Best After The Don

[centurymaker]

I have rated them this way for at least 2 yrs now.

1- bradman
2- viv richards
3- sobers/tendulkar

then the rest..

 

[The Sean]

I don't think it's disrespectful to all the other great Test batsmen to say that Bradman was on another level, it's simply the truth. No one is judging or thinking less of the achievements of Hobbs/Sobers/Richards/Tendulkar etc because of it.

 

[sobers no:1]

Don't know about second best batsman of All Time, but deserves be in the discussion now with Sobers and Bradman for the Greatest Cricketer of All Time. For me he is a solid third, but definately in the discussion.
With regards to pure batting, I fid it difficult to call Barry Richards, Gavaskar or Kallis the second best. For Richards, four tests are simply and totally to little to judge a player and that attack that he plundered could hardly be seen as high quality. The other two just arn't seen as the best of their era, with Kallis for most seen as being behind, Tendy, BCL and Punter.
Speaking of Ponting, he was seen by some to have improved as the bowling got worse, but at some parts during his run spree, I was saying that he may just be remembered as the best player of his generation, so I guess it subjective. Hammond, was known to dislike short pitched bowling and for the most part of his career didn't have to, but for that reluctance of fast short pitched bowling for me he is more comparable to Everton Weekes than Bradman, and Hammond never faced any bolwers of the calibre of Lindwall and Miller in his test prime.
That leave me with a top 10 of Hobbs, Bradman, Headley, Hutton, Sobers, Pollock, Chappell, Richards, Tendulkar and Lara.
From those it can be argued that Headley and Pollock also didn't play enough, and Hutton and Chappell, though undoubably great just didn't take over games and destroy attacks like all of the others were capable of.
That then leaves me with Hobbs, Bradman, Sobers, Richards, Tendulkar and Lara, and from here is's purely up to personal taste and it gets really to close to call.

//The other two just arn't seen as the best of their era//



viv , gavaskar , chappell = sachin , lara , ponting

viv and sachin considered as the best by majority
lara and gavaskar made it arguable
chappel and ponting.. hmm never seen anyone rating them as the best in their era

pls switch btwn gavasakr and chappell or add IMO

 

[kyear2]

I have rated them this way for at least 2 yrs now.

1- bradman
2- viv richards
3- sobers/tendulkar

then the rest..

Even that.

Still Working it out in my head, but probably (listed chonologically)

Hobbs
Bradman
Sobers
Richards
Tendulkar

In Lister order

Lara
Hutton
Chappell
Headley

Ponting
Gavaskar
Pollock
Kallis
Hammond
Walcott
Worrell
Border
Weekes
Miandad

B. Richards *

Very hard to rate Barry, so he is in a catergory of his own, as depending on criteria he could be in the first second or third tier.

 

[Satyanash89]

Even that.

Still Working it out in my head, but probably (listed chonologically)

Hobbs
Bradman
Sobers
Richards
Tendulkar

In Lister order

Lara
Hutton
Chappell
Headley

Ponting
Gavaskar
Pollock
Kallis
Hammond
Walcott
Worrell
Border
Weekes
Miandad

B. Richards *

Very hard to rate Barry, so he is in a catergory of his own, as depending on criteria he could be in the first second or third tier.

Dravid in place of Miandad and it would be very similar to the list id make

 

[kyear2]

Wanted to keep it to 20 and so many great players missed out, some of those who were in contention.

Waugh
Trumper
Mcabe
Compton
Sutcliffe
Greenidge
Kanhai
Lloyd
Dravid
Sangakkara

 

[smash84]

Wanted to keep it to 20 and so many great players missed out, some of those who were in contation.

 

[akilana]

S waugh is massively under-rated both as a batsmn and a player in these decussions. Played many good knocks and was fantastic against WI and in ashes. He was also in the top 3 during the 90s and statiscally as good as sachin in that time. In his last 100 tests, his average was around 60 IIRC.

 

[kyear2]

S waugh is massively under-rated both as a batsmn and a player in these decussions. Played many good knocks and was fantastic against WI and in ashes. He was also in the top 3 during the 90s and statiscally as good as sachin in that time. In his last 100 tests, his average was around 60 IIRC.

Wanted Miandad in, he is after all Pakistan's best batsman and they are are somewhat similar players.

