The CW50 - No.20-11

[Lillian Thomson]

I should add that the deletion of Bradman altogether also had an element of the protest vote about it. I remember a poll some months ago on CW called something like "name the top 3 Aussie cricketers of all time". AKA "the fight for second place". There's always a degree of anti-climax about a contest that always inevitably ends with the same winner. Perhaps that's why, as a long-suffering England fan, I was attracted to the one man who defied the supposedly foregone conclusion that was the 1932/33 Ashes.

FTR if I hadn't gone for DRJ (and thus straight to the naughty step as far as you're concerned I suspect LT) I would have put Bradman 1 and Grace 2, but by a tight margin.

I suspect that when you picked Duggie at Number 1 you didn't think your single vote out of 40 people would have seen him the final Top 50. Now though any similar exercise in the future will see a lot of people putting someone equally unworthy at the top of their ratings.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Couldn't we just feed the results of every A vs B poll in the history of CW into an algorithm to arrive at some sort of overall ranking? I don't think we've left a single player go unridiculed in those sort of 'debates'.

 

[zaremba]

I suspect that when you picked Duggie at Number 1 you didn't think your single vote out of 40 people would have seen him the final Top 50. Now though any similar exercise in the future will see a lot of people putting someone equally unworthy at the top of their ratings.

Please do try to get over it.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Couldn't we just feed the results of every A vs B poll in the history of CW into an algorithm to arrive at some sort of overall ranking? I don't think we've left a single player go unridiculed in those sort of 'debates'.

Good idea..........as long as you leave out minnows.........

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Please do try to get over it.

Over what?

 

[zaremba]

The whole "the sanctity of this, and every subsequent, poll has been compromised by zaremba putting Jardine at number 1" grumble that I've been picking up over the last few days.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I see. Well in that case I was over it before it happened, but where's the fun in that. I promise not to mention it again..................................unless Grace isn't number 1.

 

[zaremba]

Sadly I think the likelihood of Grace at 1 is limited. We can dream...

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Sadly I think the likelihood of Grace at 1 is limited. We can dream...

I know.....................you scurrilous poll wrecker.

 

[zaremba]

On the contrary, I daresay that by putting Grace at 2 and Bradman nowhere I have done more for WG's chances of securing the top spot than any other voter

 

[Lillian Thomson]

On the contrary, I daresay that by putting Grace at 2 and Bradman nowhere I have done more for WG's chances of securing the top spot than any other voter

I didn't mean that. I promised not to mention your wanton destruction of the voting system again as long as Grace was Number 1, which he won't be - so I mentioned it again.

I hope no one comes home and reads this thread after a night on the beer.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah, I get the Bradman thing. I was just speculating about who else could have the 100% count. Has to be Sobers, for mine.

 

[NUFAN]

I think it might be Sachin Tendulkar actually. He ticks all the boxes IMO, firstly he's obviously one of the best cricketers, he's around now and you don't hear that many people hating him.

I'll be devo if Bradman is not number 1 btw, it will not be that easy for him to catch up 25 points, maybe.

 

[zaremba]

I'll be devo if Bradman is not number 1 btw, it will not be that easy for him to catch up 25 points, maybe.

Almost everyone will have him at 1, and his competition is split. I think he'll be ok.