David Gowers's 50 best cricketers-evaluation

[Harsh Thakor]

David Gowers 50 best cricketers list 1. Don Bradman 2. Garry Sobers 3. Sachin Tendulkar 4. Shane Warne 5. Viv Richards 6. Brian Lara 7. Jack Hobbs 8. Wally Hammond 9. Malcolm Marshall 10. W.G. Grace 11. Imran Khan 12. Ian Botham 13. Sydney Barnes 14. Jacques Kallis 15. Barry Richards 16. Dennis Lillee 17. Len Hutton 18. Wilfred Rhodes 19. Richie Benaud 20. Denis Compton 21. Keith Miller 22. Bill O' Reilly 23. Andy Roberts 24. Richard Hadlee 25. Graeme Pollock 26. Sunil Gavaskar 27. Wasim Akram 28. Allan Border 29. Glenn McGrath 30. Muttiah Muralitharan 31. George Headley 32. Curtley Ambrose 33. Javed Miandad 34. Ricky Ponting 35. Frank Worrell 36. Herbert Sutcliffe 37. Greg Chappell 38. Fred Tru,an 39. AB De Villiers 40. Dale Steyn 41. Kumar Sangakkara 42. Adam Gilchrist 43. Ray Lindwall 44. Harold Larwood 45. Joel Harner 46. Virender Sehwag 47. Kevin Pietersen 48. Kapil Dev 49. Jeff Thomson 50. Alan Knott A great list overall and basically very fair.I think he gives due respect to the modern generation.Of what I have read on the net he is analytical about Mcgrtah,Lara,Akram,Ambrose etc. In these respects I really admire the list Positive points. 1.It does great justice to Andy Roberts,the most complete pace bowler with Dennis Lillee of his time.Statistics hardly did true justice to Andy who was a more complete paceman than Imran Khan ,Michael Holding or Richard Hadlee.Few paceman had such a wide variety like his bouncers at different speeds. 2.He correctly places Wasim Akram above Glaen Mcgrath as a cricketer because of his prowess with the bat and greater variety with the ball.Again better than Jenkins who placed wasim at 34th and Glen Mcgrath at 11th place.Wasim was by a whisker more eligible for selection in an all-time world xi. 3.Does Justice to Jacques Kallis who again was rated very low by Geoff Armstrong and Cristopher Martin Jenkins who put him in 52 nd place.Morally Kallis was Sober's runner-up as an all-rounder. 4.Does justice to Brian Lara who was rated in 21 st place by Geoff Armstrong and Cristopher Martin Jenkins behind Denis Compton,George Headley,Walter Hammond etc but placed Tendulkar and Viv Richards were placed in the top 10 by Martin Jenkins.In pure test cricket Lara was arguably the best batsman after Bradman. Flaws of analysis. 1.It underestimates W.G.Grace who could have been at no 1 if you ***** the staggering level of his acheivements.Imagine scoring 344 on a pitch of uncut grass , 1000 runs 28 times in an English first-class season and the double of 1000 runs and 100 wickets 8 times. .Scoring 54211 runs and taking 2876 wickets is alos a phenomenal achievement.Considering the wickets he played averaging 39.85 was a phenomenal figure.W.G.should have atleast been in the top 3,if you respect his impact and contribution . 2.Obliterates the name of Michael Holding.No pace bowler ever posessed a smoother or better action or bowled as consistently fast through the air. He was literally 'a whispering death.,steaming in like Rolys Royce car but creating the impact of thunder.Holding bowled the best ever spell and best ever over in test cricket. 3 Erronously places Malcolm Marshall above Imran Khan and Jacques Kallis.Imran's great achievements as a leader and greatness as an all-rounder place him in the Tendulkar or Viv Richards bracket as a cricketer while Kallis was almost Sober's equal as an all-rounder.I am almost certain had Kallis played in the 1980's he would have eclipsed Botham,Hadlee or Kapil Dev. 4.Places Ray Lindwall too low down the order who to me was more complete than even Denis Lillee.Lindwall could well have deserved a pace in the top 20,on par with Lillee.Remember Trueman,Davidson Compton nad Gravaney rated Ray as the best post-war pace bowler they ever saw.In that light Armostrong and Martin Jenkins were much fairer in ranking Lindwall. 5.Ranks Jack Hobbs too low who should have been place atleast at no 4.I think Hobbs was arguably the most complete batsman of all if you ***** his mastery on wet wickets.61,237 runs with 197 centuries is a staggering performance.Hobs to me is above Tendulkar or Viv Richards. 6.Sydney Barnes should be atleast in the top 10,being arguably the greatest fast bowler ever taking 7 wickets per test at 16.89. 6.He should have placed Sunil Gavaskar a place ahead of Barry Richards as well as Greame Pollock if you fairly respect international performances. 7.Adam Gilchrist should be atleast in the top 13-15.He was the greatest match-winner of his day ranked in the top 10 by Armstrong and Martin Jenkins.Gichrist may even edge Imran or Marshall in the rankings. 8.Total injustice to Murlitharan who has to be in the top 12. Warne at 4 and Murli at 30 is ridiculous. 9.Places Greg Chappell below Miandad and Border.I rate Greg as the best Australian batsmen after Bradman if you evaluate his career.No batsmen played as well in the Carribean or in World Series supertests.Adding his scores against Rest of the World and World series Packer Supertests Greg would average over 55.He was the most prolific scorer in the supertests in the West Indies in 1979 scoring 621 runs at an average of 69 and the most prolific run scorer in 3 yaers of World series cricket aggregated 1416 runs overall in Packer Cricket including 246 against a world xi.Greg Chappell could ranks with Bradman,Tendulkar and Barry Richards as the most complete of batsmen. .Below I have re-shuffled Gower's top 50 in my tentative personal order of merit.All of Gower's selected 50 are here but in a different order. 1.W.G.Grace 2.Gary Sobers 3.Don Bradman. 4.Jack Hobbs 5.Sydney Barnes 6.Shane Warne 7.Viv Richards 8.Sachin Tendulkar 9.Imran Khan 10.Brian Lara 11. Jacques Kallis 12.Muthiah Murlitharan 13.Wasim Akram 14.Malcom Marshall 15.Adam Gilchrist 16.Walter Hammond 17.Ian Botham 18.Dennis Lillee 19.Glen Mcgrath 20.Len Hutton 21.George Headley 22.Keith Miller 23.Ray Lindwall 24.Fred Trueman 25.Richard Hadlee 26.Sunil Gavaskar 27.Curtly Ambrose 28.Graeme Pollock 29.Barry Richards 30.Wilfred Rhodes 31.Ricky Ponting 32.Richie Benaud 33.Andy Roberts 34.Harold Larwood 35.Herbert Sutcliffe 36.Bill O'Reilly 37..Kapil Dev 38.Greg Chappell 39.Alan Border 40.Javed Miandad 41. Kumar Sangakaara 42.Denis Compton 43.Frank Worrel 44.Kevin Pieterson 45.Joel Garner 46.Virendra Sehwag 47.Dale Steyn 48.A.B.Devilliers 49.Jeff Thomson 50.Alan Knott Viv Richard's great match-winning prowess in tests and O.D.I.s perhaps edges Tendulkar's longevity,Kalli's phenomenal all-round figures puts him in the top dozen ,Imran's x factor and captaincy made me rate him above Kallis,Sydney Barnes's records make him the best bowler of all,Sobers as a pure cricketer surpassed the Don ,W.G.Grace made an impact to the game no cricketer ever did,Hobbs dominated his era more than any batsman ever did bar Bradman,Wasim's batting talent in addition to phenomenal bowling skills placed him ahead of Marshall,Mcgrath,Lillee ,Roberts and Ambrose,Gilchrist was the best match-winner of his day,Greg Chappell marginally had more class than Miandad or Border as a batsman .

