The best cricketer in the world today?

In the past I have made my feelings regarding Jacques Kallis being the greatest cricketer in the history of cricket known. But this isnt about that, its about the best cricketer playing today. In essence the best cricketer on current (2011- present) form. I love Kallis, but he doesnt have this title. Did a bit of searching, and I think I have a decent short-list.

Hashim Amla: Since 2011, he has played 20 Tests, scoring 1949 runs, with seven centuries at an average of 64 with a top score of 311*. Four of those centuries were scored last year during his Golden Summer, where he scored 859 runs in six
tests at an average of 85.9. A stat-line made all the more impressive by the fact that all six Tests were away from home.

Dale Steyn - Since 2011, he has played 20 Test as well, Taking 100 wickets, at an average of 21.65. Also taken six five wicket-hauls in this time-line.

James Anderson - Since 2011 He has played 30 Tests, taking 119 wickets, at 27.26, with five fifers

Alastair Cook - Played 32 Tests in the timeline, scoring 2801 runs, at an average of 51.87, with ten Test Centuries, and a top score of 294

Michael Clarke - In the period, he played 28 tests scored 2903 runs, at an average of 64.51, with a top score of 329*. He also took nine wickets at 33.66, with one Michelle, as the Aussies call it (Pheiffer/Fifer).

Saeed Ajmal - The standout bowler, having taken 100 wickets in seventeen matches, at an average of
23.60, with six five-wicket hauls.

For me its a close call. I think I would go for Ajmal, with Clarke being the most valuable, which isnt the same thing.

Toady? Ian Bell.

The today, was to give context Stella... naughty that..

of you left out England's greatest ever spinner Swann from that list ?

Swann hasn't been that great in the past year though. Injured in NZ, tremendous against India but a poor performance against SA. Doesn't deserve to be on that list.

I'd probably go with Steyn and then Clarke. Not Amla's fault, but the responsibility that Clarke has to carry in being captain and being their best (only?!) batsman makes his achievements even more remarkable.

Swanns record is comparable with James Anderson's, but given the fact that he played in UAE, SL, and India in that timeline, and could only muster a similar record, I decided Jimmy was a slightly better pick. Similarly, The relative slow down Philander experienced post NZ tour stopped me from listing him

It is really difficult to chose one from the names stated above, A complete or best test cricketer can be marked by how he handled the situation on difficult condition. Looking at different players from different countries, surely I will not include any Indian today, nor any Sri lankan, though Sanga has produced some of good odi innings. Ajmal surely, but he has played mostly on the subcontinent wickets. Swann not my choice because though he has produced his best but not a match winner to be believed. Regarding Amla, Clarke,Cook, Jimmy, Steyn. All these guys made me difficult to decide whether to go with whom.
Again not to forget Ian Bell for the time being has produced one of the greatest innings recently and that too at difficult situation and took his team towards win. Though not the best but he is one of the finest cricketer.

I think Kevin Pietersen is the best cricketer in the world today.....scored consistently in EVERY series agaoinst all types of attacks.....and it's not just the runs but how he scores them with dominance makes him undoubtedly the best cricketer standing today....given that:

-- Tendulkar is plaaying but declined a couple of years  back...Sehwag is finished.......

--Clarke has proven to be  home track bully

--Sagkarra, Jaywerdene, Younis etal are FTBs

--Cook and Trott are grafters...inspite of having a more all condition record

---it comes down to Amala with the bat and KP...and KP wins hands down as for his panache, dominance , flair that stands out acorss the generatons in a Ricahrdsque fashion.
He is neitehr bogged down by conditions, country pitches, spin or pace , short or long format...the most gifted cricketer standing today.

That "Home-track bully" has a hundred in India, Sri Lanka, South Africa and England. Also KP has scored 2145 runs in 28 Tests in that time period, at an average of 47.66, he isnt even close

Even KP doesn't think he's the best in the England side - he thinks Cook is!

