Lack of Stars?

[Manee]

I am not too sure if it is a valid point but I have noticed that since the 1980s, there has been a decrease in world wide recognised cricketing stars. Back in the 1980s, there were people such as Michael 'Whispering Death' Holding who had the reputation of a film star as superb in their field of play even to those who don't watch the sport. More recently, there was Waqar and Wasim, the two W's of reverse swing. They had an enigma of controversy and of swing like no other before them. Others include:
- Dennis Lillee
- Shane Warne
- Richard Hadlee
- Imran Khan
- Kapil Dev
- Sachin Tendulkar
- Ian Botham

However, these days there are few players of such calliber and reputation. What do you CW members believe is the cause for a lack of cricketing superstars. Or do you think that my judgement of the reputation of past cricketers may be overstated from never actually being alive whilst they played.

 

[garypleavin]

Dont forget Viv 'Master Blaster' Richards, Greg Chappell and Sunny Gavaskar.

 

[bond21]

Brett Lee.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

There's no denying cricket has its transitional periods. However, I think it's crying wolf to suggest that the world has the same dearth of bonafide stars as it did in, say the late eighties and early nineties - where West Indies aside, the star power was in short supply - Australia with only Border to really call on, India with Kapil Dev, England with a sharply waning Botham, Sri Lanka relatively irrelevant (Aravinda aside) and Pakistan the only other nation with comparable star output.

I suppose you could say cricket has its golden periods of star conflation (which I would call the 1999 World Cup, most recently) and its troughs. There will be standouts among the current emergers who will be considered stars and have their first chance averages compared ad nauseam with the incumbents, though. Don't think we're at that stage of widespread mediocrity that defined the mid-to-late 80's, though.

 

[Top_Cat]

I personally blame the death of moustaches. Nothing says 'Legend' like a slug on the upper lip.

 

[silentstriker]

IMO, there are enough stars. A lot of times their reputation is enhanced later. I think Lee is a big star, personally. Flintoff too. Guys like Lillee and Richards don't come along often, but for the rest of the examples, I think there are equivalents.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I think Manee's lament comes from the fact people retire in bunches. We've lost Lara, Inzamam, McGrath, Warne, Gilchrist, Langer, Pollock, Astle and now Fleming within 18 months of each other, when there weren't any high profile retirements since the 2003 World Cup (Waugh, Hussain and Thorpe aside). Now there's a legion of young bloods taking their place and people have turned to the midrange performers to star, some of which have (see Lee).

 

[ohtani's jacket]

It's not just cricket, it's the same in practically every sport. Modern sport lacks stars or any real characters. It's a result of professionalism I guess.

 

[Richard]

There's no denying cricket has its transitional periods. However, I think it's crying wolf to suggest that the world has the same dearth of bonafide stars as it did in, say the late eighties and early nineties - where West Indies aside, the star power was in short supply - Australia with only Border to really call on, India with Kapil Dev, England with a sharply waning Botham, Sri Lanka relatively irrelevant (Aravinda aside) and Pakistan the only other nation with comparable star output.

I suppose you could say cricket has its golden periods of star conflation (which I would call the 1999 World Cup, most recently) and its troughs. There will be standouts among the current emergers who will be considered stars and have their first chance averages compared ad nauseam with the incumbents, though. Don't think we're at that stage of widespread mediocrity that defined the mid-to-late 80's, though.

New Zealand in the late-1980s had Martin Crowe, Richard Hadlee and at a push John Wright. Australia from 1989 onwards had not only Border but Taylor, Boon, Mark Waugh and when they were fit McDermott and Reid. England had better cricketers in the late-1980s than Botham, though the fact that David Gower and Graham Gooch were the best around says a fair bit about how bad things were.

Either way, I've always utterly hated the phrase "transitional"; "good" and "not so good" do fine. The simple fact is, there won't always be a high calibre of cricketer around (or rather, there will sometimes be less high-calibre cricketers around than others). I'd say in the last 6-and-a-half years, the game has been at a distinctly low ebb, though there's a few signs in the last 2 seasons (SH seasons, ie 2006\07 and 2007\08) that things are getting better.

 

[Manee]

I think Manee's lament comes from the fact people retire in bunches.

It is not so much lament as an observation.

 

[Beleg]

I dunno what you're smoking but Dhoni, Akhtar, Asif, Lee, Ponting, Hayden, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Kallis, Sangakarra, Muralitharan and Flintoff are all HUGE stars.

 

[Manee]

It's a result of professionalism I guess.

Good point

 

[Manee]

I dunno what you're smoking but Dhoni, Akhtar, Asif, Lee, Ponting, Hayden, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Kallis, Sangakarra, Muralitharan and Flintoff are all HUGE stars.

A lot of my friends have not heard of Asif. Ponting is hardly a star, more a good player, same for Dravid and Kallis. I am not doubting the quality of players, but more their star quality.

 

[bond21]

Michael Clarke, Hussey and Symonds and Hayden are all legends in Australia at least.

Especially Symonds, hes an icon.

 

[Richard]

I dunno what you're smoking but Dhoni, Akhtar, Asif, Lee, Ponting, Hayden, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Kallis, Sangakarra, Muralitharan and Flintoff are all HUGE stars.

Shoaib and Flintoff are when they're fit. Ganguly has only become one again recently having not been for a fair while. Same true of Tendulkar. Dravid's currently somewhat on the wane. Dhoni is very far from a star in the Test-match game. Asif is still relatively at the start of his career, brilliant though that start has been. Lee has only this season suggested he has it in him to be a star, and likewise Dale Steyn.

Kallis, Sangakkara, Ponting, Muralitharan and, sadly, Hayden are the only ones I'd say you've a point on TBH. 4 batsmen and 1 bowler. Not exactly fantastic, but as I say - things have been better the last 2 seasons than for a while before then.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

A lot of my friends have not heard of Asif. Ponting is hardly a star, more a good player, same for Dravid and Kallis. I am not doubting the quality of players, but more their star quality.

ITSTL. Do you mean stars as 'all-time greats', in the Hadlee/Richards/Ambrose/Waugh/Wasim vein? Because there's plenty of batsmen (if not current bowlers) who stack up statistically with any era, when you consider performance against contemporaries.

 

[The Sean]

I think Manee was referring to genuine popular culture and media "stars" in the classic sense of the term. Not necessarily just the best cricketer, but rather the blokes who are famous with the average man or woman in the street even if they don't follow cricket.

 

[Jamee999]

Monty!

 

[silentstriker]

I think Manee was referring to genuine popular culture and media "stars" in the classic sense of the term. Not necessarily just the best cricketer, but rather the blokes who are famous with the average man or woman in the street even if they don't follow cricket.

Well, all the Indian cricketers would meet that criteria. And exceed guys like Lillee, considering most of them can't leave their houses alone.

 

[sledger]

Brett Lee.

yawn.