It's funny that so many people don't realize that Kallis had the ability to dominate an attack. I honestly believe that Kallis has at least as much ability to do so than all but possibly Lara. His role in the team, though, was to be the anchor. In recent years, since the arrival of Amla and de Villiers, Kallis has become more free-flowing - showing that he can do it; it just wasn't in his role description.Lara=Tendulkar>Ponting>Kallis=Dravid.
The top three just a touch above the other two though. And yes the ability to dominate an attack and set the tempo for an innings does count or Barrington would be rated higher than Viv.
Interestting idea, but your batting order is all wrongThe idea of this team is to win matches as fast as possible. They can bowl a team out fast and then pile on a huge score quickly.
Sehwag
Trumper
B Richards
V Richards
Hill
Gilchrist
Younis
Steyn
Marshall
Donald
Barnes
I'd still have Bradman. Was a very quick scorer.The idea of this team is to win matches as fast as possible. They can bowl a team out fast and then pile on a huge score quickly.
Sehwag
Trumper
B Richards
V Richards
Hill
Gilchrist
Younis
Steyn
Marshall
Donald
Barnes
Bit rough leaving out Bishen Bedi in that bottom lotSince I am at it
Top 10 Bowlers
Malcolm Marshall
Glenn Mcgrath
Curtly Ambrose
Dennis Lillee
Ray Lindwall
Imran Khan
Fred Trueman
Michael Holding
Wasim Akram
Richard Hadlee
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
Bill O'Reilly
Jim Laker
Clarrie Grimmett
Hedley Verity
Anil Kumble
Richie Benaud
Erapalli Prasanna
Lance Gibbs
What cracks me up is that same argument doesn't get applied to someone like Shane Warne. What is that word that starts with 'h' ?Sachin is only considered the best because 40 trillion Indians with internet are adamant he is. In reality, you can't split them easily.
Just can't understand people who don't rate Tendulkar at least Lara's equal.What cracks me up is that same argument doesn't get applied to someone like Shane Warne. What is that word that starts with 'h' ?
Hypocrisy? I don't think I was being hypocritical. My point was that so many Indians inundate internet discussions saying how good he is, that weight of numbers sway things towards him being considered above the others.What cracks me up is that same argument doesn't get applied to someone like Shane Warne. What is that word that starts with 'h' ?
Yeah, Murali has 176 wickets vs minnows. Warne has 17. Their records are pretty similar against non-minnows.To a large part I agree, one has to dig or nit pick to separate them. With Lara vs Sachin it's sachins consisrentcy, Warne vs Murali, it's mural's difference btwn home and away stats and total of matches vs the minnows. Most would disagree but that is how i separate them.
According to this limited study the order of preference is;....It does not matter which route is taken, be it the high road or low road, be it the country road or the highway, be it the scenic route or the road through the concrete jungle, there is only one destination. The one which proclaims Muralitharan as the best amongst the equals. Let no one forget the X-factor here, the impact Muralitharan has had on Sri Lankan cricket. Glenn McGrath comes in next, a well-deserved place for this outstanding metronome. Richard Hadlee, the legendary fast bowler from down under clocks in the third position. Malcolm Marshall, that fearsome Bajan fast bowling "giant" is in fourth position, closely followed by the other Caribbean giant, this time physically also, Curtley Ambrose.
Imran Khan follows next, a well-deserved position for this wonderful bowler, batsman and born leader of men, despite playing in quite a few tests as a batsman. Dennis Lillee, one of the all-time greats, follows next. He is the highest placed bowler who does not lead in any category. Alan Donald is in seventh position, closely followed by the other West Indian giant, Joel Garner. Now comes Shane Warne, a well-deserved top-10 position for this magician.
It Figures | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
Hm. I'd go for:The fearsome fiftteen: a look at the great bowlers