who is the second best cricketer ever? (1 Viewer)

[max]

Viv Richards.

Also, looking at current form, i think Rahul Dravid should be there, among the top few. I mean, he is in a team where nearly everyone is overshadowed by Sachin, but he has been The Wall numerous times.

Surely you're kidding right?

Dravid is far too defensive a player to be considered in that bracket of cricketers.

He would better suit a question like 'second best defensive batsman.'

And nit, people like Dravid and Tendulkar have down to earth cricketing personalities because they have to. They aren't dominating world cricket, haven't won two world cups in succession and aren't clearing the cricket ratings. They have to be humble. What 'huge successes' are you talking about? They are 8th in the world for odi's and 3rd for tests. Oh yeh, they made the wc final a couple of years ago.

 

[aj_number_10]

I agree with Max... To consider Rahul Dravid as the second best cricketer ever is embarrasing to the the talented players who have played the game.

Dravid is a great cricketer , however he doesnt have the potential that I believe lots of cricketers have not only had in the past but have today. Rahul walks out there and just stays there, lwaits for the real bad ball to put away... (Look to Australia in India a few months ago, i think he was 20 off about 150 balls?). Guys like Sehwag , Gilchrist , Lara , Gayle (The List goes on) , are better players than Dravid as they can turn average balls into bad balls.

Dravid is similar to Kallis , both fine players , but they are really just mentally very good.


As far as the second best cricketer , how do you compare a batsman to a bowler , and considering I dont think many people in this forum would of seen much from before the 90s its a real hard topic. From what everyone sais that i hear Viv Richards was a champion.

From the cricket ive seen ( 90s onwards ) as a bowler Ambrose was the best , and probably Warne when we talk about spin. As a batsman it would be Lara. (Remember im only talking about what ive seen)

 

[ramanij]

The greatest cricketer was Sobers no doubt about it
The greatest batesmen was Bradman
THe greatest bowler? well this question is still out guys like Sydney barnes,Mcgrath,Lillie,warne,akram and my person favourite Curtly Ambrose

for the second best cricketer of all time i would have to say gilchrist or Imran khan Botham,Hadlee and kapil dev are the most overrated cricketers ever

The second greatst batsmen ever would have to be Tendulkar as personally i ahve never seen hammond or Len hutton play so i cannot judge.Lara is also there but he always gives a chance early on in his innings also what people dont realise with Tendulkar is that he for the last 10 years has been in some very poor teams until recently while Lara alwsy had the support of Ambrose and Walsh 2 of the greast bowlers ever so coming into bat when the opposition has a score of 300 si differnt when thepositon has a score of 500 the pressure of Tendulkar is so immense far greater than teh don or Viv Richards so taking into all these factors
Tendulkar is clearly the second greatest after him do Viv Richards, Lara,Ponting,Gavaskar all come in to play

 

[david88]

comparing bats men with bowlers

Its hard to compare but it can be done in a relative way. A good batsman averages about 50 give or take a little. Bradman played over 2o tests and sustained an average of 99.97-nearly double of any other batsmen who has played over 20 tests.That means that Bradman was twice as good as most other batsman.

A good bowler averages about 25 . Can You imagine a test bowler who has played 20 tests averaging 12 runs per wicket?no. therefore Bradman was the best compared to all his past and present rivals.

 

[blackfriday]

on averages bradman would be the best batsman, and a bloke named lohmann or whatever has a test bowling average of 10 and took like 100 wickets or something.

 

[dawso]

u say best cricketer 'ever', im gunna make a prediction 4 the future...........

michael clarke

 

[max]

u say best cricketer 'ever', im gunna make a prediction 4 the future...........

michael clarke

I'm going to have to second that.

 

[rama_v]

Surely you're kidding right?

Dravid is far too defensive a player to be considered in that bracket of cricketers.

He would better suit a question like 'second best defensive batsman.'

And nit, people like Dravid and Tendulkar have down to earth cricketing personalities because they have to. They aren't dominating world cricket, haven't won two world cups in succession and aren't clearing the cricket ratings. They have to be humble. What 'huge successes' are you talking about? They are 8th in the world for odi's and 3rd for tests. Oh yeh, they made the wc final a couple of years ago.

Your right about Dravid, he's probably too defensive to be considered among the greats but thats the sort of player he is (like Kallis). Anyway about the "down to earth" issue, you seem to suggest that Dravid/Sachin have achieved very little that they can boast about. Let me just show you Sachin's record, and ask yourself, if you were in a crap team and had statistics like this, what would stop you from boasting? Most indian players have never been big boasters, and neither have some aussies, ie gilchrist, gillespie etc. Its not that they cant boast because the team has performed poorly, despite their team they have performed phenomenally over the last 10 years.

TESTS
(including 17/12/2004)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50
Batting & Fielding 120 193 21 9879 248* 57.43 34 38

ODI
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50
Batting & Fielding 342 333 32 13497 186* 44.84 86.20 37 69

Equal highest number of test centuries, highest ODI centureis (by a LOGN way), highest runs in ODI (by a long way), over 20, 000 runs in Internaitonal Cricket, the list goes on....