 

[watson]

Just to go back to Lara's record for a minute;

Lara's theme: a caribbean rhapsody

.....Concluding words

Lara has never been involved in any incident on field. In this matter he is exactly like his close friend, the one who, at last measurement was three inches shorter and a few Test runs richer!!! His fracas with the WICB on payments was something he did on behalf of himself and his team-mates.

Where is Lara placed in the pantheon of batting greats? On numbers, nowhere, as do many of the other modern greats. However if we strictly rely on numbers, Lohmann and Barrington are certainties in any selection. There are many other factors. Many batsmen compete for the coveted second spot amongst Test batsmen. Sobers, Hobbs, Tendulkar, Lara, Richards, Hutton and Ponting form a reasonably populated group from which to pick one. I would not question anyone whose selection varies from mine. But as far as I am concerned, Lara is the candidate for this coveted position. If I have to justify this with numbers, a string of numbers would do: 153, 213, 688, 400, 375, 277 and 226.

If I sit down to select an all-time best eleven (or fifteen) I would immediately write down the following three names. Then go for a cup of coffee, put my feet up and think, refer to my database (why? I probably have all the relevant numbers in my head) and then fill the other names over a day. This I say, implying no disrespect to any of the other greats who would eventually find their way into the team.

Bradman
Lara
Gilchrist


Blogs: Lara's theme: a caribbean rhapsody | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Red]

It's an interesting question I reckon. I think if you're picking an XI, you want everyone in their correct position. Bradman obviously goes at #3 for most people, but who do you reckon fits in to 4, 5 & 6, and why?

In my opinion Sobers is a lock for #6, based on his batting alone, without factoring in his bowling and fielding.

 

[Coronis]

//The other two just arn't seen as the best of their era//



viv , gavaskar , chappell = sachin , lara , ponting

viv and sachin considered as the best by majority
lara and gavaskar made it arguable
chappel and ponting.. hmm never seen anyone rating them as the best in their era

pls switch btwn gavasakr and chappell or add IMO

More people would rate Chappell and Ponting higher than Gavaskar I'd say.

Wanted to keep it to 20 and so many great players missed out, some of those who were in contention.

Waugh
Trumper
Mcabe
Compton
Sutcliffe
Greenidge
Kanhai
Lloyd
Dravid
Sangakkara

Sorry, just have a hard time believing that Sutcliffe, Sangakkara can be on the same level as Kanhai and Lloyd. No WI bias there mate?

S waugh is massively under-rated both as a batsmn and a player in these decussions. Played many good knocks and was fantastic against WI and in ashes. He was also in the top 3 during the 90s and statiscally as good as sachin in that time. In his last 100 tests, his average was around 60 IIRC.

He is mainly rated on his captaincy, sadly.

 

[watson]

Sorry, just have a hard time believing that Sutcliffe, Sangakkara can be on the same level as Kanhai and Lloyd. No WI bias there mate?

No, I agree with putting Kanhai and Lloyd on the same plane as Sutcliffe and Sangakkara.

Sutcliffe and Sangagkara have the edge in terms of raw numbers, but the West Indians are still the better batsman; as counter intuitive as that sounds.

 

[Jono]

S waugh is massively under-rated both as a batsmn and a player in these decussions. Played many good knocks and was fantastic against WI and in ashes. He was also in the top 3 during the 90s and statiscally as good as sachin in that time. In his last 100 tests, his average was around 60 IIRC.

Its weird. In the 90s it was always Steve Waugh, Lara and Sachin. Ponting than joined that group and its almost like because Ponting is there, Steve Waugh got kicked out.

Odd.

Lest we forget the MRF trio!

 

[smash84]

MRF can surely hire someone to make better uniforms (the color is awful)

 

[kyear2]

More people would rate Chappell and Ponting higher than Gavaskar I'd say.



Sorry, just have a hard time believing that Sutcliffe, Sangakkara can be on the same level as Kanhai and Lloyd. No WI bias there mate?
.

Actually rate Kanhai higher than Sangakkara, and they are some from the 60's who though that Kanhai was a better batsman than Sobers. Regarding Sutcliffe, the fact that he averaged more than Hobbs and Hutton, yet was rated below them both should say something. His suspected scoring rate was in the mid 30's and so I have no problem with where he is rated. Lloyd took on the quartet in India and Lillee and Thompson in Australia and succeeded againts both. Watching Sangakkara in Australia in the last series and what he is doing now at home leaves some questions in my mind, not because of what he is doing now, but rather how he played againts Australia.

