This was written about eight years agoNo Kohli or Smith?
This was written about eight years agoNo Kohli or Smith?
Of all the ones recently bandied about the only ones I find remotely credible are Gower's, CMJ's and Crowe's.Many lists have a target audience that drives their agenda. Editors play around with the order and add popular or controversial names hoping to boost publicity and sales/clicks.
A credible list should show a proper spread among eras, countries and disciplines that reflects cricket history.
CMJ had major input to the TMS list which is quite similar to his own, only ten years earlier. The TMS list appeared in book form in January 1999, squeezed between Woodcock's Top 100 in The Times (1997) and the Wisden Cricketers of the Century which the publishers knew was being prepared.Of all the ones recently bandied about the only ones I find remotely credible are Gower's, CMJ's and Crowe's.
Agree wholeheartedly. Perhaps one day I’ll try making one of my own.A credible list should show a proper spread among eras, countries and disciplines that reflects cricket history.
Do it. I'll include yours.Agree wholeheartedly. Perhaps one day I’ll try making one of my own.
Ha. Appreciate being considered worthy.Do it. I'll include yours.
So why mine isn't included???Do it. I'll include yours.
People love to eat pizza more than doctors in your country, that's why.So why mine isn't included???
Pizzas are probably better for health than doctors anyways.People love to eat pizza more than doctors in your country, that's why.
(Understandable ig, pizza tastes better than doctors)
Pizza>Apple>Doctor imo.Pizzas are probably better for health than doctors anyways.