 

[MuffinMan]

I reckon either Sachin Tendukar or Brian Lara

 

[ishq]

Dravid is a defensive player. Agreed. So why can't he be among the CURRENT GREATS? You have to look at his record. He may not be a Sehwag or a Gilchrist, but he gets the job done majority of the time. He stuck in there last night, for quite a bit, mainly because of his defense.

I am not saying that he is No.2 - far from it.

A prediction for the future? I'd also say Salman Butt.

And when it comes to boasting, I think Sachin's records can lead him to the top of any tally. However, its just not him. He is one of those quiet achievers - unlike, and here i agree with nit, some other players.

 

[Hotdog1]

though dravid may be defensive he's actually not a bad player, infact, i reckon he has won just as many - if not MORE - games for india than sachin. especially in recent times, when the chips are down for india its usually dravid who comes to the rescue, while when india was on top, it was tendulkar causing the havok.

imo in the players still playing right now, gilchrist has to be the most valuable. he has the best strikerate in test matches in the history of the game (of those that have scored over 1000 runs or soomething), and the way he can turn or win a match in 1 session or even in an hour is phenomenal. i reckon he is the difference between taylors side(a good team) and the waugh/ponting side (a great team)

Kallis would come next. he is just so consistent with the bat for south africa, the backbone of there batting. although he hasnt bowled much lately due to his injury, he has still bowled economically, and once he geys back to full fitness he should be able to start taking wickets again. Easily the best all rounder (discounting wicketkeeping batsman as an allrounder)

Then there would be a mix of lara, tendulkar, dravid and maybe even ponting in batting... (a few years ago, lara and tendulkar would be way above the others, but in recemt years, the rest seems to have caught up a bit)
and in bowling: macgrath, warne, and murali... (pollock seems to have recovered his form but not the same as few years ago)


of the retired players that ive watched, curtly ambrose and wasim akram stands out. probably among the greatest bowlers of all time, nuff said.

for the future, andrew strauss.

 

[acmilan]

Totally agree with Hotdog, Strauss will be one of the best when he peaks. In 2004 he got 1001 runs @ 62.56 average with 4 hundreds and 4 fifties. As for Clarke, im a little weary still of saying he will become a great player. No question that he will be good but greatness is a big step away from just being a good player. Its still early but normally if he doesnt hit big scores then he tends to get out early which, if you look at great players, sometimes the consistency in getting decent scores (such as 40 or 50 odd runs) is what are important

 

[rama_v]

Yeah, Strauss looks an awesome player, I hardly saw him beign beaten by the ball in the tests against S Africa recently. I cant wait till the ashes to see how good he plays against the Aussies, I think Salman Butt is another exciting prospect (in terms of openers)

 

[max]

Yes, Salman Butt looks a very matured batsman at only (some) 20 years. And once Clarke gets moved up the order - like to number four or even three then you'll see more consistency and stability in his batting. Ponting was similar in his debutant year.

 

[kirabolton]

I'm going to have to second that.

i will also add my bit and 'third' it. It was only the other day when Australia played Pakistan in the one dayer that i really realised what everyone has been saying about michael clarke. I mean seriously the guys a kid really, especially in cricket terms. Somebody who can just come into the team and immedietly perform well is definetly going to be great, he has the talent and he seems to have the mind for it. Think about it, when Steve Waugh got into the australian teams it took him ages to really make a name for himself or get any real achievements, look at who he became. I will go further and predict michael clarke will not only go down in cricket history as one of the greatest batsmen ever, but i reckon he will captain australia as well.

 

[angelduck]

hes not a bad bowler either, and i also think hed make a great captain, he might even take ova from Ponting

 

[ishq]

hes not a bad bowler either, and i also think hed make a great captain, he might even take ova from Ponting

are we forgetting Adam Gilchrist? Or is this 'in the long run?'

 

[angelduck]

in the long run, hes not experienced enough yet!

 

[Lhyviathan]

Anyone heard of George Headley?

He was a West Indian batsman, who was dubbed "The Black Bradman". (In return, his admirers called Bradman "The White Headley" )

M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
22 40 4 2190 270* 60.83 10 5 14 0

I've obviously never seen him play (his first test was in 29/30 and his last was in 53/54), but I reckon he'd be up there somewhere... :uhhuh:

 

[rantman]

curlty ambrose. a burst of 7 for 1 against australia does it for me.
plus has bowling average of 20.99, better than any other bowler with more than (the greats) 400 wickets.
released ball from 10ft created some massive bounce, intimidated many batsmen
together with walsh, marshall and bishop made the bowling of the windies of the early-mid 90's considered second-to-none to any other attack of that era
i'd say if bradman being a batsman is considered the best we have to be fair to the bowlers and put one of them as second best
otherwise ken barrington is the second best of all time

but in my mind, modern day best player would be ricardo powell, without a doubt
he has to one of the cleanest hitters of the ball
the bats makes a different noise when he strikes the ball
absolute marvellous to watch
i think if a team needed around 60 to win of the last 5 overs (rr 12) powell and afridi together would be able to do it
both have a strike rate 99 and 103 respectively


but if i was to choose a modern day great bowler i couldn't go past shane bond or maybe even nicki boje