• 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

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
But you're voting that a batsman who is clearly the standard of an international 10 or 11 today, is one of the greatest cricketers of all time, on the basis that he was less crap than everyone else in his day.

Of course if he was given modern training, coaching and equipment he would be a better player than he was.

There's no way of saying though that he would have been the best in the world, or even good enough to play for England.

As an assessment of the best cricketers of all time, he's plainly absolutely nowhere, and bearing in mind his record that probably stands for everyone pre-war, with the possible exception of Bradman who was so far ahead of everyone else that he may have reached a standard of excellence even by today's players.
In an assessment of best footballers of All Time, would you not place Pelé in Top 100 given he wasn't as good as Embappé.... Or would you not rank Ali in Top 10 boxers as he most likely will not be stronger than Mayweather??
 

Brook's side

International Regular
In an assessment of best footballers of All Time, would you not place Pelé in Top 100 given he wasn't as good as Embappé.... Or would you not rank Ali in Top 10 boxers as he most likely will not be stronger than Mayweather??
Ali had technique. Pele had technique.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
Ali had technique. Pele had technique.
The technique they had have changed significantly. Pele could not possibly played today with a similar technique. Hobbs had better technique than someone like Root or Kohli. Heck, purely technically Hobbs was arguably even ahead of Don, who suffered in sticky dogs.
 

sayon basak

International Debutant
And also how is having a better technique measure of someone's greatness? Technique is subject to change. Beckenbauer was a libero, which is not seen nowadays because of the current off side rule, now should we dismiss his greatness as a libero?
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But you're voting that a batsman who is clearly the standard of an international 10 or 11 today, is one of the greatest cricketers of all time, on the basis that he was less crap than everyone else in his day.
Nah you’re saying he’s the standard of a ten or 11 today based on staged, stilted, ancient footage. You’re assuming I’m accepting that premise, which I’m not.

so I’m actually not saying that at all.
 

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
You can define Greatness as you may seem fit; be it impact, consistency, peak or even innovation, in any way shape or form you deem fit. As for formats, its a 100 Greatest Cricketers List. You can take it as Test only, Test + FC, Test + ODI, Test + ODI + T20 + FC + Grade, only T20s..... Give preference to any format any way you may seem fit. Same for the primary skills, secondary skills, fielding, captaincy, etc. And again, it's All Time, so feel free to Vote or to not vote for cricketers who played before Test came around, or in the round arm era or under arm era. Vote for the 10 Greatest Cricketers In Order. The first place gets 10 points, second 9, third 8..... Each round will be open for 48 hours.
Love this opening post.

Cricket is not just Test Cricket. It is all encompassing so ideally you should look at a player's entire body of work to determine their true greatness as a cricketer.
 

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
But you're voting that a batsman who is clearly the standard of an international 10 or 11 today, is one of the greatest cricketers of all time, on the basis that he was less crap than everyone else in his day.

Of course if he was given modern training, coaching and equipment he would be a better player than he was.

There's no way of saying though that he would have been the best in the world, or even good enough to play for England.

As an assessment of the best cricketers of all time, he's plainly absolutely nowhere, and bearing in mind his record that probably stands for everyone pre-war, with the possible exception of Bradman who was so far ahead of everyone else that he may have reached a standard of excellence even by today's players.
This is embarrassing. Bradman himself mentioned that Hobbs had the finest technique of any batsman that he ever saw, better than Hutton and all. He saw enough of Hobbs including playing with him and who better to judge a batsman?

It’s like not having The Cubian Chess Genius, Jose Capablanca who was Hobbs contemporary in top 10 saying he couldn’t hang on with todays chess player. Capa for that matter is widely placed at no.4 and would be smashed by current today top 100. Doesn’t mean a thing.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
This is embarrassing. Bradman himself mentioned that Hobbs had the finest technique of any batsman that he ever saw, better than Hutton and all. He saw enough of Hobbs including playing with him and who better to judge a batsman?