[Raghav_12]

Lol.. Dale Steyn at 40!! This invlidates whole list.

[Precambrian]

Wg grace is lol

[Marut]

How is Botham justified at #17 and Kapil at #37? Botham was mostly an Ashes hero and against WI the toughest team of his era, he usually failed with both bat and ball. Kapil was a superior batsman as well as bowler compared to Botham. In fact Botham struggled against top teams, with both bat and ball. After his first four years, he was practically a nobody in bowling averaging in the region of 40 against all good sides.

[Marut]

I have no attraction for putting old names at the top of these lists. Honestly I wouldn't have W.C.Grace in top 50!! Similarly, Kallis does not deserve to be high on these lists.

[Detonator]

Viru

[rkt.india]

Wilfred Rhodes has 2 test 100s in 58 test and averages 30. :haha:

[rkt.india]

Lol.. Dale Steyn at 40!! This invlidates whole list.

He himself puts Dale Steyn at 47, just above Jeff Thomson.:cantstop:

[rkt.india]

You forgot Geroge Lohmann. He averages 10 in test cricket takign 112 wickets in 18 tests and 13 in FC cricket over 293 matches taking 1841 wickets. What an achievement for a fast bowler. He should be there somewhere with Sydney Barnes.

[Marut]

He himself puts Dale Steyn at 47' date=' just above Jeff Thomson.:cantstop:[/quote'] :hysterical: Thomson, a mediocre bowler averaging 28 on the bouncy pitches of Australia in a bowler friendly era = Steyn, the #1 bowler in the current era of batsmen friendly rules and pitches. :hysterical:

[Vijy]

You forgot Geroge Lohmann. He averages 10 in test cricket takign 112 wickets in 18 tests and 13 in FC cricket over 293 matches taking 1841 wickets. What an achievement for a fast bowler. He should be there somewhere with Sydney Barnes.

