CW Top 50 Cricketers of All Time - 2nd Edition

[silentstriker]

I got so ****ing confused there because I thought you were talking about Dev. Read through his bowling stats - "average of 240 vs England? wtf?"

240 not that far off .

Interesting thing about Dev is that his record in India is actually lower than his career - he averages around 26 in India. In England he averages almost 40, and in NZ, it's worse. In fact, except Australia and West Indies, Dev didn't do all that well outside of India. So I don't think the argument of 'flat wickets' really holds with him.

 

[ankitj]

Trust me I hate to do this...

 

[Satguru]

In my opinion...

Because he was and is a very one dimensional cricketer and it is arguable if he was the (2nd) best at even that dimension. Wasn't a great fielder, not much of a leader/captain and in terms of match-winning or turning knocks his probably don't list very highly.

I really find it hard to fathom that he gets in the top 5 ahead of Warne, Marshall, Murali, Richards, and quite a few others. He was great at what he did but he rarely transcended the game IMO to be in the top echelon of players. If he ended up second and ahead of Imran and Sobers...then I'd be at a loss for words.

Well, i agree with most of what you said, especially that theres now way he should be above Imran and Sobers. Everything except the bolded parts...

Ive always found this statement about Tendulkar not playing enough match winning/turning knocks a bit of a myth really...
136 at Chennai... has hardly ever been a better match-turning innings... 82/5 chasing 270 against Saqlain at his zenith. Yeah Wasim and Waqar werent quite at their best, but he had no one except effing Mongia for support... and he took as to the brink of victory... with a terrible back... if that isnt the very definition of epic i dunno what is

155 against australia... probably his best match winning knock

126 vs australia chennai 2001... probably his most underrated innings, and proved vital in winning that match, and the series

the 103 at chennai against england

Sure he's no Lara or Laxman in terms of playing match winning knocks, but a lack of great match-winning performances there is not

And, yeah the "carrying the burden of a billion" is NOT nonsense. It is most definitely not a privilege when youve been constantly hounded by the press, repeatedly been written off inspite of your achievements pretty much since the age of 17! He most definitely 'transcends' the game imo... because he's known in every nation by virtually everybody and whether they watch cricket or not, they know that theres a guy called Tendulkar

 

[silentstriker]

Trust me I hate to do this...

Sobers +16 but still with a 50+ away average. WAG!

 

[Satguru]

Sobers +16 but still with a 50+ away average. WAG!

Exactly! Wow

 

[Spark]

Well, i agree with most of what you said, especially that theres now way he should be above Imran and Sobers. Everything except the bolded parts...

Ive always found this statement about Tendulkar not playing enough match winning/turning knocks a bit of a myth really...
136 at Chennai... has hardly ever been a better match-turning innings... 82/5 chasing 270 against Saqlain at his zenith. Yeah Wasim and Waqar werent quite at their best, but he had no one except effing Mongia for support... and he took as to the brink of victory... with a terrible back... if that isnt the very definition of epic i dunno what is

155 against australia... probably his best match winning knock

126 vs australia chennai 2001... probably his most underrated innings, and proved vital in winning that match, and the series

the 103 at chennai against england

Sure he's no Lara or Laxman in terms of playing match winning knocks, but a lack of great match-winning performances there is not

And, yeah the "carrying the burden of a billion" is NOT nonsense. It is most definitely not a privilege when youve been constantly hounded by the press, repeatedly been written off inspite of your achievements pretty much since the age of 17! He most definitely 'transcends' the game imo... because he's known in every nation by virtually everybody and whether they watch cricket or not, they know that theres a guy called Tendulkar

Isn't that the point, though? We're not comparing him to Marcus North here.

 

[Satguru]

Isn't that the point, though? We're not comparing him to Marcus North here.

No its not the point... the point is that he has played a number of match winning innings... only Lara, VVS and Dravid compare in the modern era
The more important point is that you cant use the fact that some players hav eplayed more match winning knocks than him as an excuse to rate him lower... if that had been the case, VVS>>> Sachin, Ponting, Kallis, etc... which as we all know is false.

