Cricinfo - Blogs - Different Strokes

County cricket of course was almost the modern-day equivalent of the Indian Premier League. Reading the detailed scorecards of the Championship brought great players like Glenn Turner, Majid Khan, Mike Procter and Derek Underwood to life in my scrapbook. Was this where Fantasy Cricket was born, watching global marriages like Gordon Greenidge and Barry Richards (Hampshire) taking on Imran Khan and Garth Le Roux (Sussex)?

Australian champions like Dennis Lillee, Rod Marsh and the Chappell brothers were similarly god-like. Sunil Gavaskar’s brilliant innings against the West Indies still sticks in my mind, as does my father’s reverent worship of the Indian spin dynasty of Bishan Bedi, Erapalli Prasanna and Bhagwat Chandrasekar. I never quite understood why he was so enchanted by these mysterious slow bowlers when there were all these fearsome fast bowlers to imitate. I put it down to a ‘grown up thing’ so I pretended to understand and was allowed to stay up late and listen to the commentary.

Perhaps the sheer statistics and averages of the players of the 1970s don’t really stack up today but they still seem impossibly heroic to me, even thirty years later. Was it the romance of radio and newspaper that created legends where only mediocrity existed ? Does television sometimes spoil that aura and mystery?

Funnily enough, I remember more individual details from Test matches that I listened to on the radio, smuggled under the blankets, than later matches I watched on TV. Maybe the lack of vision led to a greater sense of imagination because I had to create the scenes myself. The beautiful commentary allowed me to form my own impression of what Holding must have looked like, gliding in off the long run or how Zaheer Abbas was meant to be a ‘touch player’ or the impregnability of Geoff Boycott’s defence. Why was Lillee’s action so classical? Why did Collis King seem to hit every ball for six?

It’s a tough task, comparing Kallis or Brian Lara to those of a different era.To a little boy, huddled next to a barely audible radio in Colombo, listening to wondrous accents from faraway places, the 1970s seemed full of the greatest players that ever strode the Earth. It was a decade of the quickest bowlers, fearless hookers (the batting kind!!) and Asian players whose wristy strokeplay and teasing flight conjured up images that I barely understood but was told repeatedly was pure magic.

Was this really the decade of innocence and greatness before the pragmatism and hard graft of the 1980s? Were these players really as good as they were made out to be? They must have been! Is it any coincidence that only little children believe in giants?

In an era before averages and strike-rates were the barometer of greatness, my first experiences of cricket were painted by uncles and grandparents who vividly described players whom they had never even seen. It almost spoils it when I see archive footage and realise that Jeff Thomson wasn’t really faster than a rocket! Mind you, Sir Viv is still the ‘King of Cool’.

Excellent article. I relate it in an antithetical light, I grew up in the 90s and it irks me no end when people fail to give Curtly Ambrose, Waqar Younis, Alan Donald, Azza, Carl Hooper, Saeed Anwar, Aravinda de Silva, Jonty Rhodes, all these amazing cricketers their due. Reading your article puts it all into perspective. One must not compare across eras and that's why greatest ever debates are unending and painful. If you look at every decade in cricket, there will be a bunch of players who rank among the very best. This goes to show that cricket has vitality and considerably more regenerative power than nostalgia allows us to believe. Probably by 2015, people will not be so mournful (scornful?) of a decade known for Gilly, Hayden, Sehwag, Flintoff, KP, Brett Lee, Dale Steyn and - admittedly a premature choice - Mendis.

Nice contradiction Dave: "you can only compare between contempories, not across eras ...a few modern greats may get shown up." Isnt that comparing era's? The 70's & 80's were era's of great quciks & all rounders. If you are arguing modern players are not so great lets have a look at the modern era of spin: 3 of the greatest wickets takers of all time are spinners. 2 of which could be argued are the best of their kind in cricket history. Is this not a golden age of spin & bat, with Mendis,sangakarra, jaywardene etc sitting on the horizon? If the Windies couldnt handle bedi or chandrasekar how would they handle warne or murali? On uncovered wickets the carnage begins. I grew up on a steady diet of 70's cricket, and yes legends played the game, but do not ignore the fact that we are watching legends play at the moment. Gilli warne & mcgrath are all time greats, so are sachin, punter, lara, murali, anil, kallis, pollock. Lament past legends but appreciate the present as well, it wont last.

