Is Lara the second best of all time?

[ZoraxDoom]

No disrespect to Sir Bradman, but he played agaisnt bowlers who my grandma could hit a century off. There was less swing, way less talent, no reverse swing, no new technology's we have today to find out where to bowl, and how to bowl properly. Plus Bradman never played an ODI.

A) Your Grandma could score a century against Larwood and bodyline bowlers? She's one hell of a batter then.
B) the ball actually swung and seamed MORE on uncovered, unshaved pitches
C) Bowlers were more attacking, so they wouldn't bowl wide of the stumps and used a lot of short balls and yorkers. Makes 'em pretty tough to face.
D) Talent was all over the place. There is always talent.

Then what makes u to have such opinions about hiim when U haven't watched a single match in which he played.Its definitely his records & average which tells u all about this.

I've seen clips, watch documentery-things on him, and seen the scorecards where fabulous bowlers (better than your precious Imran) at domestic level were killed by him.

The "average" theory applies on regular bowlers only & not those on make-shift ones & its accepted world over.

Imran and Micheal Clarke are considered allrounders. So if the average goes for Imran, it can go for Clarke.

In my opinion,Imran was a better batsman than Botham because Imran not only has better stats than him but also because beefy was a "hit & miss" sort of batsman(without denying that he is one of the gratest allrounders of alltime) while Imran was definitley a better bowler tha Hadlee.

Fine, its only your opinion. But note that Botham has a double century, and Hadlee was the leading wicket taker in tests for a period of time. Both accomplishments which Imran never had.

EDIT: Don't take it thw wrong way, I still think Imran was a great allrounder. I just don't agree when he says that Imran was the best cricketer ever/a better batsman AND bowler then the others at the time. He is Pakistan's best cricketer by far, but not the world's.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Fine, its only your opinion. But note that Botham has a double century, and Hadlee was the leading wicket taker in tests for a period of time. Both accomplishments which Imran never had.

Botham also scored a century and took 5 wickets in an innings in the same match five times, which Imran only did once.

 

[puddleduck]

lol Zorax, cheers for reiterating most of my points on the last post

To be fair in my opinion, Imran Khan is probably a better allrounder than you are giving him credit for, especially if you consider that his achievements include captaining as well. If that facet of the game is included as part of being an allrounder then it most definately elevates him above Ian Botham.

I believe I read that Khan when captain averaged around 40 with the bat and around 20 with the ball? Which is a remarkable acheivement! Not to mention he was a very good captain and brought the best out of some talented players. As well as leading the side with his own abilities when needed most. The thing with him and Botham is both had very much opposite careers. Whilst Botham started superbly and was first to 1000 runs and 100 wickets, 2000 runs and 200 wickets and 3000 runs and 300 wickets, his career tailed away with fitness and injury problems, and he never achieved success against the formidable Windies team of that generation. Khan however improved through his career and in his last 50 odd matches averaged somewhere around 50 with the bat and under 20 with the ball. He also did achieve success against the Windies and perhaps that counts for something?

I do not however agree that he was a better cricketer than Sobers. Sobers is definately in my opinion the all time greatest all-rounder in cricket. His bowling averages could most likely have been lower but he often abstained from bowling at tail-enders (something I'm sure Khan did not do) and as has been mentioned on many occassions had the ability to bowl both finger spin and a decent seam bowler too (I think he could also bowl wrist spin? ) So if the pitch had no help, he could tie the batting up, he could earn his wickets over long spells, or if it was moving he could cause problems off the pitch.

Not even mentioning the fact that Sobers batting is so far ahead of any of the all-rounders mentioned, as simply as a batsman, Sobers makes it into most top 5's in the World. Sobers was also a fine ambassador for the game, simply a legend in every way, a gentlemen and a true hero in terms of Sportsmanship.

The big thing is if you ask any of the all-rounders mentioned, they will all put Sobers top of their list, including the likes of Richie Benaud (highly talented all-rounder) Imran Khan, Ian Botham. His fielding was superb, around 100 catches from his 90 odd games, instead of Khans 20 odd from 80 Botham would also beat Imran in the fielding stakes, as he was arguably the finest slip catcher of his generation.

 

[jan]

Botham also scored a century and took 5 wickets in an innings in the same match five times, which Imran only did once.

but botham never won the world cup for his team

 

[cricket_lover]

are we still discussing about Lara? or all-rounder stuff...hehe

 

[Shoaib87]

Botham also scored a century and took 5 wickets in an innings in the same match five times, which Imran only did once.

I'm sure he did it more than one time,the link to a match which nightprowler10 posted was the one in which Imran scored a 100(DNB in the second innings because his team had already won before he could come to bat).

"His averages (37 with the bat, 22 with the ball) put him at the top of the quartet of allrounders (Ian Botham, Richard Hadlee and Kapil Dev being the others) who dominated Test cricket in the 1980s. And whereas Botham declined steadily, Imran just got better and better: in his last ten years of international cricket he played 51 Tests, averaging a sensational 50 with the bat and 19 with the ball. He gave no quarter during some memorable battles with West Indies - Pakistan drew three series with them at a time when everybody else was being bounced out of sight - and he led Pakistan to their first series victory in England in 1987, taking 10 for 77 with an imperious display in the decisive victory at Headingley."-Martin Williamson

Drawing 3 test series against the WI team of 80 & winning the World Cup for Pakistan were no jokes.I personally rate Sobers & Grace as batting-ARs,Hadlee as a bowling-AR,while Botham,Kapil & Imran as genuine ARs while Imran being simply the best out of them all.

