Players that are the most overated by CW posters.

[robelinda]

Hence the absurdity of All Time XI's in the first place.

 

[Ikki]

Well, many young Indian cricketers have had plenty of good things to say about Tendulkar's influence in the dressing room. He's never had a problem with any of the captains he's played under, indeed he's only been a great help by all accounts. If you're willing to talk about Warne's overall influence on Australian cricket, all that holds equally good for Tendulkar.

Well, I am not merely talking about leadership in that instance of influence. Warne's captained in other teams in other countries and affected many players - as well as those in his team. He's a player where on the field he gets people to follow his lead, even if he isn't captain.

I'd argue he was more influential across the board for spin bowling than Tendulkar is for his batting. As a leg-spinner, he is the best. As I said, if you didn't have Murali you'd have to go back to the 30s and look at Grimmett and O'Reilly to even get a spinner comparable to Warne. He made it an attacking art, home and away, on spin-receptive pitches and non-receptive pitches. He was an icon across the world for his art, his desire and panache...not just because of his nationality. Although these things I guess go more towards the "greatness" of a player rather than their ability.

It doesn't put him a long way above Tendulkar as a cricketer, no. Not for me anyway.

These are semantics. When I say "not close", I mean not worth arguing about. Ponting > Tendulkar as a cricketer. It doesn't mean a long way away...but that it shouldn't really have much of a debate. It is obvious - Ponting, Captain, Fielder, Batsman; Tendulkar, batsman.

 

[Dasa]

Ponting's fielding counts for nowhere near as much in Tests - he can catch well, but so can Tendulkar, and the ground fielding is nowhere near as important as in ODIs. Certainly not enough to make up any perceived gap between he and Tendulkar in batting. In ODIs, Tendulkar is imo comfortably ahead as a player even taking fielding into account.

 

[Ikki]

From your history of posting, I know you regarded Lillee as greater cricketer than Imran and Hadlee. It may have changed now. And you also regard Warne greater than Sobers and Imran, don't you?

The "greatness" of a player I'd argue is different than their ability as a player. Lillee is the greatest bowler ever, IMO. As an overall player, you'd have to really argue hard that he was that much better than Hadlee, for example, who could also hold a bat.

Imran is arguably the greatest player ever after Bradman. Lillee is not close.

 

[ankitj]

The "greatness" of a player I'd argue is different than their ability as a player. Lillee is the greatest bowler ever, IMO. As an overall player, you'd have to really argue hard that he was that much better than Hadlee, for example, who could also hold a bat.

Imran is arguably the greatest player ever after Bradman. Lillee is not close.

I am going to bookmark this post. It's so good to have you say all this

 

[hang on]

robelinda,

in any sport, there will be comparison (definitionally ie the nature of almost all sport almost demands it, even the solitary rock climbing, me against the elements sports). and there will, ineluctably, be comparisons of the best over time, a natural exercise, if u will. and thus the selection of all time 11s is also a natural consequence on this. why is this absurd, thought experimentish though it might be?

and it is great fun, too (i am not saying that fun and absurd are mutually exclusive, btw, after all, cheese rolling and morris dancing exist!)

 

[Jono]

Yeah, it's a bit rich complaining about Tendulkar being ridiculously overrated while he's merely a contender for an ATG batsman, and at the same time bringing in Warne's mythical "leadership, influence on the game" and wishy-washy **** like that.

Haha so good.

Wouldn't have lost a match as captain of course. You want proof? Rajasthan Royals of course

 

[smash84]

I am going to bookmark this post. It's so good to have you say all this

 

[weldone]

Among very good players, the most overrated must be Shane Keith Warne, both in CW and outside...

Among others, there are a huge number of them...Ishant Sharma is a prime example. Daniel Vettori (his bowling only) is another...

 

[Himannv]

Botham IMO.

 

[abmk]

Ponting: Captaincy, Batting, Fielding.
Tendulkar: Batting.

Did I miss something? Ponting is a record breaker and a success in 3 separate instances, Tendulkar one. So how are they equal as players when it's debatable that even in the thing Tendulkar is great at that he is better than Ponting?

Hell yeah, you missed a LOT

oh so sachin's fielding doesn't count ? he is a pretty good fielder himself. Ponting's clearly better though ...

sachin's part-time bowling doesn't count ? remember kolkatta 2001 ? remember adelaide 2003 ? yeah, that's right !

Majority regard sachin to be a better bat than ponting and to me there is quite some gulf . Even Ian Chappell who doesn't like sachin that much and likes ponting said ponting had just only gotten into sachin and lara's league in his opinion in 2007 and ponting's only declined since then

oh and ponting's average captaincy especially in tests has been exposed more and more ( one of the best instances of course being introducing part-timers to speed up the over-rate instead of going for the kill in the 4th test in Ind in 2008 to avoid being fined )

Warne is one of the best slip fielders of all-time. Tendulkar is what? Merely good?

and sachin is one of the best in the outfield, a pretty safe catcher himself. I can think of many fielders equal/better than warney at slips from Aus itself - MW, taylor, simpson.

Really...what influence did Sachin have on the rest of cricket? Were there a shortage of quality batsmen before he joined? Do you think an Aussie kid is looking to be the next Tendulkar or Chappell, Ponting, Waugh, Border etc?

