[solved]Hall of Fame 2015/6 - Round 1 Group G

Here is round seven of this years Hall of Fame.

All polls will remain open for a week so make sure to vote ASAP for your favourites.

The 1st round matches still open to voting can be found here -

https://www.606v2.com/t61437-hall-of-fame-2015-6-round-1-group-f

https://www.606v2.com/t61410-hall-of-fame-2015-6-round-1-group-e

https://www.606v2.com/t61404-hall-of-fame-2015-6-round-1-group-d

Todays poll features stars from the world of Snooker, F1, Cricket and Football

Please vote for your top two choices and let the best man/ woman win.

Your nominees are:

Steve Davis
Michael Schumacher
Brian Lara
George Best

Steve Davis OBE - Championed by VTR

A great sportsperson can be defined in a number of ways. We could have the great champion, someone who dominated their sport for a period. Or someone that had an incredibly long career at the top. Even someone who fundamentally changed the way their sport was played. It is certainly a rare specimen that can be classified as two let alone all three of these.

Growing up in the 80’s there was one name above all others that was synonymous with Snooker: Steve Davis. There were popular characters such as Alex Higgins and Jimmy White but only one great champion. Often mocked for being boring, Davis did his talking on the snooker table, taking apart opponents in a period of domination only approached since by Stephen Hendry.

I will come on to his record but let’s start with impact. Why was Davis considered boring? I think simply because he was the first player to really take a fully professional approach to snooker and recognise it for what it was: a growing sport where riches could be made. Is practicing so hard you leave nothing to chance really boring? Refusing to drink during matches boring? Playing with intensity? I would say not – and almost all players that have followed have realised that being an endearing character does not pay the bills and deliver silverware, it is only winning that will do that. Davis’ approach drastically improved the standard of the game, paving the way for the incredible level of play achieved by future greats such as Hendry, O’Sullivan and John Higgins.

So what of that record? Davis won 6 out of the 10 World Championships in the 1980’s. Add to that numerous other titles including several victories in The Masters and UK Championship and you can only be awestruck by his dominance and consistency. Even in rare defeat, Davis will be remembered. The 1985 final, watched by a UK TV audience of almost 20 million people in a beyond midnight finish went to the final black. Taylor won, Davis was gracious in defeat and certainly played his part in the greatest match ever. In what is likely to be his final tally, Davis has reached 41 ranking finals, winning 28 titles.

Snooker is not a physical pursuit but I would argue it is a young man’s game. Stephen Hendry, Davis’s main contender for the snooker GOAT won his last world title aged 30. A sport based on such precision naturally favours the undiminished motor skills of the younger player. Davis is unique in his longevity, and has only relatively recently showed signs of a terminal decline. Of course his period of domination is long over, but Davis has remained competitive well past the age of 45. Aged 48 Davis was still good enough to reach the UK Championship final in 2005 and had a season in the all-important Top 16 at the age of 50. He has the ability to qualify for major events to this day; the competitive instinct refuses to be extinguished. One of his greatest coups was in 2010 when he beat defending champion John Higgins to progress to the World Championship Quarter Finals. A huge shock no doubt but in some ways not that surprising: every player would have known that on his day this elder statesman still had the game to defeat them.

And finally back to that personality: Davis has a fantastic dry wit, makes time for the fans and provides analysis and commentary of the highest quality. The often vile British media with their hypocritical dual delight-and-disgust at sportspeople that make a mess of their lives will chip away at characters like Davis with the boring tag as a mark of their own disappointment. There’s no story to tell outside of his sporting excellence, Davis is a true class act on and off the baize.

The pioneer, the great champion, the evergreen. Davis is certainly all three.

Brian Lara- Cricket- Championed by VTR

We can all look at statistics when we try to decide who is the greatest but sometimes seeing with our own eyes is the only way to judge. Bradman’s average, Tendulkar’s runs, Sober’s all-round feats are all there in the record books, but for sheer aesthetics there is the man with the high back-lift and flashing blade that made batting look so elegant you knew you were witnessing something special: that man is Brian Charles Lara.