To be fair in my opinion, Imran Khan is probably a better allrounder than you are giving him credit for, especially if you consider that his achievements include captaining as well. If that facet of the game is included as part of being an allrounder then it most definately elevates him above Ian Botham.

I believe I read that Khan when captain averaged around 40 with the bat and around 20 with the ball? Which is a remarkable acheivement! Not to mention he was a very good captain and brought the best out of some talented players. As well as leading the side with his own abilities when needed most. The thing with him and Botham is both had very much opposite careers. Whilst Botham started superbly and was first to 1000 runs and 100 wickets, 2000 runs and 200 wickets and 3000 runs and 300 wickets, his career tailed away with fitness and injury problems, and he never achieved success against the formidable Windies team of that generation. Khan however improved through his career and in his last 50 odd matches averaged somewhere around 50 with the bat and under 20 with the ball. He also did achieve success against the Windies and perhaps that counts for something?

Yeah,I totally agree what whatever U've said in those lines.

are we still discussing about Lara? or all-rounder stuff...hehe

Yeah,I agree with u that the discussion has become bit off-topic in this thread.Anyway,here is my ranking of top 10 batsmen of alltime:
Donald Bradman
Brian Lara
Javed Miandad
Viv Richards
Gary Sobers
Sunil Gavaskar
Steve Waugh
Sachin Tendulkar
Inzamam-Ul-Haq
Rahul Dravid

 

[MohdIrshaad]

Yeah,I agree with u that the discussion has become bit off-topic in this thread.Anyway,here is my ranking of top 10 batsmen of alltime:
Donald Bradman
Brian Lara
Javed Miandad
Viv Richards
Gary Sobers
Sunil Gavaskar
Steve Waugh
Sachin Tendulkar
Inzamam-Ul-Haq
Rahul Dravid

Inzamam can't run while Javed Miandad was not such a great batsman.I don't see why two were included in that list except for the fact that they belonged to a certain country.

Top Ten

Don
King Richards
Gavaskar
Vishwanath
Tendulkar
WG Grace
Lara

Not certain about rest three.

 

[Davew78]

Hi all, thought i'd weigh into this discussion, its piqued my interest.

Firstly, I'll make a bet that Lara will have 35 test centuries to his name before he retires. I think Tendulkar may only have 37-38 cause I dont think he will be around that much longer, I think the strain is getting to him too much.

Id tend to look at who was the better batsman by thinking "who would i rather bowl at". Answer? Tendulkar. Hes more predictable than Lara, and, while he has all the shots, would be less likely to carve you up on a whim. For my money that makes Lara the more dangerous batsman, and edges him ahead of Tendulkar, though not by a lot.

Bradman has to be the best. Larwood may not have been 150 odd kph as a few of todays bowlers are, but the idea of facing even 130-140kph without adequate protection on uncovered pitches makes me wince. Having played on both covered and uncovered pitches i would have to say that that easily equals another 15-20 kph if the bowler has good control.

That said, you also have to remember that cricket was a nicer game back then. There were unwritten codes of conduct that you didnt breach, which was why the bodyline series was so nasty. It was calculating and totally against the gentlemans rules of cricket.

Whatever, still Bradman first, Lara second then a whole host of batsmen not seperated by much at all.

And to whoever thought Hadlee was not the greatest bowler of his generation (by a country mile) have a look at footage of his 9-52 against Australia. He may not have been the fastest bowler around but his line, length, control were impeccable, and his stats back that up.

 

[MohdIrshaad]

As far as the allrounders are concerned, here is what Hadlee had to say about them.

Hadlee's take on the issue:
(quoted from the official Cricket Web interview)

Q/ In the post-Sobers era, you have been widely considered as one of the four great all-rounders. The others being Kapil Dev, Ian Botham and Imran Khan. Each of you have taken well over 300 wickets and scored over 3000 runs. Who do you consider the greatest all-rounder of all-time?

Sobers is regarded as the best ever ? his record speaks for itself. He had all the skill and the versatility. He would be one of the first selected in any world team. Wisden rated him 2nd to Bradman says it all.

During the 80?s it was the ?Battle of the Allrounders? ? it was a real contest between the four of us. We all knew what each

other was doing around the world and when we played against each other there was a will and desire to outdo your opponent. Of the four of us I would rate Imran as the better player because of his all round consistency with the bat and ball. He could play any type of innings and make the Pakistan team as a batsman alone. He was a potent strike bowler and an influential player in many of Pakistan?s wins.

Hi all, thought i'd weigh into this discussion, its piqued my interest.

Firstly, I'll make a bet that Lara will have 35 test centuries to his name before he retires. I think Tendulkar may only have 37-38 cause I dont think he will be around that much longer, I think the strain is getting to him too much.