Things from the past are often seen in more favourable light than they are at the time. The Brazil team of 1970, the Windies of the 70's 80's, Bjorn Borg/John McEnroe are EXCEPTIONS that really were GREAT, and would be great in anytime.
As would Bradman, Ali, Ty Cobb. Legends are forever. Our perception of good and great players can change over the years but that doesnt happen with Legends.
TBOY called Gilli warne mcgrath sachin, punter, lara, murali, anil, kallis, pollock in that Legend bracket. For me Legend means much more than just being a great player, much more. It's HOW you played the game as well how well you did and it is also about personality. I'd only have Lara, Tendulkar, Warne, maybe Murli that are the modren legends. They do not seem out of place next to Bradman, Sobers, V Richards, Hobbs, Botham, Lillie, Khan, Headley.

Thats my point eddy: its all perception & often its only after people have retired that we appreciate just how great/legendary they were, because while they were playing we focused on how they would have been destroyed by players of the past. I listed those modern players because every country has legends that need to be mentioned. Refer to recent debates re: Kallis's achievements on this forum for more info. If viv, botham & lillee are legends than in my books so are Mcgrath, Gilli, Punter and Pollock. All those players I have listed have put up numbers that compare, even, dare i say it, SURPASS some of the best across history. You cant hold current players to harsh statistical anaylsis without also subjecting previous players to the same methodology, its disingenuous and false idolatory. As I have mentioned before on cric info, the Don scored 1968 runs in 15 games with 10x100(5X200) and one 50 against very weak teams. Lillee only took 6 wickets outside of Aus, Eng Nzd in 8 tests. TBC

Cont- so this does not detract from their legendary status but perhaps opens peoples eyes a little bit to the reality of being human. Lillee is a Legend and so the is the Don, but they cashed in with numbers in conditions that suited them, just like modern players do. The Don still averaged over 80 against the only strong team of the era (england) which is awesome. What Im stating Eddy is that if you allow the Bothams of the world to have a place on your pedestal, then dust it off and realise there are players currently forging their image in stone and want, no, deserve to be placed on your shelf next to Messrs Botham, Lillee etc.

I Think i agree with you TBOY. Out of these 'Legends'... Bradman,Gilli warne mcgrath sachin, punter, lara, murali, anil, kallis, pollock,Sobers, V Richards, Hobbs, Botham, Lillie, Khan, Headley...only Bradman, Sobers, viv, warne, hobbs where classed as cricketers of the century. Botham played a lot of cricket when some great cricketers were away with Kerry Packer, but his efforts in 1981 give him legendary status in England and AUS. You have legends in each country, some manage to cross countries and some are regarded as Legends everywhere(cricket world), Like Bradman, Sobers, VIV, my personal top three of all time.

My list was not exhaustive Mark. I was merely asking people not to overlook modern players by viture of the fact that were born after other players. Given that cricket is an 11 aside game there is no reason why most countries couldn't have a few legends of the game spread across its history. Once again its all about your perspective, which was my initial point. Feel free to construct your own lists of legends mark, just be prepared for robust discussion. The ESPN 50 legends of cricket was pretty solid. check it out. I could contruct an all time australia 11 that didnt include Lillee - Hayden, Harvey, Bradman, Punter, Waugh, Miller, Gilli, Davidson, Lindwall,Warne,Mcgrath. That gives u 4 quicks, a spinner and deep batting. U could easily replace some players with Greg Chappell or Alan Boarder or Lillee.This is just an example. In an england 11 hammond would have to be a feature. Other countries would only possess a couple, or in some cases, no legendary players.

