Who is the greatest cricketer of all time?

Since its interception, cricket has produced many great players—batsmen, bowlers and all-rounders. There are many masters of their own specialty, yet there are few all-rounders—the true cricketer. This is because excelling at every facet of the game is particularly demanding on the body and mind. However, there have been a number of fortunate souls who have been able to withstand the rigours of top-level cricket and etched their name into the list of top batsman, bowlers and on the rare occasion, fielders.

Dr William Gilbert Grace (W.G. Grace) is a name that would easily roll off the tongue of an Englishman, despite last gracing the first-class cricket field in 1908. Many argue that despite only having a mediocre record in twenty-two Tests, Grace made modern cricket as we know it. He scored 54,896 first class runs (at 39.55), scored 126 centuries and 244 fifties in 872 matches. Along with this, he took 2876 first-class wickets (at 17.92), captured five wickets in an innings 246 times and ten wickets in a match on 66 occasions. Grace was a dominant batsman in his era—as most top-quality batsman averaged around twenty, extremely low compared to today’s standards. This was because pitches were usually no different to the rest of the luscious, green playing surface, thus providing uneven and concerning movement. As a fielder, the Englishman was considered a sure catch and a good fieldsman, often in the cover and point regions.

Though Grace’s resume is indeed remarkable, there is no doubt that West Indian Sir Garfield Sobers is the greatest international all-rounder of all-time. Not only was he a great batsman, bowler and fieldsman, he had something no other great all-rounder possessed—a variety of left-arm bowling styles. Sir Donald Bradman—the greatest batsman and many believe cricketer of all-time—described Sobers as a “five-in-one cricketer” (batsman, fieldsman and three-in-one bowler). [Armstrong, p. 24] He could open the bowling with in-swingers to the right handed batmen, before bowling his two styles of spin—left-arm orthodox and wrist spin. His effectiveness as a bowler, however, was nullified by being the West Indies’ leading batsman for most of his career. Sobers averaged 72 as a number three batsman and 64 at number four, but 107 of his 160 Test innings were at five, six or seven in the order, mainly because of the need to rest from bowling. Sobers’ long individual batting efforts—including twenty-six centuries—may have also affected his inflated Test bowling average of 34 because he would often already be fatigued before beginning his bowling spell. This, and being part of a team which had two of the world’s best fast bowlers—Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith—and accomplished off-spinner Lance Gibbs at its disposal. Sobers mostly had to bowl into the wind when playing with the two faster men, before having to bowl long, defensive spells after their retirement, therefore decreasing the possibly of taking wickets.

Sobers was also a brilliant fielder and inventive captain. Leading cricket website, Cricinfo, says “His catching close to the wicket may have been equalled but never surpassed, and he was a brilliant fielder anywhere.” Former Australian captain Richie Benaud described Sobers as "the greatest all-round cricketer the world has seen". Sobers was "a brilliant batsman, splendid fielder, particularly close to the wicket, and a bowler of extraordinary skill, whether bowling with the new ball, providing orthodox left-arm spin or over-the-wrist spin,” according to the Australian. [Armstrong, p. 23] Sobers’ captaincy style also impressed many. A year after his career ended in 1974, Sobers was knighted due to his services to cricket.
Nonetheless, statistically, Sobers may not have the best international record as an all-rounder. This title could quite easily go to South African Jacques Kallis. In a career slowly coming to a close, he has played a colossal 140 Tests, 303 One Day Internationals and sixteen Twenty20 Internationals. Although Kallis will be most remembered for his batting and technique—that is about as hard to crack as his limitless concentration—the all-rounder’s workmanlike 500-plus international wickets ranks him alongside great South African bowlers. These wickets and nearly 22,000 international runs should put him in the top echelon of players, but a public perception of selfish batting seems to stop him being put in the class of great cricketers. Kallis is also a batsman who takes time to score runs—striking at 44.52 per hundred balls in Tests, significantly slower than the dominate batsman of the past fifteen-twenty years. He therefore fails to dominate a bowling attack in the vein of Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting and Virender Sehwag.
There are many more all-rounders that may be considered as the best; Imran Khan, Keith Miller, Ian Botham, Kapil Dev and Alan Davidson all make a compelling case, however in my opinion, none are in the class of Sir Garfield Sobers.

