• 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.

CW's 100 Greatest Cricketers Poll

S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
I left Marshall because I considered ODIs as well..... Don, Grace and Sobers were automatic top 3; and then I had 3 bowlers, 1 allrounder and 2 batsmen close. Hobbs had FC and Sachin ODIs were they were too good, Imran was also were close to automatic and great in ODIs as well, as was Hadlee; and McGrath was the best ODI bowler. Murali despite being slightly below Marshall got a big ODI push, and Viv being the ODI GoAT got a massive one.
Click to expand...
ODIs are irrelevant.
 
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
capt_Luffy said:
I left Marshall because I considered ODIs as well..... Don, Grace and Sobers were automatic top 3; and then I had 3 bowlers, 1 allrounder and 2 batsmen close. Hobbs had FC and Sachin ODIs were they were too good, Imran was also were close to automatic and great in ODIs as well, as was Hadlee; and McGrath was the best ODI bowler. Murali despite being slightly below Marshall got a big ODI push, and Viv being the ODI GoAT got a massive one.
Click to expand...
Fair enough considering your criteria. For me personally I only applied ODIs as a criteria for distinction between players of similar quality i tests. So the top 7-8 members ever in tests made it first for me and then I used ODIs as a criteria(Murali over Warne and Viv and Mcgrath over Keith Miller).
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
HouHsiaoHsien said:
Fair enough considering your criteria. For me personally I only applied ODIs as a criteria for distinction between players of similar quality i tests. So the top 7-8 members ever in tests made it first for me and then I used ODIs as a criteria(Murali over Warne and Viv and Mcgrath over Keith Miller).
Click to expand...
Shouldn't impact be a factor as well? And if it is, considering we are talking about Greats not bests, shouldn't Grace be in the top 5 somewhere at least?
 
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
capt_Luffy said:
I mean, do agree, but Grace basically changed the game as it was before and was the best cricketer for a fairy long time (2-3 decades) when FC was the main format.
Click to expand...
Perhaps with Grace it’s fair, cause he was a really unique pioneering figure and moreover head and shoulders amongst his peers
 
P

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
1. Walter Hammond

Don’t forget Guy could actually bowl as well plus The Goat fielder when he retired.

2. Syd Barnes
3. Dale Steyn
4. Keith Miller
5. Adam Gilchrist
6. Shane Warne
7. Jacques Kallis
8. Brian Lara
9. Muttiah Muralitharan
10. Wasim Akram
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
kyear2 said:
Tests alone would have made it less complicated, or tests and first class. The LO stuff really isn't related.
Click to expand...
OverratedSanity said:
Agreed. I'm going only tests. Doesn't make much sense to combine formats to me.
Click to expand...
Probably. But we rank just Test cricketers quite often. I wanted to conduct what could be an overall group of Greatest Cricketers. If that definition doesn't includes LO for you, or FC or you; or you don't want to look at very old cricketers, so be it. Everyone can define "Greatness" however they want imo.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top