The best batsman, across years and formats

[Boris]

The best batsman, across years and formats

Cricinfo - Blogs - It Figures - The best batsman, across years and formats

This is a blog that I have found on cricinfo and leads to some very good analysis of batsmen in my opinion.

Here is the greatest when combining both formats

Here is the greatest in Tests

Here is the greatest in ODIs

They lead to some very good lists. You have to remember that the lists aren't complete because there are players still playing.

One example is Ponting. He is ranked below Tendulkar, Lara and Richards in fourth. But as he is still playing and Richards and Lara is not, he is very likely to surpass them being only a few spots behind and sit pretty in second, needing quite some miracle batting in his last couple of years to surpass that of Tendulkar, almost impossible.

Just like to add that comment before people wonder why there are some players who don't make the list too high up.

 

[behindsquare]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

Durability and longevity are highly underrated characteristics in cricketers.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

Cricinfo - Blogs - It Figures - The best batsman, across years and formats

This is a blog that I have found on cricinfo and leads to some very good analysis of batsmen in my opinion.

Here is the greatest when combining both formats

Here is the greatest in Tests

Here is the greatest in ODIs

They lead to some very good lists. You have to remember that the lists aren't complete because there are players still playing.

One example is Ponting. He is ranked below Tendulkar, Lara and Richards in fourth. But as he is still playing and Richards and Lara is not, he is very likely to surpass them being only a few spots behind and sit pretty in second, needing quite some miracle batting in his last couple of years to surpass that of Tendulkar, almost impossible.

Just like to add that comment before people wonder why there are some players who don't make the list too high up.

It is so hard to judge players through the years.

Why?

Well for a start conditions change. Cricket evolves - often for the better. It is great these days that we have covers to protect the wicket, that we have better bats and safety equipment.

I prefer to just take the best batsmen of any era and say that they are all as good as each other. The best batsmen of any era would make it in any other era.

Therefore it is then just a case of detailing who the elite batsmen of any era is.

Obviously in recent times you have 3 stand-out batsmen.

1) Tendulkar

2) Lara

3) Ponting

Tendulkar is the best of the lot IMO - his durability counts for a lot, he is truly a genius.

Lara and Tendulkar are better batsmen then Ponting. Lara was capable of playing the most destructive innings. He had a great flair with his shots, and he was a bit of an enigma. Some times he lost the plot off the field and that carried onto his onfield performance. But when he was switched on he would tear an attack apart.

To Pontings' great credit he has performed in the number 3 position, traditionally the hardest place to bat - especially in Australia. He can play all the shots and is the perfect prototype of a number 3 batsmen. He does have a slight weakness against quality spin which probably doesn't allow him to be considered in the same class as Tendulkar and Lara but he isn't far off.

Also, to his great credit his performed while also having to captain. This is no mean feat - especially when you consider the fact his had to deal with a number of retirements.

To me those are the 3 best batsmen of our era.

Other players like Dravid and Kallis have claims of being truly great but to me those 2 batsmen lack the attacking instincts of the 3 players I mentioned above. I have also failed to consider any player that has been convicted of match-fixing.

 

[Boris]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

It is so hard to judge players through the years.

Why?

Well for a start conditions change. Cricket evolves - often for the better. It is great these days that we have covers to protect the wicket, that we have better bats and safety equipment.

I prefer to just take the best batsmen of any era and say that they are all as good as each other. The best batsmen of any era would make it in any other era.

Therefore it is then just a case of detailing who the elite batsmen of any era is.

Obviously in recent times you have 3 stand-out batsmen.

1) Tendulkar

2) Lara

3) Ponting

Tendulkar is the best of the lot IMO - his durability counts for a lot, he is truly a genius.

Lara and Tendulkar are better batsmen then Ponting. Lara was capable of playing the most destructive innings. He had a great flair with his shots, and he was a bit of an enigma. Some times he lost the plot off the field and that carried onto his onfield performance. But when he was switched on he would tear an attack apart.

To Pontings' great credit he has performed in the number 3 position, traditionally the hardest place to bat - especially in Australia. He can play all the shots and is the perfect prototype of a number 3 batsmen. He does have a slight weakness against quality spin which probably doesn't allow him to be considered in the same class as Tendulkar and Lara but he isn't far off.

Also, to his great credit his performed while also having to captain. This is no mean feat - especially when you consider the fact his had to deal with a number of retirements.

To me those are the 3 best batsmen of our era.

Other players like Dravid and Kallis have claims of being truly great but to me those 2 batsmen lack the attacking instincts of the 3 players I mentioned above.

I agree with this.

We have really been spoiled for choice of late with great batsman.

This list is of a fairly small section of players, only since the introduction of ODI cricket.

I enjoy looking at these lists though because they don't just include the usual stats, they take mostly everything into account. A player that has a greater 'presence' or is good for a reason other than hard stats, is boosted up the list.

 

[The Ox]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

It's scary when you think how good all these guys are, then you realise the only reason there isn't a million point gap between second and first is because ODIs didn't exist when Bradman was around.

 

[Boris]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

It's scary when you think how good all these guys are, then you realise the only reason there isn't a million point gap between second and first is because ODIs didn't exist when Bradman was around.

If Bradman had the chance to play ODIs, I think he would have fitted in perfectly with the 50 over format. If he can score 300 in one Test day, he can score 200 in an ODI.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

I often wonder where the myth came from that Steve Waugh's Australian side pioneered the idea of scoring at 4 an over in test matchs back in the early 2000's - today going at 3.5 in a test is often considered slow.

Looking at score-cards from the 70's and earlier the top teams like Ian Chappell's Australians were always scoring at 3.7+.

Bradman would have raked it in, imagine him in the middle overs, turning 1's into 2's and 2's into 3's.

 

[Boris]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

I often wonder where the myth came from that Steve Waugh's Australian side pioneered the idea of scoring at 4 an over in test matchs back in the early 2000's - today going at 3.5 in a test is often considered slow.

Looking at score-cards from the 70's and earlier the top teams like Ian Chappell's Australians were always scoring at 3.7+.

Bradman would have raked it in, imagine him in the middle overs, turning 1's into 2's and 2's into 3's.

There's a difference between doing it and being recognised. Chappelli's teams weren't full of those sort of fast scoring players. There was normally one dasher that lifted it for everyone. Waugh's teams through to today were filled with players that could all do that with ease. Look at Gilchrist and Hayden as examples that played through this decade.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

Come off it, I have a book called 'cricket in the 70's' with a heap of scorecards in the back and the scores are just as brisk as they are today. It is a myth that 'fast scoring' started with Waugh, or at least was made the 'norm' as it is considered now.

 

[Boris]

Re: The best batsman, across years and formats

Come off it, I have a book called 'cricket in the 70's' with a heap of scorecards in the back and the scores are just as brisk as they are today. It is a myth that 'fast scoring' started with Waugh, or at least was made the 'norm' as it is considered now.

I didn't say they weren't.

I was just saying there is a difference between doing it and being recognised for it.

Hayden and Gilchrist are known for being the first to bring in the 6+ RPO for the first 10 in an ODI. Of course they weren't the first, but they were the first recognised for scoring that quickly that blisteringly.

Time and place.