Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Neither Sachin nor Lara in top 20 all time test player: ICC
Share: 
by Amitjha | January 16, 2009 at 09:31 pm
821 views | 0 Recommendations | 1 comment
ICC released its list of all time test player ranking, and shockingly, neither Sachin nor Lara is in even top 20.What to say about others.Hoe they compiled the data and what is there criteria, is very tough to say.But by this kind of rating ICC will certainly lose its credibility in coming times.
The ICC on Thursday came under attack for its "baffling" all-time Test player rankings which had no place for champion batsmen like
Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara in the top 20 but the game's governing body made it clear that the list did not rank players in terms of true greatness.
A day after the new chart was released, former cricketers expressed surprise at the composition of the list and said it was 'extremely misleading" since many great names did not figure in the top ten positions.
India's former left-arm spinner Maninder Singh went to the extent of calling it a "joke" and said "sadistic" ICC officials should stop coming out with such lists.
"The ICC is in the habit of making a joke of themselves, and this list proves that. Now, how can you explain Tendulkar who has scored over 12,000 Test runs not being in that list? I think these jokers should not be given the pleasure of rating players in this way", Maninder said.
The ICC, on its part, promptly, came out with a clarification saying that the list does not rank players in terms of true greatness and does not give a full picture of a player's level of consistency or longevity in the game.
It said that Matthew Hayden's place higher up the table than Sachin Tendulkar or Brian Lara in the all-time Test and ODI rankings does not necessarily mean that the just-retired Australian is the 10th-best Test batsman or 18th-best ODI batsman in the history of the game.
"The rankings give an indication of how players peaked during their careers but do not give a full picture of those players' level of consistency or longevity in the game", the ICC said in a statement.
Explaining the manner in which the rankings have been decided, the ICC said, "A batsman or a bowler who averages around 700 ratings points for most of his career apart from a purple patch where he shoots up to 900 points before dropping down again may be ranked higher on the all-time ratings.
"But that does not mean he should necessarily be considered to be better than a player who hovered around the 850-point mark for his entire career," it said.
The ICC accepted that the all-time list does not rank players in terms of true greatness.
"For that reason some players, who are considered by most observers of the game to be truly great, such as Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Wally Hammond, Greg Chappell and others, do not feature in the top 20 in the all-time high ratings," the statement said.
Tendulkar was ranked 26th in the Test rankings while Lara was listed three rungs above him.
The ICC urged fans to take a closer look at a player's entire career graph to determine his greatness rather than go by the snapshots, which is what the "best-ever ratings" effectively are.
If a player's career is considered as a mountain, then a single peak would hold worth less than a high, long plateau, the ICC said.
"Hence Tendulkar would be deemed greater than most other players despite having a lower peak. One way of assessing a player would be to calculate his "average rating" over his career though of course this could penalise a player whose long career included a slow start," the ICC said.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (1)
at 22:16 on February 9th, 2009
Yes. Ridiculous to rank players like Sangakkara, Kallis to be superior to Tendulkar. At the same time, to me, he need not be the no.2, players like Viv Richards etc. played a more difficult brand of stroke play which demmanded much much more skill. Also players like George Headley, Everton Weeks, Ricky Ponting & Brian Lara can be strong contenders to be included at the top of the list. But Tendulkar should have easily found a slot within top 10 without any doubt. On any given day, he should have been ranked higher than Sangakkara, Kallis & co. given his much much superior class, flair & the amount of pressure he handled quite remarkably for almost 2 decades. Need not be no.2, but should be within the first 10 without any doubt. The very same applies to Brian Lara as well. Steve Waugh & Border may not be within the top 10/20, there may have been many better & superior players in the history of the game, accepted, but Lara should have been definitely there.
Also how come Hayden be ranked above Gilchrist, especially in ODIs ? Gilchrist had an ODI SR of 95+ & even in tests it's 80+. He had played a rare brand of cricket only a very handful of players could have ever imagined to match, let alone actually playing. All these facets should have been taken into account when one's class is to be determined. May be I'm a Sri Lankan, but still I certainly cannot digest how come players like Sangakkara, Peiterson to be ranked ahead of Gilchrist, let alone in ODIs even in Tests. Gilchrist was a genuine match winner not only in ODIs, but also in Tests. How many games these other so-called superiors have won for their respective countries?. In ODIs, no match, but even in tests ???.