Shane Warne vs Sachin Tendulkar

[Coronis]

Who proved himself in any and everyother capacity and outlet he had.

Whether it's his record in WSC and ROW matches which you helpfully highlighted or his record against the best bowlers in the world in county cricket, he name dwarves to be referenced in these conversations.

His situation was unique and while the scenarios under which we can judge him are not ideal, they do prove his pedigree. And more importantly they're all we have to judge him by. And everytime he was tested, in brief excursions or seasons, he rose to said challenges.

In 2002 in other exercises I was reading about, as many "experts / writers" voted for Barry for an all world opening slot as they did Sunny, and more than Hutton. I'm not saying that's definitive, I'm saying it's all credit to the ability that he had, damn even Bradman selected him at some point. It wasn't like he got injured, he played his trade around the world and met ever challenge offered.

There more than enough numbers that's been provided by you and @peterhrt that shows who he was.

Good job ignoring literally everything I said in that post.

People have an amazing capacity to be stupid.

 

[subshakerz]

Please point to them.

And I love how were comparing CMJ and the cricket / journalistic fraternity which rated Barry the best in the world for about half a decade to one journalist most people have never heard of.

Suddenly pundit rating matters but not for Marshall.

 

[kyear2]

Suddenly pundit rating matters but not for Marshall.

One doesn't have as much of a record to stand on, so yes, it would be that we rely a bit more for him.

Thought that would be obvious.

And don't think I've seen a world XI where Marshall isn't the one leading the attack. And quite frankly everyone rates cricketers quite differently, and as Coronis says, it's a fool's errand to compare batsmen to bowlers, adding in all rounders and it's a cluster****.

 

[subshakerz]

One doesn't have as much of a record to stand on, so yes, it would be that we rely a bit more for him.

Thought that would be obvious.

It's not because at least I am consistent in paying cautious deference to punditry

And don't think I've seen a world XI where Marshall isn't the one leading the attack.

Plenty of them don't mention Marshall. Benaud, Dickie Bird, many in the Lord's Cricket interviews with cricketers of the time.

 

[kyear2]

I am so sorry man, if you think the selectors of every national team in the world is an idiot; but you, dear friend, only know about the sport. Pant looked bad for 1 game, and among all the people (mostly Indian fans) I have talked with, you are the only one wanting to field Jurel right now. And that's when he is close to the team as a batsman, literally no one would had fielded Knott for India. I never denied Barry was talented, just that you gas him up like a balloon; and you really never heard of Kimber?? Fwiw, I would be tempted to know how many shortlists you have looked at. I haven't found one with McGrath above Lillee. And CMJ himself ranked Marshall in the periphery of 50 I believe. Not so fired up anymore, are we??

But then again, you also believe Sobers to be ahead of Bradman while simultaneously gassing up specialists.

I'll address this yet again.

I've said repeatedly that Bradman is the best, I've also said it's worth a discussion. That's it.

I also don't believe, like everyone else that Bradman was twice the batsman everyone else is, so that's my starting point.

Yes, I've always maintained that I rate players primarily by their, well primary skill. I also think Sir Garry is arguably the best bat after Bradman, who then brings some other useful skills to the table.

Say for instance we use CMJ's world XI (Bradman in for Lara) that @peterhrt shared and they are playing the England all time team.
Sobers is now your 3rd seamer and 2nd slip as well as being arguably your 2nd best middle order batsman. Who's more valuable to the team, Bradman or Sobers.

When Sobers retired he was the world's leading run scorer, third in catches and 2nd leading west Indian wicket taker, and at this point Gibbs, if I recall correctly was the 2nd leading wicket taker behind Trueman.

He was the west Indian leading batsman, best catcher and did everything from opening the attack to coming back to bowl through the dead overs before the new ball with spin.

So you had a world class arg bat and slip who was more depended on with the ball and had a higher work load than any all rounder and possibly any non spinner in the history of the game. Per innings I think he bowled more overs that Hadlee. That's how much he was relied upon.

So no, I don't rate him higher, but he is probably the only one that has an argument to be.

 

[kyear2]

It's not because at least I am consistent in paying cautious deference to punditry



Plenty of them don't mention Marshall. Benaud, Dickie Bird, many in the Lord's Cricket interviews with cricketers of the time.

Benaud for the 147th time, made clear the distinction that it wasn't the best team, it was the team he wanted to represent him. He said it multiple times himself in the interview.

Dickie yes he had

Gavaskar | Richards | Richards | Chappell | Sobers | Pollock | Knott | Imran | Lillee | Warne | Gibbs

Strange team, but he did again have Barry. He keeps popping up doesn't he.

He was also one that without question had Lillee as the greatest bowler of all time.

But back to Barry, how great so we think he had to be that he just keeps popping up in these XI's?

 

[ma1978]

Not the greatest spinner ever
Not the most difficult art either. Fast leg spin and wristy off breaks are much more difficult to bowl.
Warne's competitots are as good as or even better than Warne in this aspect.

