ICC Rankings of the best test batsmans & bowlers of all time

[mukund_nadkarni]

is that the same list as this one??

I've been trying to call Mr. Chappell to get an answer to that question. His phone is coming engaged though!

So which list do you think it is?

 

[Dare]

I've been trying to call Mr. Chappell to get an answer to that question. His phone is coming engaged though!

So which list do you think it is?

lol didn't follow your convo with KP from the beginning so I thought you guys might be talking about a different one.

 

[King Pietersen]

Nope, I'm still talking about the same list. I'm unaware as to if the ICC have posted another list.

 

[Chetan0304]

I've been trying to call Mr. Chappell to get an answer to that question. His phone is coming engaged though!

Mr.Chappell busy talking with Ganguly and Sehwag

 

[Dare]

Nope, I'm still talking about the same list. I'm unaware as to if the ICC have posted another list.

we are on the same page now lol.

 

[mukund_nadkarni]

It was a 1 sentence comment, it doesn't say whether he agrees with it or not, just mentions that he's in the Top 10. If he'd have gone on to try and justify Hayden's inclusion in that list, or contested the other inclusions in the list, then you'd have a point. But he doesn't. You cannot use a 1 sentence comment to try and claim he agrees with your ludicrous mis-understanding of the ICC List.

I give up. I can try and wake up anyone who is sleeping. But I have no idea how to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep.

Also I'd like to point out is that Mr. Chappell's comment was one example. If anyone's been following Cricinfo or other sites, then you'll know that the said list has been universally slammed. I find it very difficult to believe that a select few members at PC, in their infinite wisdom read the list correctly, while the rest of the world was making a fool of itself.

 

[Dare]

I give up. I can try and wake up anyone who is sleeping. But I have no idea how to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep.

Also I'd like to point out is that Mr. Chappell's comment was one example. If anyone's been following Cricinfo or other sites, then you'll know that the said list has been universally slammed. I find it very difficult to believe that a select few members at PC, in their infinite wisdom read the list correctly, while the rest of the world was making a fool of itself.

I take nothing from the list other than the number of points each player had at their peek. Ill never use it to back up my claims because it obviously doesn't describe the best batsman in the world.

 

[King Pietersen]

Dare's got it spot on. It's a list of the players ICC Points Ranking at the peak, and they're then put into descending order. That's all it is, it's pretty simple, and how some of you people are claiming it's so wrong and that certain players should be on there, and ICC are biased is beyond me.

 

[Highlander999]

ahahah you are so funny.

posting **** that people don't understand and than giving each other reps. grow some balls and say it in English so I can understand you.

I'll give you a little hint here Dare, as you seem like a clever guy. Ignore him. He is one of the most bias posters, who is full of such rubbish, I have ever seen on this forum and you can never understand him half the time, cause he seems to be speaking his own little language. Him and that new guy who the sooner he goes back to CW web or wherever he came from, the better. You'll be better responding to Indian posters like Cricketman or Sohum, at least they have the maturity and brains to have a sensible debate, not this crap

 

[mukund_nadkarni]

I take nothing from the list other than the number of points each player had at their peek.

Is that what the ICC meant though? Did the ICC come out with a list of players with highest rating points or did it come out with a list of the greatest Test batsmen.

The way I see it, it is a list of the greatest Test batsmen compiled merely by taking the highest rating points attained by the player in the ICC ratings. Which is bollocks. The ICC then, was rightly slammed for this farce.

As for the ICC being biased, how could they be? I mean if they had to exercise any discretion on the side of reason, that list would have never been out.

mukund_nadkarni added 4 Minutes and 46 Seconds later...

I'll give you a little hint here Dare, as you seem like a clever guy. Ignore him. He is one of the most bias posters, who is full of such rubbish, I have ever seen on this forum and you can never understand him half the time, cause he seems to be speaking his own little language. Him and that new guy who the sooner he goes back to CW web or wherever he came from, the better. You'll be better responding to Indian posters like Cricketman or Sohum, at least they have the maturity and brains to have a sensible debate, not this crap

Don't be so high-handed mate. In fact that's what he had posted, " Why are you playing my boss?" No profanities or anything. Pretty harmless.

 

[King Pietersen]

Players make the all-time list by sustaining excellent form over a prolonged period. The ratings shown are the highest points totals these players have attained and no player is allowed to appear on the list more than once.

Read that. End of discussion.

 

[mukund_nadkarni]

Originally Posted by The Official ICC Website
Players make the all-time list by sustaining excellent form over a prolonged period. The ratings shown are the highest points totals these players have attained and no player is allowed to appear on the list more than once.

I rest my case upon the following remarks by Mr. Chappell in light of the above from the ICC.

The eulogies for the belligerent opener include a ranking among the ICC top ten Test batsmen and many comments similar to Ponting's statement, "Look through the history books of the game and try and see if there has ever been a better opening batsman."

 

[Dare]

Is that what the ICC meant though? Did the ICC come out with a list of players with highest rating points or did it come out with a list of the greatest Test batsmen.

The way I see it, it is a list of the greatest Test batsmen compiled merely by taking the highest rating points attained by the player in the ICC ratings. Which is bollocks. The ICC then, was rightly slammed for this farce.

As for the ICC being biased, how could they be? I mean if they had to exercise any discretion on the side of reason, that list would have never been out.

If you read the description on the side (the one KP just posted) you would know that the list is just the highest number of points a player had from the highest to the lowest.

You are just trying to make up something by saying "is that what the ICC mean by the list". Yes it is because of the description they gave. If you weren't looking for reasons of bash the list than you would see it too.

Don't be so high-handed mate. In fact that's what he had posted, " Why are you playing my boss?" No profanities or anything. Pretty harmless.

ooo so he doesn't know how to post that in English. :

if I start posting in my language than nobody will understand me because there is nobody here that speaks my language. so if he wants me to think that he is not insulting me than he can post in English.

 

[mukund_nadkarni]

ooo so he doesn't know how to post that in English.

if I start posting in my language than nobody will understand me because there is nobody here that speaks my language. so if he wants me to think that he is not insulting me than he can post in English.

Fair enough.

 

[TheGreemSim]

WTF aaron redmond in the current top 100??