Inspiring loads of cricketers to be batsmen like himself ?

This quote from symonds really sums it up:

It contains Symonds'S signature and the brief, poignant message "to Sachin ... the man we all want to be".

Tendulkar remains a man apart | Fox Sports

Outside of the cricket field, the money brought into cricket via advertising . He was the first BIG one in that field.

 

[abmk]

Yeah, it's a bit rich complaining about Tendulkar being ridiculously overrated while he's merely a contender for an ATG batsman, and at the same time bringing in Warne's mythical "leadership, influence on the game" and wishy-washy **** like that.

This post FTW .

 

[vcs]

Well, I am not merely talking about leadership in that instance of influence. Warne's captained in other teams in other countries and affected many players - as well as those in his team. He's a player where on the field he gets people to follow his lead, even if he isn't captain.

I'd argue he was more influential across the board for spin bowling than Tendulkar is for his batting. As a leg-spinner, he is the best. As I said, if you didn't have Murali you'd have to go back to the 30s and look at Grimmett and O'Reilly to even get a spinner comparable to Warne. He made it an attacking art, home and away, on spin-receptive pitches and non-receptive pitches. He was an icon across the world for his art, his desire and panache...not just because of his nationality. Although these things I guess go more towards the "greatness" of a player rather than their ability.



These are semantics. When I say "not close", I mean not worth arguing about. Ponting > Tendulkar as a cricketer. It doesn't mean a long way away...but that it shouldn't really have much of a debate. It is obvious - Ponting, Captain, Fielder, Batsman; Tendulkar, batsman.

So Ponting > Tendulkar as a cricketer, and going by the same standard Kallis is several light years ahead of Ponting, and yet you find him "annoyingly overrated".

Also agree with what Dasa said about fielding in Tests. In ODIs I'd say Tendulkar and Ponting are actually very close as cricketers because I really rate the impact of his fielding and captaincy in that format.

 

[abmk]

slightly OT,

talking of spinners, why is Laker not talked about so much ?

 

[Ikki]

So Ponting > Tendulkar as a cricketer, and going by the same standard Kallis is several light years ahead of Ponting, and yet you find him "annoyingly overrated".

Also agree with what Dasa said about fielding in Tests. In ODIs I'd say Tendulkar and Ponting are actually very close as cricketers because I really rate the impact of his fielding and captaincy in that format.

By that criteria he is a better player (although I rate batting all-rounders much less than bowling all-rounders) but this Kallisballer **** is what pisses me off. I mentioned in another thread when we were discussing something similar to this, Kallis is better than the likes of Ponting and Tendulkar as players, but I probably wouldn't pick him over them in a side - which doesn't make much sense by that criteria but there you go. I don't really rate his batting as high as others and his bowling is also often overstated for my liking.

 

[silentstriker]

Ponting: Captaincy, Batting, Fielding.
Tendulkar: Batting.

Fielding certainly - he is fantastic. Captaincy however, makes his overall rating go way down, not up. Ponting is a test class captain like Mohammad Sami is a test class bowler. Just having the title doesn't mean you get points for being good. Sachin sucked as captain too but his reign was thankfully short.

 

[Uppercut]

Statsguru comparisons aren't in vogue lately, they've always been the CW way.

I'm not a stats guy but also not as stupidly anti-stats as some (I believe the numbers are important but shouldn't be used as the sole basis for an argument). I struggle with the concept of labelling a player overrated based purely off his numbers. I don't think you have to have watched a player to form an opinion but research should extend beyond filtering their averages if you want to declare widely held ATGs as overrated. Challenging the status quo is good but not without multiple layers of information backing up your opinion.

EDIT - Vcs, only the first sentence was a reply to you

Nice.

There's been an unusual amount of really good posts in this thread. Burgey setting the tone.

 

[pup11]

I'm one of the biggest fans of Ponting but its outright silly to suggest he is a better cricketer than Tendulkar. Ponting despite his technical fragility is a more naturally gifted player than Sachin, but Tendulkar leaves all his competition from his generation behind with just his sheer dedication and will to keep improving.

Tendulkar has had a career that has spanned over two decades and in that time period he has virtually scaled one batting record after the other and in doing so he has left behind a legacy that makes him one of a kind.

 

[GIMH]

Nice.

There's been an unusual amount of really good posts in this thread. Burgey setting the tone.

Yeah, has been a nice thread. Enjoyed the Ikki-vcs discussion too; that's what can happen when two blokes just put their opinions forwards without acting like ****s and making straw man arguments.

 

[GIMH]

Fielding certainly - he is fantastic. Captaincy however, makes his overall rating go way down, not up. Ponting is a test class captain like Mohammad Sami is a test class bowler. Just having the title doesn't mean you get points for being good. Sachin sucked as captain too but his reign was thankfully short.

I don't rate his captaincy a lot (he's better at it than Sami is a bowler though!!) but I can't agree with this. To perform at the level he did for so long while wearing the armband more than makes up for his tactical errors. Having a captain bat at 3 like he did was worth far more than just runs, as was his tendency to ton up with his first knock of a series. There's no statistical way of calculating what that's worth; he may not be a great tactician but he was a great leader of men and as such captaincy does increase his value, IMO.