There's something that makes some players be remembered as legends who always appear larger than life over others who may have been equally competent, and in my opinion, it so happens that the 70's were full of them. With viv, like with KP today, its the arrogance and swagger that does it. Of course, performance must go hand in hand, but there was something special in tendulkar's single handed, against the odds, dismantling of australia in sharjah, or Mcgrath's pre-match gauntlet thrown down to the best player in the opposition (a contest in which he usually came off best). Nobody to date has been able to match the kind of sinister smoothness that holding, or the gritty cheekiness that miandad, brought to the crease. Its perhaps the personality making its prescence felt that makes a legend, somebody making their prescence felt with such a force that millions of viewers think they know the man intimately. After all Murali wouldnt be Murali without that Bug eyed grin.

Markc: did u read my post 6/8/8 "Feel free to construct your own lists of legends mark, just be prepared for robust discussion"? Did u understand this statement? Shafiq: yes other countries would only include a couple or in some cases no legends. Once again this was not an exhaustive list. I was being diplomatic and talking about Zim, SL and Bang. The reason why should be obvious: they are the 3 most recent countries granted test status. so they dont have the depth or history like Aus and Eng the 2 oldest playing test countries. Windies could field a team of legends, so could SA. India and Pakistan have legends 2(I notice you forgot Sunil Gavaskar, oh sorry, maybe your list wasnt comprehensive either) Whoops. maybe u should have read my previous posts re legends:"sachin, punter, lara, murali, anil, kallis" and "I listed those modern players because every country has legends that need to be mentioned." Hmmm, it appears that there are a few people that dont read all the previous posts.

Well tboy my list would be: 1. G.Sobers, 2. D.Bradman, 3. S.Warne, 4. V.Richards, 5. I.Khan 6. H.Sutcliffe/G.Headley, 7. M.Marshall, 8. W.Hammond, 9. J.Hobbs, 10. M.Murali, 11. I.Botham/R.Hadlee, 12. K.Miller, 13. S.Gavaskar, 14. S.Tendulkar/B.Lara, 15. J.Miandad, 16. J.Kallis, 17. A.Gilchrist, 18. L.Hutton, 19. E.Weekes/C.Walcott, 20. S.Barnes(eng), 21. R.Ponting/R.Dravid, 22. W.Akram, 23. K.Dev, 24. G.McGrath, 25. F.Worrall.
And a few more that could easily be regarded as legends: R.Lindwall, D.Compton, D.Lillee, C.Ambrose, A.Kumble, R.Benaud, F.Trueman, G.Faulkner, B.Bedi, A.Davidson, K.Barrington, G.Pollock, A.DeSilva, A.Donald, A.Border, L.Gibbs, S.Pollock, S.Waugh, C.Walsh and W.Younis.
But given time and you could add K.Sangakkara, M.Jayawardene, M.Yousuf and V.Sehwag. But i would also be happy to see a Zimbabwean on this list and there should be, Andy Flower is a bloke who averaged over 50 as a wicketkeeper/batsman in a very bad side so he to should be regarded as a legend.

Well Markc, thats not a bad list at all, very similar to the ESPN list I think. I would have Andy Flower on the list as well. Zims only legedary cricketer. Sorry T, I had a good think about big inzi, u right: he certainly was the unsung batsman of his era, sharing the limelight with Dravid, Sachin, Lara, Punter. Riaz, humans are comparitve creatures, thats why we compare eras, thats why we keep stats and a good robust discussion is great. T pointed out someone I missed earlier (Inzi) in my defence I did state my earlier list was not comprehensive & was only serving a point: Do not limit a players status merely because he was born after someone else. Theres not enough room here to give my top 50 of all time with clear explanations. Riaz is right about one thing though: generational arguments are tough, with the good old "when I was a lad and men were men and dinosaurs roamed the earth & we all went to school at ST Peters" coming out with each new generation.