Cricket’s five leading Test wicket-takers—Muttiah Muralitharan, Shane Warne, Anil Kumble, Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh—may not all receive the same amount of attention as cricket’s five leading run-scorers or batsman, though they are all great. Three of the five are spinners, with Shane Warne being the only leg-spinner in the top twenty-five leading wicket-takers. Warne, however, will always be regarded as one of the greatest and most famous cricketers. His many off-field misdemeanours and on-field success may never be topped. He revolutionised the art of leg spin bowling after former Australian leg-spinner Bill O’Reilly wrote how he feared “the art of leg-spinning is in danger of disappearing from the game”. [Armstrong, p. 25] Warne grew up in the eighties, a decade of fast bowling. Captains believed quicker men were far more likely to capture wickets and spinners gave away far too many runs. Nonetheless, Warne, after initially bowling medium pace as an adolescent, finished his career as the leading Test wicket-taker in 2007 (708 wickets). Another spinner, Muttiah Muralitharan, soon overtook Warne’s record and finished his Test career with 800 wickets—well ahead of the Glenn McGrath, whose 563 wickets are the most from a quick bowler.

Finally we get to batsman—and they are in abundance: Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Jack Hobbs, Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, Vivian Richards, Len Hutton, Victor Trumper, Sunil Gavasker, Greg Chappell, Frank Worrell, Everton Weekes, Clyde Walcott; the list could go on and on. Bradman’s credentials are obvious as I touched on earlier in the Bodyline article, but apart from Tendulkar, the rest are extremely difficult to split; definitely not as influential as a man like Sobers, Miller, Botham or Imran Khan.

Although Bradman will go down in history as the greatest cricketer, the question is, who would be more valuable—Sobers or Bradman? I think because of his batting record alone, Bradman would have to be regarded as the greatest cricketer. But if I had to choose my own side, I would select Sobers. I came to this opinion after significant research and a personal preference for having an all-rounder instead of a one-dimensional player in my side. In Tests or a four-day first-class game, I would have to toss a coin on who to choose. Though, Sobers would, in my opinion, be more valuable than Bradman in the shorter formats of the game—ODI and Twenty—because the Australian would not have time to achieve his remarkable Test batting feats, thus nullifying his effectiveness. Even if Sobers failed with the bat, he could unleash an inspired spell of fast bowling, before cleaning up the tail with his spinners—something Bradman would be unable to do. However, I am sure you would take either player any day of the week. It is extremely difficult to compare cricketers from different generations, let alone to cricketers who have basically never played in the newest two formats of cricket (Sobers played one ODI). Though, in summary, an all-rounder gives a team more variety and stability than a player who has just one specialty.


Armstrong, Geoff (2006). The 100 Greatest Cricketers. Sydney, Australia: New Holland Publishers. ISBN 174110439-4.

The Evolution of Cricket since Twenty20, and the Indian Premier League

The fourth season of Indian Premier League (IPL) kicked off yesterday, comprising all of 74 games over 51 days. This got me thinking. The recently completed Cricket World Cup was haggled for being too long with 49 matches across 46 days. Yet the IPL has more matches and is five days longer! The difference, of course, is the IPL a Twenty20 competition, with each game lasting a little less than four hours. But surely 74 games of cricket in one tournament is overkill? The significance in countries other India is fairly low; no games are even broadcasted in Australia. Despite this, and delving deeper, Twenty20 cricket—the IPL included— has had a positive effect on the skill of players, even if it's to the detriment of the other two forms of cricket.

A new type of slow bowling has also been bred; ones who bowl with a traditional off spinners or left-arm orthodox bowlers action, but do not spin the ball. Instead, the delivery is fired in at the batsman’s legs or feet, giving them barely any length to get under.  Part-timers, especially, have been renowned for this type of bowling; yet, regular spinners such as Harbhajan Singh and Sulieman Been have begun to successfully resort to such tactics. Surprisingly, spinners have probably become the most reliable type of bowlers in Twenty20, and are extremely effective in reducing scoring rates. Of late, it has become more frequent for a spinner to open the bowling in Twenty20 cricket—and sub-continental teams have been known to open with two.

