The Independent Voice of West Indies Cricket
A representative panelist on cricinfo is identifying the top 25 international cricketers of this century.
They are up to number 7 here is my top six in no particular order: Warne Murali Lara Kohli Sachin Ponting
what say you?
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/the-greatest-men-s-internationals-of-the-century-no-7-1511126
@CricSham
What's wrong with you.....Sammy is missing?😳
@CricSham
Will be between Warne, Lara, McGrath, Tendulkar, kallis and ponting. I’d put Lara first for simply scoring 600 plus runs versus murali and bass in their own conditions but I know cricinfo is heavily biased…and based in India so they won’t do that, similarly to how they put Laxman’s 281 on an absolute road over Lara's 153 on a day five Kensington pitch in a match nobody in either second innings scored more than 40. Bet they’ll probably give it to kallis
@Jumpstart
Given Tendy’s achievement, both at the test and ODI level, it would be correct if he’s selected. That being said anyone of Lara Tendy,Warne or Ponting would be the right choice.
On the choice of Lara‘s or Laxman’s innings definitely Laxman.
I was surprised that they did not name Kallis earlier. Maybe he would be the surprise pick as number one. I definitely don’t agree but…
I missed McGrath. You’re correct he’ll definitely be in the top six.
@Jumpstart
I’d put Lara first for simply being a fellow Tit...
Indeed. And while you're at it, please remind everyone here that Lara was the first man to ever walk on the moon (and some say water as well), and he also invented modern day plumbing and the Chinese finger trap.
@CricSham
if you look purely at statistics, maybe. but qualitatively, Tendulkar does not even have have one entry in cricinfo's list of top 50 performances of the that 50 years, compiled in 206. lara has four entries. by the icc's cumulative batting rankings, tendulkar ranks 32, behind ponting, kohli, steve smith, kallis and lara. in wisden's top 100 performances, tendulkar has one entry, and again lara has four.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24941869
Patrick Ferriday and Dave Wilson, authors of Masterly Batting: 100 Great Test Centuries, created their list of favourites based on a number of different criteria - runs, conditions, bowling strength, percentage of team total, chances, speed, series impact, match impact, and what they refer to as "intangibles".
Tendulkar makes their list just once, in 100th place, for the 155 not out he scored against Australia in Chennai in 1998.
This seems a meagre return for a man who has hit 51 centuries in his Test career. Brian Lara, meanwhile, has five centuries in Ferriday and Wilson's top 100, including three in their top 20.
"Tendulkar's reputation is based on his longevity, consistency and the fact he has played his whole career under the pressure of being an Indian icon," says Ferriday.
"But I don't think he played the stellar innings that Brian Lara played. Most of Lara's centuries were innings that either saved his team from losing or enabled them to win. Tendulkar's were often hidden amongst those of his team-mates
the great indian writer Rahul Bhattacharya, who was one of the contributors to the top 50 test performances. three of lara's 21st century innings' are in the top 20 of this list
That is one way (though only one) of thinking about the results of the Cricket Monthly exercise. It's a list tingling with the Lara sensation. Consider his rough contemporaries who have no entries in the 50: Sanga, Jayawardene, Inzamam, Chanderpaul, Hayden, Kirsten, Ponting, Kallis, Tendulkar. Lara? Four. For the 50 years in consideration, nobody has as many, batsman, bowler or allrounder. Four Lara Four! All four in the top 30, three in the top 20, one of those in the top five: 153 not out in Barbados.
sorry. there is no universe where tendulkar is better, or in the same universe as lara. tendulkar isn't even the best batsman from india. gavaskar is
@Jumpstart
there is no universe where tendulkar is better, or in the same universe as lara. tendulkar isn't even the best batsman from india. gavaskar is
Even Lara would put two slap pon yuh if you ever said that shit in front of him.
@SnoopDog
lara is a very humble person....but allan donald, glenn mcgrath, jason gillespie, murali, waqar younis and wasim akram have all said lara was better. he hasn't slapped them as yet
@Jumpstart
So why don't you name your top 6 and mek dem Cricinfo experts look like skunts?
@Kay
also, from 2000 to 2006, lara scored 6380 runs, while tendulkar scored 4749 runs, despite there being only five tests between them(tendulkar played 61, lara played 66).....and im not the only one who noticed this.
a cricinfo panel discussion in 2006
Lara the greatest among his peers'
Tony Greig: For me, it's sort of, just the natural thing. It's like a fielder, when you see him run across the turf and pick up the ball, it ends up in the middle of his hand. He doesn't fumble it. I mean guys like Clive Lloyd, Colin Bland, when they chased the ball, for some reason it went into their hands, and out like a rocket. It's just a natural thing for me. Lara, well for me Murali said it all, he reckons he is so far above others in his ability to play spin that it doesn't really matter; that pretty much says it all for me.