Anyway, best cricketer in the world today? Easy one I think, it's got to be Hashim Amla. Not even close, he's head and shoulders above the rest.

Just saying Clarke has a hundred in SA is doing it an injustice too. That was an outrageously good knock.

Duty281 wrote:Even KP doesn't think he's the best in the England side - he thinks Cook is!

Ha Ha he is wise enough to know not to blow his own trumpet.

And he knows.......it helps to butter the boss / manager / captain

And he is assured that neutral criticis will do the job for him.....separate his all time greatness as a dominant batsman..... from the riding-the-tide-grafter Cook

kingraf wrote:That "Home-track bully" has a hundred in India, Sri Lanka, South Africa and England. Also KP has scored 2145 runs in 28 Tests in that time period, at an average of 47.66, he isnt even close

let's separate his average at home vs. in these countries to get " Home Track Bully" stand out for yourself.

he must be averaging much higher at home than away.

If statistical averages was all that was required...we would not need human analysts to judge cricket....
and team selections would not need a panel of selectors but just a computer program to list the squads based on averages and stats.

But we know cricket is so subjective....so many nuances that requires indepth knowldge of game to judge.

subjectively for the strokes that he palys...for the dominance and class with which he destroyed the Indian and Lankan and SAffie attacks....no one comes close to KP......other than Lara, Richards, tendulkar of their prime.

At your insistence I seperated Clarke's average since 2011. He averages 43.6 away from home in that time period, vs King Kevins 37...

kingraf wrote:At your insistence I seperated Clarke's average since 2011. He averages 43.6 away from home in that time period, vs King Kevins 37...

Checkmate!

kingraf wrote:At your insistence I seperated Clarke's average since 2011. He averages 43.6 away from home in that time period, vs King Kevins 37...

so how much does Clarke averages at home
and what is the period under discussion ?

The period under discussion is 2011-present. Its in the OP.

Averages 95 at home

Clarke's easily a better batsman than Pietersen for one simple reason: Consistency.

Whatever Clarke averages home and away, he's a world class player.

His average away home is effected by the rest of his teams batting being totally hopeless.

Clarke for me, although this series hasn't been great for him.

And het he averages 54 in this series. Only one less than KP's average in England in the time period...

kingraf wrote:And het he averages 54 in this series. Only one less than KP's average in England in the time period...

Well Pietersen's been on the decline for a few years now, so it's hardly relevant.

The better comparison is Clarke vs Amla.

Amla wins hands down.

And it says a lot about his quality that we think he's had a relatively poor series, yet he has that average. A phenomenal player is Clarke.

Bowlers by and large win matches. Steyn is the best player for me by a mile.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:And it says a lot about his quality that we think he's had a relatively poor series, yet he has that average. A phenomenal player is Clarke.

Clarke's averaging 50+ due to Manchester. He got 189 and 24*.

kingraf wrote:Averages 95 at home

95 at home..and only 43 away .

A diffrence of 10 to 15 runs in average counts as a HTB
this is a mega super duper HTB

Go on then KP_fan, give me a case for why Pietersen is better than Amla. That'll be a bit of a poser for you.

If he averaged the same away as he did at home, he would be Bradman incarnate. Your system is punishing him for being so damn good at home, while somehow applauding Pietersen for being comparatively average both home and way

Duty281 wrote:Go on then KP_fan, give me a case for why Pietersen is better than Amla. That'll be a bit of a poser for you.

already posted aove.....style flair dominance, panache.....the diffrence between a Boycott and a  Richards

311* is pretty dominant in any language, and it was pretty stylish

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Go on then KP_fan, give me a case for why Pietersen is better than Amla. That'll be a bit of a poser for you.

already posted aove.....style flair dominance, panache.....the diffrence between a Boycott and a  Richards

Pietersen isn't in Amla class. Period.

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Go on then KP_fan, give me a case for why Pietersen is better than Amla. That'll be a bit of a poser for you.

already posted aove.....style flair dominance, panache.....the diffrence between a Boycott and a  Richards

Were you out for his 311 then? Arguably more dominant than anything KP's ever come up with.