So NO, no bias here.

 

[watson]

And here is a coincidence.....

Who's the next-best batsman after Bradman?

We all know who the greatest batsman of them all is, but who's second in line?

By Martin Crowe

Donald George Bradman. Australia. Greatest Ever Batsman. Just rolls off the tongue, easy peasy. Question is, who comes next behind the great man? Daylight? No, a bit flippant. So how do we decide? Let me name four candidates from four different eras and then make a decision.

Do I need to go back to the start, to the 19th century? Not really, cricket was a bit raw back then. So how about we start with Bradman's era? Does this first candidate's name start with an H? It does, but it's not Hammond, it's George Headley, the Black Bradman, from the West Indies.

Headley over Hammond because he scored a century exactly every four innings, Hammond one nearly every seven. So Headley's ratio was closer to Bradman's than anyone else. Also similar to the Don was Headley's mindset. He spent a lot of time visualising what he wanted. He often didn't sleep prior to a match, so when he got to the middle he was calm and relaxed. Headley is the first candidate.

Next era is 20 years on and another West Indian, Garry Sobers, the flamboyant, brilliant left-hander from Barbados. It's not so much the record, which is lofty, but the way in which he played and dominated. Like Bradman, he was the best of his day. He succeeded in all conditions and in all situations. He scored big, he scored fast, he scored consistent Test centuries, one every six innings, on top of his all-round duties. Sobers is candidate No. 2.

Moving on to the next 20 years and to the batsmen who faced the might of the greatest fast-bowling attack ever, the vaunted West Indian big men. This was the hardest assignment of all: to survive, attack and conquer this uncompromising blitz of short fast bowling. The man to do it best was Sunil Gavaskar from India. Roberts, Garner, Holding, Croft, and Marshall - the little master stood up to them and scored nine fine centuries against them, amongst his 34 Test hundreds overall. Gavaskar pips Viv Richards and Greg Chappell from that era for that one reason alone, that he passed the hardest exam, a test not even Viv would have topped. Gavaskar is candidate No. 3.

Twenty more years on, the final man is easily found; it's the other little Indian master, Sachin Tendulkar. Bradman himself thought Tendulkar looked the most like him - high praise indeed. Tendulkar continues to show us why. The greatest run-scorer, century-maker and household name, he is candidate No. 4.

So who will it be: Headley, Sobers, Gavaskar or Tendulkar? It's almost impossible to know where to start, to start removing anyone of these unbelievable batsmen. So I will add a new premise to finding the next best after Bradman. It is who would be the ideal batting partner to join Bradman? After all, isn't batting all about the partnership? So if you had the right-handed Bradman at one end, who would you want to see join him to bat with? Or if you were a bowler, who would you prefer not to see?

I have my answer. I believe the greatest batting partnership you could ever wish to lay your eyes on would be Don Bradman and Garry Sobers, the greatest left-hander of all time. The Australian and the West Indian; the short, fast-moving run machine and the tall, languid, carefree freak. The ideal contrasting yet complementary pair.

So there it is, close your eyes and dream the dream, Bradman and Sobers batting together at Lord's on a great pitch, with the sun blazing down on a full house. Enjoy it. It's heavenly.


Note: Martin Crowe, one of the leading batsmen of the late '80s, played 77 Tests for New Zealand


The Jury's Out: Who's the next-best batsman after Bradman? | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Red]

Pretty average and uninformed article from Crowe.

- Headley might have made a century every four innings, while Hammond only made one every seven, but Hammond played a ****load more tests than Headley, against (arguably) better opposition.

- And G. Chappell averaged 56 against the WIs, so his record against them is very similar to Gavaskar's.

- And to discount Viv because he didn't play against his own attack is one thing, but to say "(Gavaskar) passed the hardest exam, a test not even Viv would have topped" is kind of odd. How does he know? Viv was as good as anyone I've seen against quick bowling.

 

[smash84]

yeah.....not a great piece by Crowe at all

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Whats the bet that if the poll was just between Tendulkar and Sobers or Tendulkar and Vivs, the winner wouldn't be Tendulkar