The Greats

[SJS]

it'd be those from countries that weren't involved in the series who would have voted "No".

You are probably correct. For sure Australians have a great regard for Laxman in general and that innings in particular

 

[Pedro Delgado]

It's be interesting to see the nationality of who voted against it. I'm guessing that the Indians would have been voting in favour. Aussies might have been split - some acknowledging how good in the innings was, some still dirty that we didn't win the series - but I'd say that it'd be those from countries that weren't involved in the series who would have voted "No".

You've got to be kidding me. When people started hearing about what was happeneing it sent shockwaves throughout my cricketing world, and had us reaching for our teletext! I was in the pub the day after and all of my friends that follow the game were talking about it.

I voted yes.

 

[vic_orthdox]

You've got to be kidding me. When people started hearing aboout what was happeneing it sent shockwaves throughout my cricketing world, and had us reaching for our teletext! I was in the pub the day after and all of my friends that follow the game were talking about it.

I voted yes.

Must've just been the Australians still dirty on Laxman then

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Just for information, in Wisden's top 10 test innings Laxman's innings as well as Lara's innings are included. Lara at no.2 and Laxman at 6. Surely an innings that is rated by Wisden as the sixth greatest of all times (in 1769 test matches - maybe some 50,000 innings) surely it WAS a great innings but then.....

One of the others nominated, Mark Waugh's 116 against South Africa in the fourth innings in 1997, is 16th. Bradman's 270 that Adam nominated is of course number 1.

 

[Pratters]

Player Total votes Votes against

Hobbs 22 2
Akram 22 7
Hadlee 22 6
Lara 153 19 5
Holding to Boycott17 9
Waugh's 63* and 200 to win vs Windies 1995 20 7
Ashes 2005 21 5

The candidates fulfilling the criteria and making the list of greats are:

Hobbs
Ashes 2005

/runs and hides

 

[Pratters]

Just a comment to people who are critical of the results of this exercise -- everyone voting is evidently using their own criteria, and the 75% of votes required means that a very wide range of criteria have to be fulfilled before someone gets the nod. That seems fair. If the criteria were laid down in advance and it was simply a question of saying yes or no, a different set of results would emerge. But here, we have some people who might class 50 cricketers as great, others who might class 25, others only 10. If someone gets 75% of votes despite all that, then that is a powerful endorsement. If they fall short, it doesn't mean it's a useless exercise, just that the parameters are open to a variety of interpretations.

I will agree with the post. Candidates can also come back the next month if some one genuinely feel it can be included by being nominated etc. So its not the end of the world one way or the other. I for one feel Lara's 153* was definitely great. Maybe it will be included in the next month.

Any way the list of greats so far is as follows:

D.G.Bradman
G.Sobers
S.K.Warne
B.C.Lara
M.Muralitharan
S.R.Tendulkar
Imran Khan
G.D.McGrath
I.V.A.Richards
M.Marshall
J.Hobbs
Ashes 2005 series

 

[Pratters]

The candidates up for voting for the next 23 and half hours with voting closing 9 PM IST tomorrow:

Lara's 400*
Ganguly (people have nominated him based on his one day batting ability)
Trueman
Jones' 200
Neil Harvey
Frank Worrell

 

[SJS]

Lara's 400*.....NO
Ganguly (people have nominated him based on his one day batting ability).....NO
Trueman.....NO
Jones' 200.....NO
Neil Harvey.....NO
Frank Worrell.....YES

 

[Jamee999]

All No

 

[nightprowler10]

Lara's 400* - yes
Ganguly (people have nominated him based on his one day batting ability) - no
Trueman - no
Jones' 200 - no
Neil Harvey -no
Frank Worrell - yes

 

[Xuhaib]

Bob Massie Debut Performance .That should be in.

 

[Jono]

Lara's 400* - Yes (I don't care how flat the pitch was, its 400 runs and the patience required for that is immense).
Ganguly (people have nominated him based on his one day batting ability) - No.
Trueman - Yes.
Jones' 200 - Yes
Neil Harvey - No
Frank Worrell - Yes

 

[open365]

all no except Lara's 400,i don't see how anyone can't vote for it.

 

[Fusion]

Lara's 400* - Yes
Ganguly - No (if voting purely on ODI record, then yes)
Trueman - No
Jones' 200 - No
Neil Harvey - No
Frank Worrell - No

And I would like to nominate Miandad and Ambrose if they haven't been allready.

 

[jamesicus]

"I will base my nominations on those players who, in my eyes and experience, have achieved greatness by elevating and enhancing the game in extraordinary ways -- not necessarily just on-field accomplishments -- although I do include some players (or collection of players) strictly because of the sheer enormity and excellence of their career performance."

My list to date:

D. G. Bradman


From now on I will add to my list based on a mosaic of reminiscences and meanderings without any intention of ranking any individuals based on my stated criteria.

I must include J. B. (Jack) Hobbs for he was the bulwark of English batting following the end of WW1 and until the mid-1930s. His accomplishments (statistics) as an opening batsman in test cricket are unparalleled. He was the backbone of England and Surrey (his home county) batting for over thirty years. Jack Hobbs was a man of great integrity and dignity who devoted most of his life in service to the game. I never saw him bat, but my father and grandfather held him to be the greatest of all batsmen.

My Updated list:

D. G. Bradman
J. B. Hobbs

 

[archie mac]

Lara's 400*= no
Ganguly = no
Trueman = no
Jones' 200= yes
Neil Harvey = yes
Frank Worrell= yes

 

[social]

The candidates up for voting for the next 23 and half hours with voting closing 9 PM IST tomorrow:

Lara's 400*
Ganguly (people have nominated him based on his one day batting ability)
Trueman
Jones' 200
Neil Harvey
Frank Worrell

Lara's 400* - yes if for not other reason than it's sheer size
Ganguly ODI - yes, although, if selected, he'll undougtedly be the worst of the bunch
Trueman - yes even though he's nowhere near Hadlee, Lillee and Akram
Jones 200 - yes, even though Laxman's and Lara's were at least as good
Neil Harvey - no, he's not anywhere near Waugh
Frank Worrell - yes, for captaincy alone because he's not as good as other batsmen already rejected.

 

[social]

Akram and Hadlee, arguably the 2 greatest pace bowlers of all time, ARE NOT GREAT?

That's a sorry indictment on the credibility of this forum.

 

[Jason_M]

Jones 200 yes.

The rest no.

 

[archie mac]

Neil Harvey - no, he's not anywhere near Waugh

We are talking Neil Harvey? Not the 'Freak' Harvey?