Gerry SA wrote:

Azzy Mahmood wrote:And it says a lot about his quality that we think he's had a relatively poor series, yet he has that average. A phenomenal player is Clarke.

Clarke's averaging 50+ due to Manchester. He got 189 and 24*.

True. Funny thing about having a high average, it means you've scored a ton of runs

kingraf wrote:If he averaged the same away as he did at home, he would be Bradman incarnate. Your system is punishing him for being so damn good at home, while somehow applauding Pietersen for being comparatively average both home and way

discounting HTB runs...not punishing.

also why is the refrence window taken from 2011 ? what's the underlying rationale ?
why not 2012 and 13...that's 18 months +

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:

Azzy Mahmood wrote:And it says a lot about his quality that we think he's had a relatively poor series, yet he has that average. A phenomenal player is Clarke.

Clarke's averaging 50+ due to Manchester. He got 189 and 24*.

True. Funny thing about having a high average, it means you've scored a ton of runs

Side from Manchester, Clarke's got 108 runs @ 21.6.

So he hasn't been a dominate as his average suggests.

It takes current form into account, while ensuring outlier perfomances dont have an dominating influence. If we only took 2012 into consideration Clarke would walk this.

I love the 'if we don't take players high scores into account they average less' argument.

kingraf wrote:It takes current form into account, while ensuring outlier perfomances dont have an dominating influence. If we only took 2012 into consideration Clarke would walk this.

I will adjust that window a bit and play around with stats to see if there are any huge swings

JDizzle wrote:I love the 'if we don't take players high scores into account they average less' argument.

It's about consistency

Otherwise someone like Sehwag could be considered one of the best ever.

Massive 200 and 300 hundreds followed by lots of low scores.

To be fair Gerry, no is as dominant as averages suggest. Steyn has taken 235 wickets in 35 test victories at 16, the upshot is, he has only taken 98 wickets in 30 non victories, you could argue half the time he isnt even half decent

there are many parameters that should be consdidred within whihc the average should be normalized:

--home conditions vs. foreign to home conditions

--flat patta pitches vs. bowler froiendly pitches

--contributions in matches won

-- match winning contributions

--relative strength of the side one is batting in

--strike rate, stroke play, flair , panache, dominance on the match condition, box office appeal, spectator entertainment content

You have to take each player individually though. Clarke and Amla average 4/5 runs more than KP because they are more consistent, but if I was selecting someone to improve an all ready good/great team in the middle order it would be KP as he can play innings that no-one else can at this moment in time. Clarke and Amla will probably go down as better players though.

I always feel too much stock is put into KP's "ability to take the match away". As if no one else can do it. In Adelaide Clarke sparked SA for 230 having come in at 55/3, in Brisbane he came in at 48/3, to score 259, why that is ignored baffles me.

That's a bit different for me though. That's coming in when your team in under pressure and playing a top knock. Debately whether KP could have played those knocks, but I would be fairly certain in saying that Clarke couldn't have played innings of pure brilliance like KP's at Mumbai and Headingley last year.

kingraf wrote:To be fair Gerry, no is as dominant as averages suggest. Steyn has taken 235 wickets in 35 test victories at 16, the upshot is, he has only taken 98 wickets in 30 non victories, you could argue half the time he isnt even half decent

See I'd see that and say that he pretty much won those 35 games by himself, and in those 30 games he lost, his teammates did sod all

Seriously you would think sometimes KP was the only guy who had come in and played a fairly high tempo innings to win a game. Personally for me Clarke is the better player and will finish his career with much better stats.

Must have missed his 151 in Newlands. It was great when he scored it, it became remarkable when the next two innings aggregated 143

kingraf wrote:Must have missed his 151 in Newlands. It was great when he scored it, it became remarkable when the next two innings aggregated 143

I've also seen him make a lot of unremarkable knocks when plenty of other people were able to score runs.

Talking about Clarkes 151