Greatness of a Cricketer! How should fans judge?

[Shamim.Miah]

A question to members/fans, how do you judge a cricketers greatness as a fan? Should it be purely judged on how many World Cup they have won? MOM performance in final? How many player of the series, Man of the match awards they have won over the career. Or is it purely based on stats? Number of century, runs, wickets etc taken over the years. Please share you thoughts and opinion about any Indian player/players that have achieved all the criteria above. Or you can relate to other cricketers from around the world. How do you judge? Thanks. 

[velu]

we should not consider matches or series won as a player .. players in a better team will by default win many games

ponting will be a greater player than sachin and lara if we go by the matches won logic..

 

i would go with runs , centuries n wickets taken etc..

 

 

[Shamim.Miah]

2 minutes ago, velu said:

we should not consider matches or series won as a player .. players in a better team will by default win many games

ponting will be a greater player than sachin and lara if we go by the matches won logic..

 

i would go with runs , centuries n wickets taken etc..

 

 

Would you still consider the cricketer great if someone has say scored 10,000+ runs or taken so many wickets but fails in world Tournments? Wouldn't that say he can't cope with pressure, expectation etc? What would be the attributes needed by a cricketer to be considered great? 

[tweaker]

Great players stand out from other players.When Tendulkar was playing many batsman were as good as him but he was always above everyone.

Now Virat Kohli is playing with RCB with Gayle,ABD etc but he has been able to show his greatness.

[tweaker]

ABD has been considered a modern great batsman ,but he is always consider a chocker in important matches.

Many great batsmen are not able to contribute in high pressure situations.

Many great bowlers are not able to bowl during a very tense last over

[Shamim.Miah]

There are modern players that perform consistently in series. Joe Root, Virat Kohli, AB, Amla and some others. Virat Kohli might have won the prize for best modern great had he managed to win India the last t20 cup! Under immense pressure he was literally scoring runs for fun! Like no pressure ever existed. But he couldn't pass the final hurdle. not everyone can handle pressure. That's why it maybe hard to say what is the real attribute needed to judge greatness? Maybe a combination of couple? E.g pressure, expectation, stage (world cup), contribution? 

Edited August 24, 2016 by Shamim.Miah

[beetle]

I would go with the no of runs /wkts/centuries  plus  the number of MOM awards. It shows individual performance and the players contribution to  the wins of the team.

[Asim]

Some fair amount of career length with consistently performing everywhere vs all type of oppositions... Subjective though...

[Shamim.Miah]

5 minutes ago, Asim said:

Some fair amount of career length with consistently performing everywhere vs all type of oppositions... Subjective though...

Interesting. But how would you judge player's greatness if he doesn't play all around the world? Say a player from Zimbabwe, Ireland, Bangladesh with their amazing performance in each and every match of a World Cup leads it's country to a World Cup glory? Would he be great? Even though he hasn't played against all countries in different conditions? But his just won his country the World Cup in the biggest stage being the highest run scorer or wicket taker, player of tournment? 

[express bowling]

The factors  I look for are

• Team can depend on him when in trouble.
• Contributing to his team's wins consistently and, sometimes, winning it almost single-handedly.
• Performing  consistently.
• Doing well in most places in the world and especially against the top teams.
• Doing well in big matches and tournaments.

Edited August 24, 2016 by express bowling

[Asim]

25 minutes ago, Shamim.Miah said:

Interesting. But how would you judge player's greatness if he doesn't play all around the world? Say a player from Zimbabwe, Ireland, Bangladesh with their amazing performance in each and every match of a World Cup leads it's country to a World Cup glory? Would he be great? Even though he hasn't played against all countries in different conditions? But his just won his country the World Cup in the biggest stage being the highest run scorer or wicket taker, player of tournment? 

Obv whatever possible chances he got from his side without getting much dropped...

in ur example, might not be called a great of game since career would not be that long but winning a world cup would definitely make him a Hero for his nation...

[Shamim.Miah]

9 minutes ago, Asim said:

Obv whatever possible chances he got from his side without getting much dropped...

in ur example, might not be called a great of game since career would not be that long but winning a world cup would definitely make him a Hero for his nation...

Would be extremely harsh on that individual player. Competing against the best class/players in the greatest stage and by his individual performance leading his country to World Cup triumph surely would warrant to be called one of the greats? Especially if he goes on to break and set indivdual records for himself and his country. He would surely at minimum be a national hero and a legend. Greatness to me is doing something extraordinary, be it with personal achievement or team. 

