I believe MIANDAD deserves to be, atleast, mentioned on this thread....
It's so hard to judge who is 'best'.
Miandad was great so was Viv but if we judge on the basis of records or stats then only Bradman can be great.
However could Bradman still show the same stats had he been playing today? Sachin has broken records but he's not reliable always. Dravid is steady but slow. Inzamam always hovers on the brink of greatness but hasn't managed it imo.
Taking everything into consideration I think Steve Waugh comes close to 'great', and Sachin most watchable.
Tendulkar is obviously great..
Ponting, Lara and Waugh
I think if you include 80's, Miandad is definitly in the mix. Look at his record the guy was a pressure performer and played in the big matches, that is the most important thing if you ask me. Include Saeed Anwer for the same reason, Inzi is good too.
I don't believe Inzi, Youhana or even Saeed belong in the cateogry of the guys mentioned in the initial posts.
Coming back to Bradman, he played in a different era, where the conditions were very similiar, I believe the only 3 countries he played in were South Africa, Aus and Eng.
In the past 2 decades, cricket has changed drastically, with the quality of fast bowling and spinners has increased alot.
I believe Bradman will be just your avg joe if he were to play in this era.
I would regard Waughs, Tendulkar and Lara over Bradman anyday.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Xpress: *
I don't believe Inzi, Youhana or even Saeed belong in the cateogry of the guys mentioned in the initial posts.
Coming back to Bradman, he played in a different era, where the conditions were very similiar, I believe the only 3 countries he played in were South Africa, Aus and Eng.
In the past 2 decades, cricket has changed drastically, with the quality of fast bowling and spinners has increased alot.
I believe Bradman will be just your avg joe if he were to play in this era.
I would regard Waughs, Tendulkar and Lara over Bradman anyday.
[/QUOTE]
Well... If you think that bowling of 90s was better than you are mistaken. regardless whatever may be the bowling quality scoring 100 every 2.5 inning is no joke.And consider that during those days when Bradman played they didnt use to cover wicket during night. Todays batsmane will start peeing on thought of it.
By the way Bradman played against India and West Indies too though mosty of his tests were against English.
This thread is going only in the places it was not supposed to go. My title clearly says "modern era" and if anyone read inside, it clearly said "present generation". But unfortunately most of the replies feature Richards, Miandad, even Sobers and Bradman. Lets stick to the new generation plz!
This is an older story from dec 9, but i read it on fox sports that hayden is the only tplayer among the present lot of batsman to score 1000 test runs for three consecutive calender years. Pretty good achievement that.
**Tendulkar not world’s best
**
NEW DELHI, June 22: India’s cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar said Friday that Australia’s Steve Waugh was a better Test batsman than Sachin Tendulkar for his ability to deliver in tight situations.
Gavaskar, writing in his widely syndicated column, slammed Tendulkar for throwing away his wicket in the second Test against Zimbabwe at Harare this week, which the hosts won by four wickets to square the two-match series.
Tendulkar slashed a widish delivery to point after making 69 as India collapsed from 197 for three to 234 all out, leaving Zimbabwe a modest victory target of 157. “It’s time to listen to the Australians who rate their captain as the best Test batsman in the world for his ability to either win or save matches for his team outside his home environs,” Gavaskar wrote.
Tendulkar was the mainstay as India chased their first series win outside the sub-continent in 15 years after winning the first Test at Bulawayo. But brittle batting by an outstanding line-up - at least on paper - ruined India’s hopes at Harare after scoring 237 in the first innings and 234 in the second. “It was the batting that let the team down,” wrote Gavaskar, the first batsman to complete 10,000 Test runs and the scorer of a record 34 centuries.
"When batsmen who are set, have done all the hard work, throw their wickets away to loose shots, then the team is never going to put enough runs on the board. “Why blame Venkatsai Laxman when the best batsman in the universe (Tendulkar) gets a half-century and then gets out, when a big score from him is the crying need of the team.” This was, however, not the first time Tendulkar had disappointed his fans. Tendulkar could score just four runs when India, chasing 120 to win, were bowled out for 81 by the West Indies in the Barbados Test in 1997. Against Pakistan at Madras in 1999, Tendulkar failed to complete the job despite scoring 136 as India succumbed by 12 runs.
In contrast, Steve Waugh has the reputation of producing runs when it matters most. His 110 against India in the second Test at Calcutta early this year came after his team slid to 269 for eight in the first innings. Brian Lara of the West Indies and Pakistan’s Inzamam-ul-Haq are the other batsmen renowned for playing match-winning knocks under pressure.
Australia were at the receiving end when Lara scored a robust unbeaten 153 to mastermind his team’s one-wicket victory at Bridgetown in 1998-99. Inzamam, rated by his Pakistani colleagues as the best batsman in the world, made a brilliant 114 to set up his team’s series-levelling win against England at Old Trafford earlier this month.-AFP
Source: http://www.dawn.com/2001/06/23/spt7.htm
Another article on whose the best. This is exactly what I’ve said earlier!
Dont you have anything better to do rather than digging out 2.5 years old article.
i was looking for various opinions on whose the best batter in the world. so y don u just relax. sachin is not perfect, live with it...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by akpower: *
i was looking for various opinions on whose the best batter in the world. so y don u just relax. sachin is not perfect, live with it...
[/QUOTE]
I know this.But whats the point in bringing 2 yr old article.I can gave you 50 articles which are writing in lastg 10 years which says that HE is the best. Does that makes him best? may be YES may be NO. But yours was a pathetic attempt of digging out 2.5 yr old article just after a match in which he failed ,to make a point.
i hoped ur reply would be a little more broad minded, but i shdn't have expected that i guess. n unfortunately i was unable to find 50 articles on the world's best batter. n just to set the record straight, india dint lose because of sachin, n i don think he failed. he set up the victory, along with ganguly but ur lower order failed miserably.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by akpower: *
i hoped ur reply would be a little more broad minded, but i shdn't have expected that i guess. n unfortunately i was unable to find 50 articles on the world's best batter. n just to set the record straight, india dint lose because of sachin, n i don think he failed. he set up the victory, along with ganguly but ur lower order failed miserably.
[/QUOTE]
Dumbo I was talking about the timing of article.That Article was written after a test match in Zimbabwe in which Sacin failed.
I can definitly post 50 articles where sachin was called best. Just dig internet.
Nowe to put the things in prespective..I am not claiming that Sachin is best. What I am refuting here is your pathetic attempt of posting an article written 2.5 years back after a match on which he failed.
that article doesnt put just one match in perspective, it talks abt other games as well. n i said sachin's not the best way before i posted this article. i agree with this article not because india lost against zimbabwe, but because of all the other stuff it talked abt after that...