Greatest Test Cricketer Ever (from 1900)

[Bolo.]

I doubt there is a big quality jump between who Bradman and Sobers faced. WI and RSA improved a lot, but Sobers didn't play them.

The game had shifted in favour of pace, but the 60s was a pretty weak time for quicks.

 

[kyear2]

One other thing, Bradman wasn't probably the best in grading players..... I mean, Bradman's All Time XI:
Arthur Morris
Barry Richards
Don Bradman
Sachin Tendulkar
Garry Sobers
Don Tallon
Ray Lindwall
Dennis Lillee
Alec Bedser
Bill O'Reilly
Clarrie Grimmett
I think the middle order is perfect; but other than that.... Not the best players nor combination, I think atleast.

Yeah, please note, I'm not arguing with anyone. Not saying I'm right and anyone is wrong. Happy to accept I may be.

I'll just give my perspective.

Batting, this one is the shortest. IMHO he's a top 3 batsman of all time, I have Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Hobbs in that order. That's my mount Rushmore of batsmen. So he brings top tier ATG value with the bat

Bowling, it's always about stats with most cricket pundits and that's fine. But it doesn't quantify in this instance, nor does it for Kallis or even Hammond.
We're going to look at it from both his and an ATG team perspective. First, for the WI teams he was on. He was invaluable as a bowler. For starters, circa 61 - 67 he averaged 27 odd, while taking 4 wickets a match, that's not inconsequential. But beyond that, he started his career bowling LH spin, which ended up being his least effective style, but hey, he was 18. During his career he was called upon to cover every bowling task, from opening the bowling, coming on at every change imaginable and also carrying out the stock bowling role. Bowling endless spells with defensive fields to at least restrict one end. Later in his career he also developed his chinamen, which again increased his value. Depending on the pitch and conditions, you didn't have to select a second spinner, or fourth pacer, he covered everything for the team. There were matches when he bowled more overs than the openers combined, and on some graveyard flat pitches. Do I believe he was missed, definitely, but there were also times there just weren't any better options. He was an integral member of the bowling team, and at various times would have made the team based on his bowling alone.
From an ATG team perspective? All teams need at least someone to turn their hand over to spell the main guys, we see it in every single match ever. He may be the best ever at it, with zero compromise to the batting. He would be economical with the ability to take the odd wicket, and again could cover that duty if the pace is helpful to pace or spin. He literally could do it all.
So yes stats matter, but the unrivalled versatility and the ability to win matches with the ball brings immeasurable value.

Fielding, it's no secret how I view the importance of slip fielding. I find it to be an invaluable skill just as important as any secondary skill of the vaunted all rounders. He was on the level of Hammond, Simpson, Waugh, Ponting, Kallis, Richardson and Hooper. Catches win matches, and had the one this morning been taken, this current game could have had a completely different complexion, and I believe for his team, he would have offered greater value standing at slip than toiling away, but needs dictated otherwise. He caught everything, and when the spinners came on he placed himself where he thought the ball was most likely to go, be it short leg or leg gully (it was primarily for the off spinning Gibbs), and he took some unbelievable catches.
Second slip if the premier position, and it's not only about the safe hands, but the ability to take the half chances and miracle grabs. Even from an ATG team perspective, and especially with an attack of (Marshall, McGrath, Steyn / Wasim / Hadlee / Imran) 2nd slip is as important, if even more so, as having a useful no. 8 or a decent 5th bowler and he provides that (and the other one) without sacrificing his primary role.

For any team he's a cheat code and invaluable. Even if he failed with the bat he would contribute in multiple and varied ways with the ball and in the field. In an ATG scenario, he (or again Kallis / Hammond) is worth their weight in gold to the team functioning as it should.

But this isn't the hill to die on, and I'm aware that others see it differently.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah, please note, I'm not arguing with anyone. Not saying I'm right and anyone is wrong. Happy to accept I may be.

I'll just give my perspective.