It’s like not having The Cubian Chess Genius, Jose Capablanca who was Hobbs contemporary in top 10 saying he couldn’t hang on with todays chess player. Capa for that matter is widely placed at no.4 and would be smashed by current today top 100. Doesn’t mean a thing.
Yeah, for that matter you can't really expect Fischer himself to win against Gukesh or Pragg today.... Doesn't makes them better really, just from a time with a wider variety of resources and the knowledge of games Fischer and the latter generations.
 

Brook's side

International Regular
This is embarrassing. Bradman himself mentioned that Hobbs had the finest technique of any batsman that he ever saw, better than Hutton and all.

Shot 1 (16 seconds): The Hobbs forward defensive
A huge lunge forward with the bat planted 6 inches in front of his eyes and a foot in front of his front leg.
Arms almost horizontal, back almost horizontal.
Nearly falling over with his back foot on the verge of lifting off the ground
1719407952737.png


Shot 2 (20/21 seconds): The Hobbs cover drive
Gets nicely in position to shovel/dink it into the hands of short extra cover.
Follows through with the bat facing mid wicket.
1719408120410.png
1719408159368.png

Shot 3: The Hobbs back foot off-drive / aimless waft
God only knows what he's doing here. He moves forward, then moves back, then with his weight nowhere wafts at it (seemingly missing the ball) with a straight bat. If he'd managed by chance to make contact it might have dribbled back to the bowler. Far more likely nick it or get bowled.
1719408596619.png

Shot 4: The Hobbs wander around in your crease almost toppling over and then try to dolly it to short mid wicket
Looks like he missed it again
1719408948194.png

Shot 5: The Hobbs try to poke it back to the bowler without falling over
See shot 1
1719409137824.png

Shot 6: The Hobbs front foot square drive
Stab it outside in, somewhere just in front of point. Flick the wrists so that the bat's facing square leg
1719409295998.png

finish facing the bowler, looking where you think it might have gone
1719409601948.png

Shot 7: The Hobbs lofted on drive
Don't quite get to the pitch of it, lean back, bat flow going though mid wicket, somehow manage to nearly take the cameraman's head off at silly mid off
1719409760263.png

Shot 8: The Hobbs lofted drive
Get nowhere near the pitch. Take a baseball style swipe miles away from your body
(no photo used)

Shot 9: The Hobbs backwards defensive
Grip the bat almost on the shoulder, then twist it to face wide mid on, then half topple forward
1719410074043.png

@Burgey
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
27 voters this round. I unfortunately couldn't take two votes into account for including multiple players already ranked. As now going forward the players are going to be closer and closer; it is good to see an increase in participation. Not a single player was able to get all the votes and the no 11 spot saw a fierce competition between Warne and Murali. As did the last two spots between 4 ATG bowlers in Barnes, Akram, Steyn and Ambrose. Calculating that part made me nervous.

Here are the results:

PlayersPointsVotes
Shane Warne17624
Mutthiah Muralitharan17223
Jacques Kallis12218
Keith Miller11317
Brian Lara10019
Wally Hammond9618
Len Hutton8918
Adam Gilchrist8315
Wasim Akram4912
Sydney Barnes4810
Dale Steyn4710
Curtly Ambrose4212
Steve Smith399
Sunil Gavaskar358
Dennis Lillee235
Ian Botham164
Greg Chappell143
Bill O'Reilly114
Joel Garner101
Ken Barrington81
Gordon Greenidge81
Mike Procter71
Everton Weekes71
Ricky Ponting63
Fred Trueman52
A B de Villiers51
George Headley51
Aubrey Faulkner41
Shaun Pollock41
Graeme Pollock31
Alan Knott31
Trevor Goddard22
Steve Waugh21
Wilfred Rhodes11

Here are the Top 20:

RankPlayers
1Don Bradman
2Garry Sobers
3Imran Khan
4W G Grace
5Sachin Tendulkar
6Richard Hadlee
7Jack Hobbs
8Malcolm Marshall
9Viv Richards
10Glenn McGrath
11Shane Warne
12Mutthiah Muralitharan
13Jacques Kallis
14Keith Miller
15Brian Lara
16Wally Hammond
17Len Hutton
18Adam Gilchrist
19Wasim Akram
20Sydney Barnes
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
The voting is now opened for ranks 21-30 and will remain so for the next 48 hours. Please post your 10 players list not already ranked; in order.