He only has the media hype.

lol

 

[subshakerz]

Benaud for the 147th time, made clear the distinction that it wasn't the best team, it was the team he wanted to represent him. He said it multiple times himself in the interview.

Dickie yes he had

Gavaskar | Richards | Richards | Chappell | Sobers | Pollock | Knott | Imran | Lillee | Warne | Gibbs

Strange team, but he did again have Barry. He keeps popping up doesn't he.

He was also one that without question had Lillee as the greatest bowler of all time.

But back to Barry, how great so we think he had to be that he just keeps popping up in these XI's?

You're right. Barry seems more revered than Marshall.

 

[subshakerz]

I'll address this yet again.

I've said repeatedly that Bradman is the best, I've also said it's worth a discussion. That's it.

I also don't believe, like everyone else that Bradman was twice the batsman everyone else is, so that's my starting point.

Yes, I've always maintained that I rate players primarily by their, well primary skill. I also think Sir Garry is arguably the best bat after Bradman, who then brings some other useful skills to the table.

Say for instance we use CMJ's world XI (Bradman in for Lara) that @peterhrt shared and they are playing the England all time team.
Sobers is now your 3rd seamer and 2nd slip as well as being arguably your 2nd best middle order batsman. Who's more valuable to the team, Bradman or Sobers.

When Sobers retired he was the world's leading run scorer, third in catches and 2nd leading west Indian wicket taker, and at this point Gibbs, if I recall correctly was the 2nd leading wicket taker behind Trueman.

He was the west Indian leading batsman, best catcher and did everything from opening the attack to coming back to bowl through the dead overs before the new ball with spin.

So you had a world class arg bat and slip who was more depended on with the ball and had a higher work load than any all rounder and possibly any non spinner in the history of the game. Per innings I think he bowled more overs that Hadlee. That's how much he was relied upon.

So no, I don't rate him higher, but he is probably the only one that has an argument to be.

Is ABD a greater cricketer than Root because of slips?

 

[kyear2]

People have an amazing capacity to be stupid.

You do prove it daily.

 

[subshakerz]

Good job ignoring literally everything I said in that post.

Failing to address arguments is what he is best at.

If it wasnt for that, I would respect him more.

 

[kyear2]

You're right. Barry seems more revered than Marshall.

More revered than quite a few cricketers actually.

That's the point. He's similar to Gilly where he's so very unique, and at a position that's only rivalled by spinners with regards to post war scarcity.

 

[Coronis]

You do prove it daily.

Again, good job ignoring the content of the original post and going off on your own tangent.

 

[kyear2]

Agree.

Nobody denies the talent Barry had.

Your problem is you know people are picking test teams and are rating test players based on test performance unless stated otherwise and you continue to bring up a bloke who only played 4 tests every single time.

Is he eligible for consideration?

The crazy part is that everyone votes for him for the SA team, then pretends that he magically isn't for the world one.

O'Reilly is a player who is rated easily the 3rd best spinner ever, and that's not solely based on his 27 test career.

You presented a body of work that's test adjacent in quality totalling about 18 tests. That added to his peer rating, and the fact that he had made several all time teams, makes him eligible for discussion imo.

 

[Coronis]

Is he eligible for consideration?

The crazy part is that everyone votes for him for the SA team, then pretends that he magically isn't for the world one.

O'Reilly is a player who is rated easily the 3rd best spinner ever, and that's not solely based on his 27 test career.

You presented a body of work that's test adjacent in quality totalling about 18 tests. That added to his peer rating, and the fact that he had made several all time teams, makes him eligible for discussion imo.

You’re basically the equivalent of a child saying “no I’m right” on this issue

 

[subshakerz]

More revered than quite a few cricketers actually.

That's the point. He's similar to Gilly where he's so very unique, and at a position that's only rivalled by spinners with regards to post war scarcity.

Glad to see you agree with me that uniqueness contributes to greatness.

 

[kyear2]

Glad to see you agree with me that uniqueness contributes to greatness.

Are you serious?

Unique with regards to the ability to score quickly while having a good technique and being able to score on challenging pitches.

 

[subshakerz]

Are you serious?

Unique with regards to the ability to score quickly while having a good technique and being able to score on challenging pitches.

Sure which is why pundits rated him higher.

 

[_00_deathscar]

While Sachin dominated Warne, I'd have loved to watch them at it during Warne's early bloom/post-babyfat years when he was a class apart in terms of drift, monster spin, and had the flipper in tact, or towards the end when he had the ball on a string. Obviously he was mostly bowling to lesser players of spin than Tendulkar during both periods so I'd still favor Tendulkar having the better of such an exchange, but it's an interesting match-up.

So basically when he didn’t have broken toenails?

 

[_00_deathscar]

Really overlooked while talking about wicket keeper bat. He literally averages 57.4 (Sangakkara's career average) as a designated keeper in 24 matches.

That’s because he played 24 matches