Equally as devastating when facing fast, spin bowling or anything in between, Lara had the ability to dominate any attack in any part of the world. With a Test career spanning 1990-2006, playing at a time when opposition bowling attacks were almost universally strong (Wasim & Waqar, McGrath & Warne, Donald & Pollock), here was a batsmen who would have all in the ground enthralled as he played every shot in the book with such panache you would think he was playing a different game to everyone else. As an opposition supporter you’d somehow want him to stay in and get out at the same time; you knew the damage he could do, yet you would always want to watch more.

And it’s not as if the style was lacking in the way of substance. Far, far from it. In 1994 Lara destroyed a capable England attack to help himself to 375 runs and take the record for the highest individual Test score, overtaking Sober’s 365 which had stood for 36 years. This was merely the start of a purple patch of an incredible 7 hundreds in 8 first-class innings, culminating in a record that could, like The Don’s Test average stand forever: an innings of 501 not out against Durham when playing for Warwickshire in the County Championship. An entire team is generally elated with an innings total of 500+, but such was his hunger for runs Lara was able to achieve that many on his own.

When Matthew Hayden bullied a club-standard Zimbabwe attack for 380 runs a decade later to take away the record of highest individual Test score, the world wept that such a prestigious record could be achieved against such poor opposition. Thankfully Lara wasn’t finished, and with mutterings of a decline during an unusually subdued home series in 2004 he astonishingly took the record back with a chanceless innings of 400 not out. England were again on the receiving end, and despite having dominated the series for a 3-0 lead at that point were powerless to stop another innings of absolute genius. To put this into context, the record individual Test score has only changed hands 4 times since the Second World War. Lara stands apart in having gained the record twice.

Do you need any more convincing? An overall Test average of 52.88 is 17th on the all-time list, which is exceptional given the bowling attacks he faced, the lack of reliable batting partners in his later career and the challenges of captaining a team that was often in crisis for a large part of that. As the Windies decline set in from the mid to late 1990’s, Lara often seemed to be fighting a lone battle as a once-dominant team started to taste defeat on a regular basis. One of his most astonishing feats was somehow dragging the Windies to a 2-2 draw against the great Australia team in 1999. His innings of 153 not out in securing a thrilling one wicket victory in the Third Test is rated by Wisden as the second greatest Test innings of all time. Even more remarkable is that just days earlier he’d scored 213 in setting up a shock victory in the Second Test to level the series.

I haven’t even mentioned one-day cricket yet where Lara was one of the masters of his age, averaging over 40 in the shorter form and playing an integral part in the Windies shock run to the 1996 World Cup final. Naturally there was a defining innings in there: his masterful 111 off just 94 balls knocked the stuffing out of South Africa in the Quarter Final.

Some say when he retired in 2007 it was too early, the flourish was still there, he could still make a difference (Lara had averaged 66 in his final Test Series). But as with those flashing strokes, I’d say his timing was perfect. We were not to be subjected to any tarnishing of memories as a slow decline set in: we witnessed and will remember nothing but sheer beauty.

Schumacher and Lara.

Best may have scored seven goals against Northampton, but I've never seen him as one of the greatest despite what Rodney Marsh and a few of his mates say.

Davis was the Liverpool of the 80's. Snooker though wasn't as strong as it is now.

Lara was the best batsmen I've seen, and has a record to match his genius. His flair also gains him extra points, as does the match winning/saving knocks.

Schumacher has seven world titles, which sort of says it all.

Quite a weak group today, seeing those write ups again takes me back! I do not believe Davis, Lara or Best to be anywhere near the greatest in their sport, Schumacher does have a claim to be so.

Its Schumacher and Lara for me, but I don't think Lara in particular will last long in the competition. I couldn't vote for Best due to his character flaws which impacted his career. Davis is probably now the third (rather than second best referred to in the write up) of all time in a mainly UK sport.

Again, the relative strengths / weaknesses of the groups comes to the fore. Yesterday's group I would put all 4 in the top 20 of all time, 3 in about the top 8. This lot, Schumi would be top 20 and the rest not even in consideration.