I will start with:

Steve Smith
Curtly Ambrose
Dale Steyn
Sunil Gavaskar
Bill O'Reilly
Joel Garner
Shaun Pollock
Allan Donald
Kumar Sangakkara
George Headley
 
Last edited:

Coronis

International Coach

Shot 1 (16 seconds): The Hobbs forward defensive
A huge lunge forward with the bat planted 6 inches in front of his eyes and a foot in front of his front leg.
Arms almost horizontal, back almost horizontal.
Nearly falling over with his back foot on the verge of lifting off the ground
View attachment 40620


Shot 2 (20/21 seconds): The Hobbs cover drive
Gets nicely in position to shovel/dink it into the hands of short extra cover.
Follows through with the bat facing mid wicket.
View attachment 40621
View attachment 40622

Shot 3: The Hobbs back foot off-drive / aimless waft
God only knows what he's doing here. He moves forward, then moves back, then with his weight nowhere wafts at it (seemingly missing the ball) with a straight bat. If he'd managed by chance to make contact it might have dribbled back to the bowler. Far more likely nick it or get bowled.
View attachment 40624

Shot 4: The Hobbs wander around in your crease almost toppling over and then try to dolly it to short mid wicket
Looks like he missed it again
View attachment 40625

Shot 5: The Hobbs try to poke it back to the bowler without falling over
See shot 1
View attachment 40626

Shot 6: The Hobbs front foot square drive
Stab it outside in, somewhere just in front of point. Flick the wrists so that the bat's facing square leg
View attachment 40627

finish facing the bowler, looking where you think it might have gone
View attachment 40628

Shot 7: The Hobbs lofted on drive
Don't quite get to the pitch of it, lean back, bat flow going though mid wicket, somehow manage to nearly take the cameraman's head off at silly mid off
View attachment 40629

Shot 8: The Hobbs lofted drive
Get nowhere near the pitch. Take a baseball style swipe miles away from your body
(no photo used)

Shot 9: The Hobbs backwards defensive
Grip the bat almost on the shoulder, then twist it to face wide mid on, then half topple forward
View attachment 40630

@Burgey
I’ll just give a few thoughts. First, this isn’t actual match footage or anything, or hell even a coaching tape. Hobbs looks casual as all hell. Have you ever seen cricketers playing strokes outside of a game or a net session? They do tend to look relatively awful. This isn’t actual game footage which means drawing a conclusion based purely on this is pretty disingenuous. Think about that most famous of all cricketing photographs.

Also, at least from what I could see, on more than a couple of those strokes he was playing strokes that he wouldn’t actually play based on where the ball was, and was trying to demonstrate the variety of shots he was being instructed to do. In this type of film, he’s not going to be playing the best shots for each specific ball.

Third, lets also remember this is 1932. Hobbs is 49 going on 50 here and 2 years out of test cricket.
 

Brook's side

International Regular
21. Garner
22. Barrington
23. Weekes
24. Ambrose
25. G Chappell
26. S Waugh
27. Ponting
28. S Waugh
29. Steve Smith
30. Steyn
 

sayon basak

International Debutant
Ian Botham
Sunil Gavaskar
Dennis Lillee
George Headley
Bill O'Reilly
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chappell
Barry Richards
Herbert Sutcliffe
Curtly Ambrose
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
Steve Smith
Curtly Ambrose
Sunil Gavaskar
Herbert Sutcliffe
Dale Steyn
Joel Garner
Kumar Sangakkara
Allan Donald
Ian Botham
Bill O'Reilly
 

Top