Barnes came along quite a bit later than Lohmann - in Lohmann's time, other bowlers such as Ferris, Turner, Peel, W. Barnes (not Sydney Barnes) were all averaging less than 20. Barnes played last Test in 1914 and pitches by then were slowly beginning to give some advantage to batsmen. Besides, his style of bowling has been considered unique - spin at medium pace coupled to swing and seam consistently. One cannot really judge oldies very properly anyway. If you look at Wisden (the founder), you will find super-impressive FC stats for him as well.

[Marut]

The early era of cricket had high standard deviations in terms of stats. There were numerous bowlers with bowling averages in the teens or low 20s and there were batsmen with high batting averages. Looks like there were a few good bowlers and batsmen who feasted on the majority of mediocre batsmen or bowlers.

[Lannister]

I think it's nearly impossible to compare players from different generations. Nowadays you see players playing throughout the year without taking much breaks in between the series. So that puts huge work load on oneself and could affect one's average.

[Vijy]

The early era of cricket had high standard deviations in terms of stats. There were numerous bowlers with bowling averages in the teens or low 20s and there were batsmen with high batting averages. Looks like there were a few good bowlers and batsmen who feasted on the majority of mediocre batsmen or bowlers.

That's a very good observation - I'd say this was certainly true until end of WW-2 at the least.

[HippoSucks]

Comparing Lohmann to Sydney Barnes is ridiculous. Bowling averages from 1900-1930: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=20+Aug+1930;spanmin1=15+Mar+1900;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling Bowling averages from 1930-1960: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;spanmax2=20+Aug+1960;spanmin2=20+Aug+1930;spanval2=span;template=results;type=bowling Bowling averages from 1960-1990: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;spanmax3=20+Aug+1990;spanmin3=20+Aug+1960;spanval3=span;template=results;type=bowling Bowling averages from 1990-Present: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;spanmin2=20+Aug+1990;spanval2=span;template=results;type=bowling The gradual increase in bowling averages is mostly caused by having more teams and therefore more players (which leads to there being more mediocre bowlers). George Lohmann's case is different. He played from 1886-1896 and in that time there was not a single batsman averaging over 50 (with a minimum of 10 innings). http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=batting_average;qualmin1=10;qualval1=innings;spanmax1=20+Aug+1896;spanmin1=15+Mar+1886;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Most of the bowlers who took at least 25 wickets also had bowling averages below 20. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;qualmin1=25;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=20+Aug+1896;spanmin1=15+Mar+1886;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling In Barnes' time bowling averages of most bowlers were not completely different to how they are now. However when Lohmann played Cricket was still not a very well developed sport and it was a bowling-dominated era. So his statistics should not be taken at face value (and his statistics should also not be used to undermine Barnes).

[HippoSucks]

:hysterical: Thomson, a mediocre bowler averaging 28 on the bouncy pitches of Australia in a bowler friendly era = Steyn, the #1 bowler in the current era of batsmen friendly rules and pitches. :hysterical:

Can you list some reasons as to why batting in tests has become easier nowadays? I would argue that the quality of batsman has gone down relative to the last few decades.

[Marut]

Can you list some reasons as to why batting in tests has become easier nowadays? I would argue that the quality of batsman has gone down relative to the last few decades.

Some of the reasons are: 1. Size of bats. Better equipment - The game of cricket played in earlier days needed the batsman to time the ball properly in order to score runs. These days, with brute force, a batsman can clear the ropes even if he hasn't timed the ball well or the ball hasn't come off the middle of the bat. 2. Flatter pitches even in countries like Australia - did any losing visiting team manage to get 400+ in Australia so consistently as India did recently? Not even a team with Sachin, Dravid, Laxman managed to do this in the past. Even in England, batting is a lot easier than in the past. 3. Batsman friendly rules like restriction on the number of bouncers per over. 4. Probably weaker bowling units - I am not 100% sure whether this is true though. How would former bowling greats perform in 2015? I don't know... 5. Bowlers have come under the scanner for chucking and some big names have been thrown out, but batsmen are under no such scrutiny so they are flourishing. ----- Just an example: In the past, fourth innings used to be unusually difficult to bat. That has significantly eased out now - the proof lies here - http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;innings_number=4;orderby=start;runsmin1=350;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=team;view=innings Out of forty nine 350 scores for the 4th innings in the entire history of Test cricket, 21 have been scored since 2006. Basically means that about 43% of the highest fourth innings scores have been made in the last nine years!! Something that used to happen once every four years is now happening twice an year!

[Raghav_12]

I would say, other than WG Grace, I would agree with top 10 of David Gower and order of top 10 as well.

[adi B]

Honestly,not the worst list I have seen but as usual too many Englishmen and aussies in that list (29 I think)

[adi B]

Rahul dravid has to be there,he is a sure shot in top 25 cricketers in tests.whats laughable is lilee and botham are in top 20 but Ambrose and gavaskar are way down ,this is pure bias and giving more considerations to ashes