.

I think Sachin will get near 43-45, will fall short of 50 though.

Also i think as far as the second best batsmen is concerned, King Richards was the second best,Sachin and Lara can be rated as third and fourth best after Richards.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Id tend to look at who was the better batsman by thinking "who would i rather bowl at". Answer? Tendulkar. Hes more predictable than Lara, and, while he has all the shots, would be less likely to carve you up on a whim. For my money that makes Lara the more dangerous batsman, and edges him ahead of Tendulkar, though not by a lot.

True, but you would have to be repared to bowl the whole day for Tendulkar, and maybe a few sessions to Lara.

 

[Shoaib87]

Inzamam can't run while Javed Miandad was not such a great batsman.I don't see why two were included in that list except for the fact that they belonged to a certain country.

Top Ten

Don
King Richards
Gavaskar
Vishwanath
Tendulkar
WG Grace
Lara

Not certain about rest three.

Mr.MohdIrshaad/Wahindiawah/GladiatrsInBlue/nehrafan/sheerindianspeed or whatever u call yourself,U may praise your indian players but please refrain from posting rubbish about legends of any other country including Pakistan.Whole world accepts that Javed Miandad is one of the best batsmen of alltime & we don't need a certificate from a troll like u to claim his greatness.

 

[cricket_lover]

Miandad is definitely a great batsmen, but i doubt he'll get into top10 or even top20 for that matter. He did reasonably well against Australia, and very well against India and New Zealand. But he was quite poor against WI, where he averaged 29.

Among my top 10 (i'm sure i'm missing few great players)
It should be
Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Lara, Gavaskar, Haynes, S. Waugh, E. Weekes, G. Sobers, WG Grace(?). I did not include G. Pollock because he played less matches than the others did, but his average is phenomenal. Most of these players were consistent in the long run.

 

[MohdIrshaad]

Mr.MohdIrshaad/Wahindiawah/GladiatrsInBlue/nehrafan/sheerindianspeed or whatever u call yourself,U may praise your indian players but please refrain from posting rubbish about legends of any other country including Pakistan.Whole world accepts that Javed Miandad is one of the best batsmen of alltime & we don't need a certificate from a troll like u to claim his greatness.

Shoaib87, please don't suspect my nationality and don't remember me by names that doesn't belong to me.

And i think you should call me troll, as you were the one who was banned from another forum(cricketweb) for your offensive views, so that pretty much makes you a .....


I have defended Imran Khan up there, but as far as Miandad is concerned, there is no way in hell he can get into even the top 25 batsmen of all time.
Miandad was a highly spirrited cricketer and a very good batsman, but he wasn't exactly one of all time greats.

 

[Indiangod]

I'm sure he did it more than one time,the link to a match which nightprowler10 posted was the one in which Imran scored a 100(DNB in the second innings because his team had already won before he could come to bat).

"His averages (37 with the bat, 22 with the ball) put him at the top of the quartet of allrounders (Ian Botham, Richard Hadlee and Kapil Dev being the others) who dominated Test cricket in the 1980s. And whereas Botham declined steadily, Imran just got better and better: in his last ten years of international cricket he played 51 Tests, averaging a sensational 50 with the bat and 19 with the ball. He gave no quarter during some memorable battles with West Indies - Pakistan drew three series with them at a time when everybody else was being bounced out of sight - and he led Pakistan to their first series victory in England in 1987, taking 10 for 77 with an imperious display in the decisive victory at Headingley."-Martin Williamson

Drawing 3 test series against the WI team of 80 & winning the World Cup for Pakistan were no jokes.I personally rate Sobers & Grace as batting-ARs,Hadlee as a bowling-AR,while Botham,Kapil & Imran as genuine ARs while Imran being simply the best out of them all.

Yeah,I totally agree what whatever U've said in those lines.

Yeah,I agree with u that the discussion has become bit off-topic in this thread.Anyway,here is my ranking of top 10 batsmen of alltime:
Donald Bradman
Brian Lara
Javed Miandad
Viv Richards
Gary Sobers
Sunil Gavaskar
Steve Waugh
Sachin Tendulkar
Inzamam-Ul-Haq
Rahul Dravid

I disagree with your top 10, Inzamam does not in the top 10, and while Javed Miandad was not such a great batsman, not the worlds best anyway.

Meanwhile heres my top 10

Bradman
Hobbs
Vivian Richards
Hammond
Gavaskar
Tendulkar
G Pollock
Sobers
Lara
Headly

 

[cricket_lover]

Mianded is definitely not in top 20, he's a really good player, no doubt! Probably the best/second best from Pakistan.

I might put Hanif Mohammad in top 25 but i don't know much about him.

He rated Tendulkar as one of the five best batsmen in the world along with Rahul Dravid, Ricky Ponting, Jacques Kallis and Brian Lara. On his own place in the pecking order - with an average of nearly 52 after 107 Tests and about 40 in 356 ODIs - he shrugged it off with a typically nonchalant, "Oh, Inzamam comes way behind them".

He is being quite humble over there but i regard him among the top 10 players today, and may be in top 5 if he plays well against Australia and in few other foreign conditions.