 

[Prince EWS]

No its not the point... the point is that he has played a number of match winning innings... only Lara, VVS and Dravid compare in the modern era
The more important point is that you cant use the fact that some players hav eplayed more match winning knocks than him as an excuse to rate him lower... if that had been the case, VVS>>> Sachin, Ponting, Kallis, etc... which as we all know is false.

You're assuming that the number of match winning knocks has to be either the only factor or not a factor at all. Most people here treat it as one of many factors, allowing for the possibility of a Lara > Tendulkar > Laxman type conclusion.

 

[Spark]

Would also disagree with the assertion that only Lara, VVS and Dravid compare btw

 

[zaremba]

tired of hearing all the nonsense of carrying the hopes of a billion people, all players carry the hopes of their countries, it a privilege not a burden.

excellent point imho

 

[kyear2]

Trust me I hate to do this...

The 135 avg in Bangladesh and the 68 avg on the even flatter pitches of Sri Lanka some what helps his away average, but yes he has been mostly consistent home and away.

 

[Ikki]

In seriousness though...

I really find it hard to fathom that you find it so hard to fathom that Tendulkar could be in someone's top 5.

The justification for Warne et.al. can apply equally to a dozen and more of other cricketers including Tendulkar. I could mention the fact that Tendulkar owns every batting record today, performed for over 2 decades remaining among the top 5-6 batsmen for most of this period, inspired an entire generation and more, was a top performer in days Gooch and Boon, and is a top performer in days of Clarke and Cook etc. But that's not what I am going to do as I did not have him in top 5 myself, possibly for some of the reasons that you yourself mentioned.

However, I find the certainty and authority with which you summarily rule out any possible argument to include Tendulkar in top 5 quite amusing. It's also a curious thing that you single out Tendulkar for that sort of assessment. It's not as if you are advocating a strictly stats/facts based evaluation either, like PEWS does. You are leaving enough room for subjectivity, influence, intangibles etc. One can make a completely stats/facts based argument and also talk about the intangibles for Tendulkar perfectly well. On the other hand for some others it would be possible to justify a next-only-to-bradman status only on intangibles.

In that sense I think there is a very, very long list of cricketers who can be considered eligible for next-only-to-bradman. This includes someone like Lillee too who I didn't even have in my 25, but I totally get the rationale that someone will like to use to put him at #2.

I just find your arguments a result of a deep seated bias or dislike for Tendulkar or his stardom, deny it as much as you like.

TBH, I probably wouldn't have sounded so certain had I not seen him for pretty much his entire career. He is an ATG, arguably the 2nd greatest batsman of all time and he did a lot for his country. But when talking about the top 5 players IMO he lacks a lot of qualities that made the others stand out. They weren't just fantastic batsmen or bowlers or all-rounders; they were that and a whole lot more. When I look at it logically I find it hard to believe there is this gulf between someone like him and Ponting. IMO it isn't reasonably justifiable and in my rating he was actually one place below Ponting - an ATG bat almost level with Tendulkar, an ATG fielder and one of the most successful captains of all time.

His records of most centuries or most matches or most runs really mean very little to me as I don't regard aggregate records in terms of judging players. They would matter if they were achieved a far greater rate than his rivals.

Never been to India, eh?


Not that I think he's better than Sobers, or Imran, or Hobbs, etc..

I think all great players were heroes to their countrymen. I do not think he transcended the game. I generally think he is an ATG bat and TBF, there are usually several of them almost every decade. That in itself is not a transcendance. He didn't change the game or the way it is viewed. It's not that those things alone create greatness. I think Sehwag will have a more lasting impact on the game than Tendulkar will, but I don't think he is Tendulkar's equal. But the players I mentioned were not only great players but their place in cricket will be truly missed. What will be missed about Tendulkar? It sounds denigrating, but I am just being honest about how I view him.