With the introduction of helmets—mainly to combat the West Indian attack of the seventies and eighties—Twenty20 has been criticised for its domination from batsmen, geared with big powerful bats which would have weighed five kilos a few decades ago. Furthermore, the playing arena has also shrunk; rarely do we now see the boundary rope pushed back a couple of metres from the fence. Even on small grounds, the rope is often brought in seven, eight, nine or even ten metres. Supposedly, spectators want to see fours and sixes, instead of the captivating battle between a spinner flighting the ball with a batsman eyeing off an 80-metre plus boundary.  Once, a batsman trying the clear the mid-wicket boundary at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) would have to strike the ball perfectly on his skinny bat to clear the fence over eighty-five metres away. Sadly, this is rarely the case nowadays. Even the MCG—which has mostly ignored the temptation to bring in the boundary rope—brought the boundary in so far on one side of the ground during Australian Domestic Twenty20 matches last season, it looked like a backwards Australian rules fifty metre arc. Admittedly, the pitches used were significantly closer to the opposite boundary than usual, but shots that commentators lauded for being so huge often bounced inside the fence. Five years ago, instead of hitting a large six, the batsman would have holed out to deep mid-wicket, and would have been crucified for playing such a reckless shot.

Despite all these on-field changes, the most significant change to cricket is the amount of money being flooded into the game—led by India. There was a day where each cricket board would make most of their revenue through ticket sales and would let the crowd enjoy their day in the sun, with beach balls, eskies, flags, blow-up figurines; however, these days are long gone. Most of cricket’s money now comes from media and sponsorship, and administrators seemingly care little about getting bums on seats—especially in Tests.  Test and one-day crowds have dwindled alarmingly since Twenty20 really cracked into the cricketing market in 2007. In 2010, crowds of only 15 and 20,000 attended ODI matches at the MCG; yet a combined 80,000 attended two domestic Twenty20 games at the venue. If the final of the KFC Big Bash had been held in Melbourne, it was predicted over 70,000 would attend. That is 10,000 more than the attendance for the first day of the Boxing Day Test earlier in the season.

Money and power is also beginning to take over the game after the formation of Twenty20 cricket—most notably with the Indian Premier League (IPL) in India. Some players have already begun to turn their back on their country and instead play for the hundreds of thousands they earn from the IPL. Three West Indians—Chris Gayle, Dwayne Bravo and Kieran Pollard—have rejected the West Indies Cricket Boards’ contract offer so they can play in a range of twenty over tournaments around the world.  Despite no more toiling eight-hour days on a furnace-like sub-continental ground lacking a cooling sea-breeze, these competitions will fill their pockets with hundreds of thousands—substantially more than if they were to play international crickt for the West Indies. Cricket’s changing, and changing very quickly, but the unanswered question is whether this change is good for the game.

Brief history of 'Chucking' - a complex issue that has been around for decades

A bowler in cricket has strict rules relating the degree the elbow is bent when a ball is delivered. Law 24, Clause 3 defines a fair delivery with respect to the arm:

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

In the past, it has been up to the umpire to determine whether a bowler breaches the law and would no ball the bowler if he decides the bowler threw that particular delivery. However, after biomechanical tests in the latter parts of the 1990s, the International Cricket Council (ICC) attempted to clarify the law by stating that the maximum permissible flexing of the elbow for fast bowlers was ten degrees, seven and a half degrees for medium pacers, and five degrees for spin bowlers. This was after results indicated that a bowler’s arm naturally flexes latterly when it rotates around the shoulder, thus meaning that no bowler strictly complied with the Laws of Cricket. The degree of flexing was changed to 15 degrees after the ICC tested bowlers through video footage during the 2004 ICC Champions trophy in England. It was found that ninety-nine percent of bowlers tested exceeded the maximum limit of flexing.