Lara undoubtedly the best of the rest, but you can't compare his career record with Bradman's. The positives for him were flamboyance and ability to play big individual innings, but he did have some mediocre series. When he was good, he was very good...

Steve 'Interesting' Davis - set new standards in snooker in the 80s primarily by being a grafter, but was clearly surpassed by Hendry and at least in terms of performance levels by O'Sullivan. His record doesn't stand up to scrutiny in this company.

George Best - rather the opposite of Davis, in being a prodigious natural talent who could get away with a lack of training, partying too hard and generally living it large. Was almost certainly the most gifted player ever produced by the British Isles. Being Northern Irish, he got few opportunities to demonstrate his greatness in international football, although he did shine in the European Cup for Man U in the late 60s. However, does he even make the list of the 20 best players ever? Not sure he does.

The drawing of these groups has been pretty poor, would it not be better to cut down on the number of sportsmen from a particular sport?

Bit of a strech to say the bowling was universally strong for Lara, England were still experimenting with their "Free caps for all" tactic until just before the end of Lara's career. Pakistan were alright, but by 1993-4 Waqar had already peaked etc.

Honestly never heard of Steve Davis (pub games are as big as safe driving over here... so not at all) so I'll go Lara and Schumacher

I wanna go on the pis* with Georgeee Best

Why wouldnt you put Best, Pele, Beckenbaur and Maradonna in the one group? then one could get the Soccer G.O.A.T, and give other sports a bit of a go.

aucklandlaurie wrote:Why wouldnt you put Best, Pele, Beckenbaur and Maradonna in the one group? then one could get the Soccer G.O.A.T, and give other sports a bit of a go.

That's a very good and sound suggestion.

The same particularly applies to cricket. Lara might win this group of 4 but he wouldn't make my All Time West Indies XI let alone be the Sporting GOAT.

guildfordbat wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Why wouldnt you put Best, Pele, Beckenbaur and Maradonna in the one group? then one could get the Soccer G.O.A.T, and give other sports a bit of a go.

That's a very good and sound suggestion.

The same particularly applies to cricket. Lara might win this group of 4 but he wouldn't make my All Time West Indies XI let alone be the Sporting GOAT.

Finding only four footballers for one group would be tricky, and Best definitely wouldn't be in the four.

I probably have some bias towards British players and especially those who were at their peak when I was growing up but even so I don't think George Best is getting here the credit he merits.

Best really was an outstanding player. His ability on the ball and awareness of space off it were eye catching in the late '60s and early '70s as he and his goals played a major role in taking United to domestic and for the first time European glory. The significance of the latter and, in particular, it helping to (at least partially) lay to rest the horrific memories of Munich for both his club and the country should not be underestimated.

During my lifetime (I'm bl**dy old btw) I've had the privilege to discuss George Best with two former top flight professional footballers. One conversation lasted about ten minutes whilst the other continued off and on for about thirty years.

The first referred to above was with Jimmy Greaves. It was at a book signing at Smiths in London just over a decade ago. A few minutes before the signing, I had seen Greavsie interviewed in the store for local tv about Best who at the time was seriously ill in hospital. He paid tribute to both Best's huge talent and how, despite his (Best's) character flaws, the public were still rooting for him. When I put my book forward for Greavsie to sign, I mentioned how well I thought he had spoken about Best. With that, it was like he was away with his best mate and there was no holding him. He looked me in the eye and said, ''Let me tell you about George'' and proceeded to do so for a good few minutes with a queue of people building up behind me and two shop assistants staring daggers at me whilst tapping their watches. In the end, it was me who felt obliged to end the conversation - Greavsie had already done more than enough to convince me of how in awe he (and Jimmy Greaves was a great footballer) was of Best. [As an aside, you couldn't hope to meet a nicer guy than Jimmy Greaves - I wish him well now as he tries to battle back from a serious stroke.]