+1

He didn't revolutionize anything, was not a great match winner, he accumulated runs for 20 years and had a great technique. Apart form the longevity it's even hard to say he was the best of his era ahead of Lara and Ponting, There are also some who say Dravid was better in a crisis and even the better match winner. People constantly defend Dev's bowling stats by saying that he bowled on those flat tracks, but never factor that in when discussing Sachin. Part of what I said about Warne, Marshall and Viv were that they were winners, can't indisputably say that about Tendy, he wasn't a great captain, or slip fielder or bowler like Sobers or captain and all rounder like Imran, and tired of hearing all the nonsense of carrying the hopes of a billion people, all players carry the hopes of their countries, it a privalege not a burden. He to me is comparable with Lara, Ponting, Hammond and Headley, but below the aforementioned Richards, Marshall, Warne, Sobers and of course Bradman.

Yeh, AWTA completely.

And, yeah the "carrying the burden of a billion" is NOT nonsense. It is most definitely not a privilege when youve been constantly hounded by the press, repeatedly been written off inspite of your achievements pretty much since the age of 17! He most definitely 'transcends' the game imo... because he's known in every nation by virtually everybody and whether they watch cricket or not, they know that theres a guy called Tendulkar

Firstly, I disagree with you about his ability to turn games. Even though he was the best player in the team, when it came to the crunch if I was the opposition I'd be far more weary of Dravid, Laxman and even Sehwag than Tendulkar. He was a wonderful accumulator, and sure he did contribute to wins; but when I mention match-winner/turner I think it is a bit elaborate than that. He may have done it in some matches, I just would say he was not renown for it. Not as much as the likes he is being named above.

Secondly, I totally disagree with the billion burdens argument. If anything they love the guy to the point of making him a deity. He has his haters, but he has more than enough fans to excuse his failings. Every great champion has to fear being written and many have gone through it. In that, I see nothing unique about Tendulkar. Being simply known in other countries is not my idea of transcendence.

 

[silentstriker]

What will be missed about Tendulkar?

Never been to India, eh?

I don't consider him better than players like Hobbs or sobers, and probably on par with guys like Chappell so I'm not the right guy to have this argument with but you should take an angle and focus on his performance and not words like transcending or things that will be missed - because you'll lose that argument.

 

[Fusion]

So we’re down to the Final Five. Predictions about order? I know that Smali said that it was still undetermined who’ll take the number one spot during the final days of counting. However, I’m going to assume that Bradman was able to pull ahead of Sobers in the end. Therefore, my prediction is they’ll finish in the following order:

Bradman
Sobers
Imran (will benefit from higher rankings from fans that didn’t participate last time)
Tendulkar
Warne

I'm right on the money so far. Smali did mention a surprise, so perhaps Sobers will come out on top. It will surprise me for sure though.

Hey Smali, I hope you are planning to reveal the next two simultaneously? It will obviously be anti-climactic to hold the number 1 choice after revealing the 2nd.

 

[smash84]

yes Fusion,

that's the plan......to reveal the next 2 simultaneously......I love my Imran write up though (although most of it is copy paste but I'll enjoy it for the next 2 days )

 

[Fusion]

You've done a great job running this thing and posting the write ups. Kudos to you, I've enjoyed it a lot.

 

[smash84]

one of the surprises was Tendulkar over Warne (compared to last time of course)

 

[smash84]

You've done a great job running this thing and posting the write ups. Kudos to you, I've enjoyed it a lot.

thanks man.......I am glad some people enjoyed it....some good debate came up too thanks to PEWS mainly.....(some thanks to Ikki too )

 

[Fusion]

one of the surprises was Tendulkar over Warne (compared to last time of course)

Since you mentioned two surprises, this pretty much reveals that Sobers will trump Bradman.

 

[kyear2]

And the other can't be Sobers over the Don, can it? It's hard to argue with 99.94