Many English county bowlers of the nineteenth century—after the legalisation of throwing in 1864—were believed to have unfair actions. Nonetheless, Australian fast bowler Ernest Jones was the first bowler no-balled in an international match in 1897. Englishman C.B. Fry had his career ended when no-balled on four occasions soon after. However, Australian aboriginal fast bowler Eddie Gilbert’s action was probably the most controversial pre-World War II. He famously bowled a series of hostile deliveries at Donald Bradman in a state game in 1931—knocking Bradman’s bat out of his hand, knocking him over with the next, and finally, having him caught behind from the third ball. Bradman later said, “The keeper took the ball over his head, and I reckon it was halfway to the boundary and that the balls from Gilbert were unhesitatingly faster than anything seen from [Harold] Larwood or anyone else.” In a state game in the same year, Gilbert was no-balled on thirteen occasions by umpire Andrew Barlow for jerking his wrist—something considered legal nowadays. His wrist action helped him generate his extreme pace, but the Brisbane Courier described his “whipped catapult action” as "almost a throw”. A new legislation after the 1932/33 Bodyline series outlawed intimidatory bowling in Australia, effectively ending Gilbert’s career. In twenty-three first-class matches, he took 87 wickets at an average of 29.21.

Throwing controversies became even more prevalent in the 1950s and ‘60s. Strangely, umpire Frank Chester was blocked from no-balling South African Cuan McCarthy by Lord’s Cricket Ground authorities in 1951, with President Sir Pelham Francis Warner (Plum Warner) stating “These people are our guests”. English left-arm orthodox spinner Tony Lock was often accused of throwing his faster ball—especially in the early stages of his career before he remodelled his action. Famously, in a County Championship match, Essex captain Doug Insole turned to the square-leg umpire when he was bowled by Lock and asked him whether he had been bowled or run out.

Australian Ian Meckiff had a controversial career, accused of throwing on many occasions before being no-balled four times during his only over in a Test against South Africa in 1963-64. Meckiff consequently retired after the match, leaving behind many conspiracies; some thought he was set up by the Australian Board which may have asked Colin Egar, the umpire, to no ball him. The fast bowler had an unusual action, where he generated his pace from a bent-arm action and a flick of the wrist.

Less notable bowlers were no-balled in Tests soon after. However, West Indian fast bowler Charlie Griffith—one of the most feared fast bowlers’ of his generation—caused similar amounts of controversy to Meckiff. He was twice no-balled in first-class cricket and possibly caused so much controversy because of extreme pace. In one of the matches where he was no-balled, Griffith hit touring Indian batsman Nari Contractor on the back of his head with a bouncer while playing for Barbados. Contractor suffered a fracture skull and required two emergency operations to remove blood clots from his brain. He never added to his thirty-one Tests after the incident, although afterwards Contractor said he wished he played just one more.

The most famous and controversial of all cricketers no-balled for throwing is Sri Lankan off-spinner Muttiah Muralitharan, who would later became the leading wicket-taker in both Test and One Day International cricket (ODI). He bowls with an unusual hyperextension of his congenitally bent arm. During his career, Muralitharan was no-balled three times—twice by Ross Emerson and once by Darrell Hair. And in 2004, he was reported to the International Cricket Council (ICC) for a suspect bowling action. The off-spinner was first called by Hair on Boxing Day 1995 during his first tour of Australia, and then by Emerson during Sri Lanka’s next visit in 1998-99. Many people have weighed into the debate on whether his action is legitimate; Hair, himself, labelled his action “diabolical”. Even Australia’s former Prime Minister John Howard publicly stated while in office that Murali (as he was known) was a “chucker”. In contrast, the bowler had a wide range of supporters who believed his action was legal, especially after tests showed him bowling with an arm brace that would not bend past fifteen degrees. Wearing the brace, he successfully bowled his full repertoire of deliveries, including the controversial doosra. The doosra is a ball that spins the opposite way to a conventional off-spinner and is extremely difficult to bowl without bending the elbow. Pakistani Saqlain Mushtaq established the doosra in the mid-1990s, and ever since, Harbhajan Singh, Shoaib Malik, Mohammad Hafeez and Johan Botha have been reported and investigated for an illegal action when bowling the delivery, thus proving it is very difficult to bowl the delivery legally.

Note: All quotes taken from Wikipedia