[Asim]

10 minutes ago, Shamim.Miah said:

Would be extremely harsh on that individual player. Competing against the best class/players in the greatest stage and by his individual performance leading his country to World Cup triumph surely would warrant to be called one of the greats? Especially if he goes on to break and set indivdual records for himself and his country. He would surely at minimum be a national hero and a legend. Greatness to me is doing something extraordinary, be it with personal achievement or team. 

Call it Great performance, Great worldcup, Great achievement, Hero for nation anything but 'Great of Game', I doubt that...

Had SA won 99 WC and lets say Lance Klusner started his career just in 99 and finished right after WC, would u be calling him GREAT today? For me he would've been just a 99WC Hero which he probably is anyways...

[Shamim.Miah]

9 minutes ago, Asim said:

Call it Great performance, Great worldcup, Great achievement, Hero for nation anything but 'Great of Game', I doubt that...

Had SA won 99 WC and lets say Lance Klusner started his career just in 99 and finished right after WC, would u be calling him GREAT today? For me he would've been just a 99WC Hero which he probably is anyways...

Leaving the test nations alone, it would just mean no associate players can ever be called great of the game as they haven't competed against all countries in all conditions, even if that associate player wins his team the world cup. That to me sounds unfair. Who would ever think before a world cup that team like Ireland, Scotland, Holland would go on to win a World Cup? Something extraordinary must happen, and if that extraordinary thing is a indivdual players performance, than to me he should be included as one of the greats, he made the impossible be the possible when no one gave his team a chance. Highly unlikely but it's just a opinion that associate players can't be called one of the greats even if they win their team the World Cup.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Shamim.Miah

[Asim]

^ Sure that's ur opinion... I described what criteria my mind suggests :)

[but don't worry either bcz if someone is such an extra ordinary player that he can single-handedly win a WC for his associate team, sure he can do alot more wonders too so I think nobody would mind calling him great but thats obv just hypothetical, realistically we dont have had even half of such player in 50 yrs of ODI and 150 years of Test history and dont think there can ever be]

[kruiser]

by the amount of joy brought to the fans. 

[Sooda]

On 8/24/2016 at 1:44 PM, tweaker said:

ABD has been considered a modern great batsman ,but he is always consider a chocker in important matches.Probbly

Probably more true in ODIs than in tests. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

For me its what legacy a player leaves behind, how inspirational he has been for others. 

Sachin tendulkar has inspired a generation of cricketers and would to in future

Imran khan inspired a generation in Pak to become a fast bowler like him

Dhoni will leave the legacy of calmness in Indian cricket, who was known to crumble under pressure

Ganguly legacy was the fighting spirit, also not to give up 

Kumble legacy would be how to achieve things with limitations

Sehwag legacy was bieng fearless and living on his own terms

Virat- Dont know how his career would go from here, but the man would leave a benchmark for the fitness effort in Indian cricket. someone like Kl rahul has already been a result of that inspiration.

Akram inspired many to become a left arm seamer- which includes player from other countries.

Deniss lilee inspired a generation to pick up fast bowling in Aus.

Viv n Gavaskar left their own legacy in their own way.

 

As far as perfomance n stats are concerned, a lot depends how a player performs in challenging conditions be it against quality opp, tough pitch or match situation.

Consistency is another key- the reason i consider Dhoni an ODi legend coz the guy has been consistent from the start. 

Another aspect in Int cricket is how u overcome challenge- A diff between a gud n gr8 player is how they respond when a challenge is thrown at them. Many player start with bang but soon oppositions figure them out n have a plan with and then its how a player counter that is what defines him in International cricket. 

[MCcricket]

A player is judged a great because of the impact he has on the opposition, results, game, fans and this impact can be made by sheer consistency, brilliance, genius.So Sir was a genius and his stats are untouchable even if you discount the eras, Gavaskar for his sheer consistency and class against best opposition the world feared, Lada and Richards for their audacity, Chutzpah and brilliance, Tendulkar for his survival and skills and stats, Virat will be for his belief, ground breaking consistency in finishing games and dominating all formats with control and to me Viruses for his never seen before attacking cricket as an open-ended and being very successful although a maverick