Vivian Richards is the greatest ODI player ever : The Impact Index

[Asoka]

Which fecking bastard came up with such a list?????Most BS list I have ever seen.

[f.b.m]

Ok. You aren't big on numbers and stats right?

[nitinbwj]

Kallis an IMPACT player ...WHAT:finger:

[Sachin=GOD]

ms dhoni > s.tendulkar:giggle: even i would not agree on that (i am dhoni's biggest fan)

Vaibhav_Delhi will take strong exception to this line :haha: As for this list - I've seen Afridi in the list so there's no need to see anything else, its got to be utter BS.

[Sir john]

what a thread by mariyam.:hehe:

[Watson87]

Carl Hooper really? Is this a joke

[Hindustani]

#6 Hansie Cronje

#23 S Afridi

#25 Heath Streak

how was the weightage for variables calculated ?

[jnr8]

http://penandpaperblog.org/2010/12/20/bradman-sobers-hadlee-botham-kallis/ This is a much better ranking system!!

[Late Cut]

You don't know Joel Garner? Kids these days:roti::eviltongue::eviltongue:

[Ganeshkumar]

Thats a good question. My guess is that 61 MoM in 445 ODIs is probably not as good a ratio as that Sir Viv Richards had. I did put up the conditions based on which the impact is calculated. Maybe you should read those and try and find answers to Sachin's lower rank. After all its not my ranking, and neither do I agree with it.

Dude,right Viv's MOM/Match ratio is slightly higher than Sachin's;but Sachin's is higher than all others,so why he is ranked as low as 18.He must be 2nd at-least.Where is Bevan?McGrath(Such an economical bowler.)?Donald?

[zen]

Nice filler thread till the WC

[achilles]

Only in a list can Adam Gilchrist and MS Dhoni be more of impact players than Wasim Akram and Sachin Tendulkar. Absolute rubbish. These lists serve the only way for the writers and experts to achieve success their propaganda.

[Mariyam]

The basic flaw is that it doesnt have longevity as criteria. Tendulkar is possibly the greatest odi cricket ever and he is ranked 18.

Good observation. I went through their criteria again. Here is how the rating is done. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/series-tournaments/icc-world-cup-2011/top-stories/Understanding-the-Impact-Index/articleshow/7349927.cms #11 In a career context, the figures from all heads are tallied. All numbers are necessarily between 0 and 5, up to two decimal points. I didn't quite follow what they mean when they say all heads are tallied, but it does seem that they've taken the entire career/longevity into account.

[zen]

Looking at the criteria, I am not surprised to see so many all-rounders at the top of the list. I read that some folks talked abt MoM but MoM's won is not the criteria here. Neither do MoM's show clearly what percentage of work did a player do in a team's win Let's look at Sachin's numbers: In 444 ODIs he has played in, Ind has won 223 (which is like 50%). In won games, he avg 58 w/ 33 hundreds, along w/ picking up 97 wkts @ 33. Let's look at Sir Viv's numbers: In 182 ODIs he played in, WI won an amazing 132 games (which is like 72%). In won games, Viv avg 57 (in a time where avg and match totals weren't that high) with 11 hundreds (all his 100s in won games!), along w/ picking up 99 wkts @ 32. It's not that difficult to see why Richards would top the impact index.

[Ganeshkumar]

Looking at the criteria, I am not surprised to see so many all-rounders at the top of the list. I read that some folks talked abt MoM but MoM's won is not the criteria here. Neither do MoM's show clearly what percentage of work did a player do in a team's win Let's look at Sachin's numbers: In 444 ODIs he has played in, Ind has won 223 (which is like 50%). In won games, he avg 58 w/ 33 hundreds, along w/ picking up 97 wkts @ 33. Let's look at Sir Viv's numbers: In 182 ODIs he played in, WI won an amazing 132 games (which is like 72%). In won games, Viv avg 57 (in a time where avg and match totals weren't that high) with 11 hundreds (all his 100s in won games!), along w/ picking up 99 wkts @ 32. It's not that difficult to see why Richards would top the impact index.

We're not questioning Viv's position,we're wondering why Sachin is ranked so low. But,for me who has read several of Jaideep Varma's vitriolic posts in the past,targeting tendulkar;I'm least surprised to see him coming with a funny set of criteria to downgrade Sachin Tendulkar.

[Mariyam]

You don't know Joel Garner? Kids these days:roti::eviltongue::eviltongue:

I live in the present. The greats and not so greats of yesteryear don't mean much to me. T-20 is the way ahead. :P

how was the weightage for variables calculated ?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/series-tournaments/icc-world-cup-2011/top-stories/Understanding-the-Impact-Index/articleshow/7349927.cms This site might answer your question.

Ok. You aren't big on numbers and stats right?

And? What have my mathematical deficiencies to do with the rankings? I didn't construct these rankings. I don't know how electricity is converted into wind/heat by a hair drier. But I still use one .:--D

[Mariyam]

:hysterical: you're such a noob. Btw' date=' where do you get the inspiration to start such obscure, [b']deviational recondite threads .....1st vehemently questioning the very foundation title of our cricket board, its inception within the questionable intent of organizational practice, its reciprocity and now sagaciously reporting the famed list of impact players constituted at the behest of the beehive journalism at its finest

Aha, I get it now. Eureka! Eureka! You are the guy whom everyone comes to for having their SoPs written. :haha:

[don_corleone840]

MS DHONI IS GREATEST INDIAN BATSMAN IN ODIS

[Ganeshkumar]

Looking at the criteria, I am not surprised to see so many all-rounders at the top of the list. I read that some folks talked abt MoM but MoM's won is not the criteria here. Neither do MoM's show clearly what percentage of work did a player do in a team's win Let's look at Sachin's numbers: In 444 ODIs he has played in, Ind has won 223 (which is like 50%). In won games, he avg 58 w/ 33 hundreds, along w/ picking up 97 wkts @ 33. Let's look at Sir Viv's numbers: In 182 ODIs he played in, WI won an amazing 132 games (which is like 72%). In won games, Viv avg 57 (in a time where avg and match totals weren't that high) with 11 hundreds (all his 100s in won games!), along w/ picking up 99 wkts @ 32. It's not that difficult to see why Richards would top the impact index.

Dude,Sachin's match winning ratio is better than Flintoff and Hooper.what about that?

[zen]

We're not questioning Viv's position' date=we're wondering why Sachin is ranked so low. But,for me who has read several of Jaideep Varma's vitriolic posts in the past,targeting tendulkar;I'm least surprised to see him coming with a funny set of criteria to downgrade Sachin Tendulkar.

I think what goes against Sachin is the win percentage. I haven't read Varma's article in the past (or may have w/o realizing who wrote them) but based on what you say, he could have invented the criteria to show that Tendulkar isn't in the top 5 or it could be a case where when Tendulkar doesn't top it's a conspiracy. I don't know!