Batting, this one is the shortest. IMHO he's a top 3 batsman of all time, I have Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Hobbs in that order. That's my mount Rushmore of batsmen. So he brings top tier ATG value with the bat

Bowling, it's always about stats with most cricket pundits and that's fine. But it doesn't quantify in this instance, nor does it for Kallis or even Hammond.
We're going to look at it from both his and an ATG team perspective. First, for the WI teams he was on. He was invaluable as a bowler. For starters, circa 61 - 67 he averaged 27 odd, while taking 4 wickets a match, that's not inconsequential. But beyond that, he started his career bowling LH spin, which ended up being his least effective style, but hey, he was 18. During his career he was called upon to cover every bowling task, from opening the bowling, coming on at every change imaginable and also carrying out the stock bowling role. Bowling endless spells with defensive fields to at least restrict one end. Later in his career he also developed his chinamen, which again increased his value. Depending on the pitch and conditions, you didn't have to select a second spinner, or fourth pacer, he covered everything for the team. There were matches when he bowled more overs than the openers combined, and on some graveyard flat pitches. Do I believe he was missed, definitely, but there were also times there just weren't any better options. He was an integral member of the bowling team, and at various times would have made the team based on his bowling alone.
From an ATG team perspective? All teams need at least someone to turn their hand over to spell the main guys, we see it in every single match ever. He may be the best ever at it, with zero compromise to the batting. He would be economical with the ability to take the odd wicket, and again could cover that duty if the pace is helpful to pace or spin. He literally could do it all.
So yes stats matter, but the unrivalled versatility and the ability to win matches with the ball brings immeasurable value.

Fielding, it's no secret how I view the importance of slip fielding. I find it to be an invaluable skill just as important as any secondary skill of the vaunted all rounders. He was on the level of Hammond, Simpson, Waugh, Ponting, Kallis, Richardson and Hooper. Catches win matches, and had the one this morning been taken, this current game could have had a completely different complexion, and I believe for his team, he would have offered greater value standing at slip than toiling away, but needs dictated otherwise. He caught everything, and when the spinners came on he placed himself where he thought the ball was most likely to go, be it shirt leg it

See, I am not arguing about Sobers' value to the team or his claim in my book of being the almost undisputed GOAT in Bradman's absence. That mad lad could do it all, from opening the batting to bowling to coming down at 7 or 8 and bat comfortably and field in anywhere as one the best there to bowling two kinds of spin all day long to captaining his team; and all these while partying..... I believe if he wanted he could had kept wickets as well. So, as a matter of fact, I completely agree with you. It's just to me, that Bradman's batting puts him above Sobers' all round value, but I can actually totally see your point. For me, its:
Bradman
Sobers

Hadlee
Imran
Marshall
Barnes
Hobbs
Tendulkar
McGrath
Lara
Warne
Murali
Gilchrist
Kallis

Gavaskar
Richards
Smith
Ambrose
Hammond
Hutton
Steyn
Miller
Akram
Sangakkara
O'Reilly
Lillee
Headley
Sutcliffe
Trueman
Holding
Garner
Donald
Lindwall
Chappell
G Pollock
Botham
Davidson
Waqar
Ashwin
S Pollock

I could probably go on a few more and it's more like a tier list; and I absolutely have no idea where to place Grace and Ranjitsinhji.

 

[Aidan11]

Ian Botham

 

[peterhrt]

One other thing, Bradman wasn't probably the best in grading players..... I mean, Bradman's All Time XI:
Arthur Morris
Barry Richards
Don Bradman
Sachin Tendulkar
Garry Sobers
Don Tallon
Ray Lindwall
Dennis Lillee
Alec Bedser
Bill O'Reilly
Clarrie Grimmett
I think the middle order is perfect; but other than that.... Not the best players nor combination, I think atleast.

The team was announced only after Bradman's death by a third party who claimed to have been given it by the man himself. Bradman had always been very reluctant to make player comparisons across eras.

It is difficult to reconcile an experienced national selector choosing such a poorly balanced side. Don Tallon played 14 Tests under Bradman's captaincy, never batting higher than number eight and twice coming in at number ten. Yet here he appears as an all-time XI's number six.

 

[capt_Luffy]

The team was announced only after Bradman's death by a third party who claimed to have been given it by the man himself. Bradman had always been very reluctant to make player comparisons across eras.

It is difficult to reconcile an experienced national selector choosing such a poorly balanced side. Don Tallon played 14 Tests under Bradman's captaincy, never batting higher than number eight and twice coming in at number ten. Yet here he appears as an all-time XI's number six.

Thank You. It was some really important context as you can't help but feel something really off about this team.

 

[kyear2]

Thank You. It was some really important context as you can't help but feel something really off about this team.

Not far from what a couple here would still choose.

 

[a massive zebra]

In Tests at Old Trafford, Bradman made just 81 runs in four innings with a high score of 30. What a hack!