If there's blatant name dropping with the well known Jimmy Greaves, there certainly isn't with the other former pro. Les Bruton, very much a journeyman professional throughout the 1920s and into the early '30s. He did though play in the top flight in both England and Scotland and had a fine understanding of the game throughout his lifetime (he died in 1989). He was also the best great uncle any person (me in this instance ) could have. I now wish I had listened to him better and asked more when he spoke about his own playing days and the game after that. However, one thing I do vividly recall from our many chats is his insistence that George Best was one of the two best players he had ever played against or seen. [The other was the now virtually forgotten and tragic Hughie Gallacher - he doesn't belong in this debate but should be nailed on if we ever have a Football Hall of Fame; Mad for Chelsea, when you get a chance have a look at his record for your team.]

My own thoughts and what was said to me do not mean George Best should ultimately be our Sporting GOAT. However, they're good enough to get him one of my votes in this round and for me to say he shouldn't be as readily dismissed as some posts suggest.

Fantastic post. Lovely stuff.

But we are talking the Football GOAT, which for me doesn't include Best. You'll always get the peers talk favourably about such and such. Best was obviously a great player, or even a genius but he had a short period of being great, much like Gazza.

Stella wrote:But we are talking the Football GOAT, which for me doesn't include Best. You'll always get the peers talk favourably about such and such. Best was obviously a great player, or even a genius but he had a short period of being great, much like Gazza.

Accepted but my great-uncle was talking fifty years after his own playing time which made his comments about Best all the more meaningful to me.

A game of opinions which is the nature of this debate. In mine Best wouldn't be number one but he would be up there amongst the greatest footballers of all time. Again my opinion but he had far, far more impact when playing than Gascoigne and left a much bigger and longer lasting legacy.

A couple more quotes about George Best. Simply came across these on the net.

From fellow United legend Eric Cantona -
''I'd give all the champagne I've ever drunk to be playing alongside him in a big European match at Old Trafford.''

And probably my favourite from United team-mate Pat Crerand after Best had given Chelsea full-back Ken Shellito a torrid time -
''Shellito was taken off suffering from twisted blood!''

I've got another

"Never fulfilled his potential"

That's from me

Stella wrote:I've got another

"Never fulfilled his potential"

That's from me

Stella - I'll take your comment seriously which is probably more than it deserves.

Imo Best did fulfil his potential to the extent that he became as great as he ever could have done - ''the greatest player in the world'', according to Pele (I don't recall him saying that of Gascoigne ).

Two Premier League equivalent winner's medals, one Premier League equivalent Golden Boot, one European Cup winner's medal (the first win by an English team) and a European Footballer of the Year award all in the mid to late '60s tend to back that up.

Where you do have a point is that he didn't maintain his greatness for long enough as the boredom and booze kicked in.

To be fair, Pele does talk garbage.

These quotes say he was a great player, but I know that. There's been many great players over the years, but only a few worthy to be the Footballing GOAT. Best's longevity does count against him, for me.

I accept that Best's lack of longevity counts against him. Certainly as regards being the Footballing GOAT. However, isn't all we're trying to establish atm is whether he's better than two of Davis, Schumacher and Lara?

Btw, Pele speaks very highly of you!

guildfordbat wrote:I accept that Best's lack of longevity counts against him. Certainly as regards being the Footballing GOAT. However, isn't all we're trying to establish atm is whether he's better than two of Davis, Schumacher and Lara?

Btw, Pele speaks very highly of you!

Well we both speak garbage, so we have one thing in common!

True, should Best get through. Schumacher has to, imo. Lara, is maybe like Best is to yourself, a bit of a Cricketing hero. In fact Best and Lara do have a bit in common. Both had huge talent, but not the consistency of others. Lara was very hot and cold during his career, but was hotter than anyone when in full flow.

Where lara has an advantage over Best is the fact that Lara performed much more on the World stage whereas Best really on played club games.

european cup is pretty much as good as the world stage, cant criticize a man for where he was born.

charlton probably takes the title as most decorated and successful player form the uk, but for me best was the most talented player to come from the uk.

i am a united fan though so you can take my bias with that