The 10 players who will "define" cricket in the next decade

[Woodster]

Of some of the other selections, it is difficult to suggest who will "define" cricket in the next decade. At this moment in time, I would remain sceptical over Suresh Raina, Shane Watson, Mohammad Ashraful and Dwayne Bravo. The rest of the selection I would say will have a far bigger say on world cricket than the aforementioned.

 

[four_or_six]

Just occurred to me, actually... Ashraful ahead of Cook? Or de Villiers? Or any multitude of others who don't have lengthy Test careers as failures, really? Including his own team-mate Shahriar Nafees Ahmed.

They're mad.

That's it, De Villiers!

Sorry, it'd been bugging me which SAfrican should be on there. Obviously there's a spread of countries to make it more appealing to everyone. I don't think it's the worst list ever though.

 

[Richard]

Clarke, Watson, Pietersen, Asif (obviously), Maaaalinga, and probably Bravo and Taylor, are all quite fair enough. In that sense it's not the worst list ever. Tait is certainly quite possible, and Raina not totally far-fetched. But the inclusion of Ashraful really undermines the credulity IMO, even more so when it's ahead of Shahriar Nafees Ahmed.

 

[Manee]

Haha, noooooooooooooooooooo. 'Fraid not. There have been many magnificent players to play for England. That Pietersen should top them all is little short of unthinkable.

In 45 ODI innings he averages 56 at a strike rate of 91. In his weaker suit, the test game, he averages 50. Not been matched by anyone in recent history I dont believe.

Umm, rather promising bowler too, no?

Handy, yes, promising, not in my opinion.

Haha, WTF? One player can do such?

Sorry, should have put help in there.

Just... no. There are a few who might possibly do that - he is not one of them.

He is a match winner, something that Bangladesh do not have in the batting department currently.

 

[Richard]

In 45 ODI innings he averages 56 at a strike rate of 91. In his weaker suit, the test game, he averages 50. Not been matched by anyone in recent history I dont believe.

Oh, in ODIs he's undoubtedly got the potential to outdo most everyone. But in Tests? No way. He'll be good, very probably, yes, but not better than anyone else has ever been.

Handy, yes, promising, not in my opinion.

IMO he's one of the most promising bowlers to come out of West Indies for many a year.

He is a match winner, something that Bangladesh do not have in the batting department currently.

If he's a matchwinner, so is the perennial Geoff Boycott's Mum.

 

[Richard]

And I'll say it again...

Sachin Tendulkar - No ODI hundreds against England.

..........

 

[Swervy]

That is all.

if only that was the case!!!

 

[Swervy]

Haha, noooooooooooooooooooo. 'Fraid not. There have been many magnificent players to play for England. That Pietersen should top them all is little short of unthinkable.

There hasnt been a more talented batsman that has played for England certainly in my lifetime....the fact that he is averaging 50 in his 2 year test career, and it is quite possible that we havent seen anywhere near all of his potential says a hell of a lot about his talent

Injury permitting, there is no reason why he shouldnt be averaging over 50 (maybe well over 50 in fact) for a good 120 test career.

 

[Manee]

And I'll say it again...

..........

What relevance does that Tendulkar hundred have to anything?

 

[Manee]

IMO he's one of the most promising bowlers to come out of West Indies for many a year.

Well, lets see if your right. Flintoff is out of the Leeds test so I will make Bravo my skipper and all rounder

Umm, rather promising bowler too, no?

Yes he is, but how can he redefine cricket in a team that is set to lose alot of its matches in the next few years? I dont think he can.

 

[UncleTheOne]

Dwayne Bravo (WI) - Promising batsman, but should not be on the list.

he shouldn't be on the list, but shane watson should?

bravo as an all round package>>>>watson

 

[Woodster]

he shouldn't be on the list, but shane watson should?

bravo as an all round package>>>>watson

Both still have a way to go for me before they attain the world class all-rounder status, or more pertinently "redefine" cricket.

 

[four_or_six]

he shouldn't be on the list, but shane watson should?

bravo as an all round package>>>>watson

More than a little harsh on Watson.

What I do think though is Bravo is more likely to stick out above his teammates and therefore may well have more impact in the grand scheme of things.

 

[four_or_six]

Both still have a way to go for me before they attain the world class all-rounder status, or more pertinently "redefine" cricket.

There's a difference between 'define' and 'redefine'

Less than ten players in every ten years 'redefine' it.

 

[Woodster]

There's a difference between 'define' and 'redefine'

Less than ten players in every ten years 'redefine' it.

Yes, you are quite right, there is a clear difference.
However, I stand by what I generally mean in that both these players are some way off reaching such a standard.

 

[four_or_six]

Yes, you are quite right, there is a clear difference.
However, I stand by what I generally mean in that both these players are some way off reaching such a standard.

The list is looking forwards though... proabably only Clarke and maybe Malinga/Asif are really top players atm.

 

[Woodster]

The list is looking forwards though... proabably only Clarke and maybe Malinga/Asif are really top players atm.

I appreciate that the list is looking forward, however, imo these 2 players are some way behind the others on this list, with no real signs of catching them up anytime soon.

I think both of them are capable of appearing in both forms of cricket for their respective nations over the coming years consistently (perhaps less so Watson, for obvious reasons), but I do not believe they will reach the desired level. Just my own personal opinion.

 

[four_or_six]

I appreciate that the list is looking forward, however, imo these 2 players are some way behind the others on this list, with no real signs of catching them up anytime soon.

I think both of them are capable of appearing in both forms of cricket for their respective nations over the coming years consistently (perhaps less so Watson, for obvious reasons), but I do not believe they will reach the desired level. Just my own personal opinion.

Of course, as I have mine. I mean to debate, not argue

I think Bravo could have a big impact, the Windies want a star and if he can carry a few along with his commitment and enthusiasm that's surely one of the big hopes for a change in their fortunes.

I reckon if Watson can stay fit he can be a very good player, although I appreciate that it's a big if. I think there's good evidence to say that he can be a good batsman in his own right, and as long as his bowling is allowed to just develop off the back of that he should be fine.

 

[ian_bell]

Im really surpirised no-ones mentioned ian bell a class player and will be a better player when he gets older. He will learn how to convert them 50s into 100s. A really bright talent.

 

[Woodster]

Of course, as I have mine. I mean to debate, not argue

I think Bravo could have a big impact, the Windies want a star and if he can carry a few along with his commitment and enthusiasm that's surely one of the big hopes for a change in their fortunes.

I reckon if Watson can stay fit he can be a very good player, although I appreciate that it's a big if. I think there's good evidence to say that he can be a good batsman in his own right, and as long as his bowling is allowed to just develop off the back of that he should be fine.

I know you're only debating mate!

Don't get me wrong, both Bravo and Watson have certain credentials that can perhaps catapult them into the spotlight, but for some reason I believe there are certain crucial inadequacies in their games.

I don't think either of there bowling skills are or will be good enough to rip through any Test playing nation in the coming months/years (unless there is marked improvement), and are either of these players batting abilities good enough to make them top class players, without taking their bowling into account. For me the juries are still out on both counts.