed to find.
CricketWeb
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, McGrath
Cricinfo
Hutton, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Akram, Warne, Lillee
Wisden
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Akram, Warne, Marshall, Barnes
Geoffrey Boycott
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Headley, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Marshall, Warne, Lillee, Barnes
Christopher Martin-Jenkins
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Warne, Barnes, McGrath
Courier-Mail
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall, Warne, Lillee
Kim Hughes
Hobbs, Trumper, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall, Warne, Lillee
Martin Crowe
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Warne, Marshall, Lillee
Geoff Armstrong
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Barnes
Third Man Cricket
Gavaskar, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Warne, Marshall, McGrath
Bob Willis
Hobbs, Richards, Bradman, Richards, Kallis, Sangakkara, Sobers, Imran, Warne, Marshall, McGrath
Peterhrt
Hobbs, Richards, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Hadlee, Marshall, Barnes, O'Reilly
There's an additional one I'm not officially including because of the early date it was completed, '91, and so probably not fully representative, will still list it though.
E.W. Swanton
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Sobers , Headley, Miller, Davidson, Evans, Marshall, O'Reilly, Gibbs
Didn't include Dickie's because it was limited only to players he saw, umpired to, but that would have been another vote for Barry. Nor Benaud's for reasons mentioned above.
So we can do a tally of the 12
Hobbs - 12
Hutton - 3
Gavaskar - 3
Richards - 2
Grace - 3
Trumper - 1
Bradman - 12
Tendulkar - 8
Richards - 11
Hammond - 2
Pollock - 1
Kallis - 1
Headley - 1
Sobers - 12
Gilchrist - 9
Knott - 2
Sangakkara - 1
Warne - 11
O'Reilly - 1
Marshall - 12
Barnes - 5
Lillee - 5
McGrath - 4
Akram - 6
Imran - 3
Hadlee - 1
If I were to remove any it would be 3rd man cricket, but the one I'm replacing it with I haven't been able to confirm.
But for reference, John Snow
For kicks and giggles I also decided to ask Chat AI for an all time XI, and absolutely no prompts besides it being a test team.
Creating an all-time Test cricket team is a challenging task, given the wealth of talent across different eras. However, here’s a balanced and widely respected XI that includes some of the greatest players in Test cricket history:
---
1. **Sir Jack Hobbs (England)** - Opening batter, known as "The Master," with 61,760 first-class runs and 199 centuries.
2. **Sunil Gavaskar (India)** - One of the best openers in history, the first to cross 10,000 Test runs.
3. **Sir Donald Bradman (Australia)** - The greatest batter of all time, averaging 99.94 in Tests.
4. **Sachin Tendulkar (India)** - The highest run-scorer in Test cricket (15,921 runs) and a record 100 international centuries.
5. **Sir Viv Richards (West Indies)** - Dominant middle-order batter, known for his aggressive style.
6. **Sir Garfield Sobers (West Indies)** - The greatest all-rounder in cricket history, capable of batting, bowling, and fielding at the highest level.
7. **Adam Gilchrist (Australia) (wk)** - Revolutionary wicketkeeper-batter, redefined the role with his aggressive batting.
8. **Shane Warne (Australia)** - The greatest leg-spinner of all time, with 708 Test wickets.
9. **Wasim Akram (Pakistan)** - One of the most skillful fast bowlers, with swing and pace.
10. **Malcolm Marshall (West Indies)** - Arguably the greatest fast bowler, with unmatched control and aggression.
11. **Glenn McGrath (Australia)** - Master of line and length, with 563 Test wickets.
---
### Key Notes:
- **Bradman** is a non-negotiable inclusion, given his unparalleled batting record.
- **Sobers** provides balance with his all-round abilities.
- **Warne** and **Marshall** are widely regarded as the best in their respective bowling disciplines.
- The team has a mix of eras, styles, and skills to dominate any opposition in any conditions.
This XI would be a dream team for any cricket fan!
Ummmmmm.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
This is hilarious levels of desperation to make your argument. Kudos.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Dude what a waste of a post.
The point is there are plenty of other ATG XIs where Marshall isn't selected, showing he is nowhere near a lock. Benaud, Bradman, Bird, Woodcock, Rod Marsh, Brearely, Waqar, Peter Eager, I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are others.
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
I definitely pick Marshall in my all time XI, but I think it's fair to say that the idea of him being a consensus "locked-in" pick for such a team has become more and more prevalent in recent decades.
At or around the turn of the century, give or take, I saw all time XIs selected by Peter Baxter, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Henry Blofeld, Bill Frindall, Jonathan Agnew, Don Bradman, Richie Benaud and Ashley Mallett, and Marshall didn't make any of them.
TMS chose their 40th anniversary team for 1957-1997 and Marshall didn't make that team either.
And if the all time rankings of John Woodcock and Nick Brownlee around that time were converted into all time XIs then Marshall misses both those teams too, and by a long way.
To repeat, I disagree with all of these, but the idea that Marshall is a near-universal lock in an all time XI certainly wasn't the case until relatively recently.
At or around the turn of the century, give or take, I saw all time XIs selected by Peter Baxter, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Henry Blofeld, Bill Frindall, Jonathan Agnew, Don Bradman, Richie Benaud and Ashley Mallett, and Marshall didn't make any of them.
TMS chose their 40th anniversary team for 1957-1997 and Marshall didn't make that team either.
And if the all time rankings of John Woodcock and Nick Brownlee around that time were converted into all time XIs then Marshall misses both those teams too, and by a long way.
To repeat, I disagree with all of these, but the idea that Marshall is a near-universal lock in an all time XI certainly wasn't the case until relatively recently.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yup agree. Marshall has only gained steam recently but for an entire earlier generation, of which some of the names he mentioned are part of, Marshall was not a lock.