• 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.

Battle of the Legends

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
adharcric said:
In the Ranking the Batsmen thread, lillian thompson proposed this concept and I found it quite interesting. As I have the next month off on vacation, I'd love to run this battle.
Of course, the poster who came up with the idea should have the first opportunity to implement it ... so lillian thompson, let me know if you'd like to take charge.

I'm not normally online enough to keep this sort of thread going, so I'm content to leave it to you. Although I think it should be kept to 64 genuine legends, with due respect to Mike Brearley and Saqlain and a few names in that list that some people won't have heard of.
 
Last edited:

JBH001

International Regular
I agree, this thing is in danger of blowing out of proportion.

If everyone becomes a legend, then no-one is a legend.

You guys should keep this down to 64 as a maximum - frankly, I think 32 would be even better.
Otherwise this whole thing would become devalued.

Lets have genuine legends.
 

adharcric

International Coach
JBH001 said:
I agree, this thing is in danger of blowing out of proportion.

If everyone becomes a legend, then no-one is a legend.

You guys should keep this down to 64 as a maximum - frankly, I think 32 would be even better.
Otherwise this whole thing would become devalued.

Lets have genuine legends.
You definitely make a good point. It will take a lot to bring it down to 32 immediately, so let's try to take it down to 96 and go down from there (96-32-16-8-4-2).
For that to happen, you guys should suggest who I need to remove from the list. I'll do a bit of work myself and read up on everybody in the list for the next few hours.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah i do agree a lot of those guys aren't genuine greats, i say after you get 128 nominees then everyone just vote for their top ten, from there choice the top 32 of the highest polled.
 

Choc

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Sounds all good but what exactly makes a Legend? Is it his batting his fielding or is it the way he bowls or is it his all round cabability to take the game away from people. Could you guys be more specific so we at least know what we're looking for:confused: :detective
 

adharcric

International Coach
The concept of everyone listing their top ten would ruin the suspense somewhat. I have 115 right now. Please tell me who should NOT be in the list asap so we can get this started.
Again, we're going for 96 now.
 

oz_fan

International Regular
Take off:
Lance Cairns
David Boon
Mike Brearley
Brian Close
Ian Chappell
Gideon Haigh
 

pasag

RTDAS
Nah leave Boon, he's a massive legend. As far as I can tell, this Battle is supposed to include all aspects of the game, including off the feild aspects as well. Imo, we don't have to remove anyone, let the people decide who is and isn't a legend. If they're crap they won't last long anyway, so who cares? So go for the 128 imo.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Dravid said:
tbh, I will laugh my ass off if Bradman loses
TBH i would be surprised is WG Grace doesn't win, if people are voting on basic of legendary status and impact they had on the game, not just how good they were.

For a guys with such an average record to be seen as one of the best all rounders of all time just shows how much a legend he was.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
chaminda_00 said:
For a guys with such an average record to be seen as one of the best all rounders of all time just shows how much a legend he was.
He doesn't have an average record at all, he just didn't play test cricket when he was at his peak. He consistently averaged 2-4 times as much as the next best batsman at county level through his peak. Second only to Bradman in terms of dominating the game. It's similar to Barry Richards or something, if Richards had averaged about 100 at first class level for years on end.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
He doesn't have an average record at all, he just didn't play test cricket when he was at his peak. He consistently averaged 2-4 times as much as the next best batsman at county level through his peak. Second only to Bradman in terms of dominating the game. It's similar to Barry Richards or something, if Richards had averaged about 100 at first class level for years on end.
I don't look that closely at FC records, even Ashley Giles has a good FC record.
 

adharcric

International Coach
Alright, I've got 128 now. I'll start the battles soon. If you notice omissions, this is the time to let me know.
 

adharcric

International Coach
PhoenixFire said:
No Inzamam?
Done. Anyone else?

EDIT: Sorry chaminda, I decided to go for 128. Everyone will be happy that way and the non-genuine legends won't last long once the battles start.
 
Last edited:

Top