Ian Chappell:I will. The point I want to make is that Tendulkar and Lara started quite a lot time before Ponting and it does take a long time to establish yourself as a great player. And whilst I think that Ponting has now surpassed Tendulkar and Lara, that has got a bit to do with age. While I do think that Ponting has entered that category since he hasn't been around for that long, I'll pick from the other two. And if you pointed a gun to my head and said pick one, I'd pick Brian Lara with the proviso that his brain is in gear, because when his brain is in gear I love watching him.
Ravi Shastri: You mentioned technique, natural skills, ability to handle pressure and ability to score in different conditions meaning adaptability. I would add two more things; consistency and your career, the span of your career. You can't do it just for one or two years. To be rated it should be a decade, a little more than a decade. And one key word that's missing -- the ability to dominate attacks. Ian mentioned Geoffrey Boycott and like he said, he could score a lot of runs but could never dominate the attack. From this list I would pick Tendulkar and Lara. Ponting too has definitely come in there now but he still has a long way to go, maybe another 5-6 years of cricket. But between Tendulkar and Lara, you would have to give it to Lara because he's dominated more often than not over a span of time. Tendulkar has had his years of brilliance, 96-97 against Australia. Now that is the Tendulkar you would remember; not only did he score hundreds but it was dominating.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/lara-the-greatest-among-his-peers-268732
David Boone:
David Boon sometimes referred to as the ironman of Australia has never held back on his opinions in the past. Especially being a match referee with the ICC for many an international match, Boon has usually charged players with the code of conduct and other such offenses. Therefore, in that capacity, Boon stated that he would pick Brain Lara ahead of Indian batting legend Sachin Tendulkar.
Speaking about players with natural talent, David Boon said that there are barely a few players who rely on their natural talent. In that capacity, Boon went ahead and picked Brian Lara as a much more ‘naturally gifted’ as compared to Sachin Tendulkar. ‘Boonie’, as he is commonly called, also went on to add that it was indeed a harsh one as far as someone like Tendulkar was concerned.
“There are very few absolutely naturally talented players who are successful at the highest level. Most of them have the element of talent, but it is how they play the game and their desire to be as best as they possibly can that makes cricketers successful. If I had to pick one that was the most naturally gifted, that will be Lara.
“I know that is very harsh on Sachin Tendulkar. I admire him immensely as a player who was successful in all conditions and in all formats. He is someone who worked very hard on his game and became mentally very strong. I wouldn’t put him in that ‘pure naturally gifted package’ but nonetheless, he is one of the best cricketers of the era,” he added.
https://www.crictracker.com/put-lara-ahead-tendulkar-david-boon/
once you move pass the envy, from the west indies, the jingoism, its not a difficult analysis. As i stated, tendulkar is not even india's best batsman. Gavaskar is and in terms of pure skill, I'd put kohli, who was as good a master of batting's hardest skill: bisecting gaps as lara
@Jumpstart
once you move pass the envy,
Moving past envy gives one the ultimate clarity to look inward and focus entirely on our own lane. It frees up our mental bandwidth, allowing one to use our energy for self-improvement and genuine personal growth. Such does not exist amongst Caribbean nationals, we prefer combative insularity.
@sgtdjones
not trinis. we never disagree that sobers was the greatest allrounder of all time, or that viv, no matter how much bad vibes we got from him, was the best batsman from the end of the war to the end of the 90s. im not saying trinis doh have traces of insularity, but when coming to wi cricket, we only care about the best xi being put on the field. when the side had 7 bajans in the early 80s, or 6 LI players in the late 80s, you didn't hear trinis complaining, even when superior pacers like tony gray got picked after utility bowlers like winston benjamin
@Jumpstart
Oh, we agree to disagree my friend.
by the way, what’s your thoughts on the Brazil team? I’m glad that Neymar made the lineup.
Where is Shiv on this list? Surely he ranks higher than Pietersen and Jayawardene and similar to Dravid in terms of overall stats across formats?
The judges seem to forget that he had the highest test average between 2007 and 2015. Next best was Sangakkara.
Seems like a very biased or inconsistent list to me.