Second greatest sportsman?

The greatest sprinter, certainly, but he isn't faster than his peers by all that much. Compare that to the domination of other sports by their greatest sportsmen, and he isn't really in the discussion

He's the fastest person ever recorded with a load of medals and records. Are you are only considering the gulf between #1 and the rest of the competitors in their sports?

I think that's the easiest way of comparing between sports.

Exactly, we're in an era where Steve Smith averages ~58 and I reckon he's worse than any player who averaged ~50 even 10 years ago. Bradman himself joked before his death that he could have averaged 70 in the modern era... at his current age

He's about half as good as the best sportsman in his own sport...
Which brings me onto the statistically correct answer of Donald Bradman, his dominance over his sport is unmatched by any other sportsman (average of 99.94 compared to second highest of ~60.0, once you exclude those who played ridiculously short careers). He is literally 50% better than anyone else who played his sport

Why don't you rate him that highly? I would admit that he, maybe, hasn't been tested fully but that will come. He has played 41 tests and averages 60, no rubbish player would be able to have an average similar to that if they were substandard. I believe, that with Virat Kohli, Kane Williamson and Joe Root, these 4 have the ability to move the cricket game forward massively. You add to that young bowlers like Kagiso Rabada, Mohammad Amir, Mustafizur Rahman etc. etc. and cricket has the ability to be very strong with fierce competition.

We still have many good bowlers that are playing in the world at the moment, although I would agree that it may not be as strong as it was maybe 10 years ago!



It is pretty unfair to compare the era's. Bradman was extraordinary, no doubt about it, and his record will never be beaten (lets be honest), but we have no idea how he would have played in the modern era. Bradman mainly played only against England and hardly played outside of Australia or England! He also only played 52 test matches, who knows what his average would have been if he played for longer and against different teams?

I am a massive Sachin fan and he is one of my idols, but I completely understand when people say that he isn't the "best" cricketer of all time and possibly not even in the modern era (there have been loads of great players), but for me he is number one. From starting his international career as a young boy, he has transformed cricket throughout the years that he played and has inspired the whole of India! He obviously does have his flaws, even on the cricket field, and their were times when India needed him and he flopped, but every cricketer has had those games and moments!

I rate him so highly as a sportsman overall due to his whole demeanour on and off the field, the fact that he is so incredibly humble and also his ability as a cricketer.

Muhammad Ali wasn't even the greatest boxer ever soo...


LOL @ people acting like anyone gives a **** about Cricket.


The greatest sportsman would probably have to be Maradona. He personified football (aka the most popular, the greatest and most competitive sport in the world).

You realise how ridiculously, ridiculously good you'd have to be to be considered one of the greatest players of all time in a Sport which has literally thousands of professional players and millions of players around the world?

I think Smith is obviously a good player but his technique has been exploited by the English bowlers in the past and there is no way he averages so highly if there were more quality pace bowlers around.

Sachin is obviously a great man and a modern great, but he wasn't Bradman.

Cricket is the 2nd most popular sport in the world. Maradona isn't generally considered the greatest footballer, so he can't be in contention for greatest sportsman

Debatable whether Ali was the greatest ever boxer (cab going into detail), but he was the greatest ever sportsman.
Ability as a boxer cannot be questioned. 3 time world champion and we never even got to see him at his peak, unlike 99% of the sportsmen mentioned above.
Commercial side he had it all and was like the Beatles of boxing. People who had no idea about the sport would watch it because of Ali.
Personalty was something else too.

Only because half of India plays it.

And your second sentence is just idiocy. Since when isn't Maraona considered the greatest footballer? People are usually split between him and Pele and that's mostly because the latter manipulates his stats to make everyone believe he was far greater than he was (albeit still great).

Does that mean he was a great sportsman though? I don't consider it part of being a great sportsman. But if you want to go for influence, Bradman's has been lost to time but he did cause the term 'don' to enter common parlance

No one's a bigger influence in their respective sports when it comes to Muhammad Ali.
Just look at the number of fighters who attempted to copy his style and spoke of him being the reason they got into boxing.

That's certainly true, but I still disagree on it being part of being a great sportsman

Forgot to add Ronnie O Sullivan.

He is easily the greatest Snooker just when you see natural talent and after you see all his tournament wins(despite fighting depression and all his struggles).

Not only was he great, but he revived the sport and made it more popular with his great Fast and entertaining style unlike other great players of snooker such as Davis who was a bore to watch!

I forgot Ronnie as well

In my opinion, the greatest snooker player to have ever taken up the cue. I am not sure if he is the greatest sportsman though. There have been loads of times when he has acted very unsportsmanlike. For example, when he purposefully took a pink instead of a black for a 147 earlier this year because the "prize money wasn't enough" and the like.

His talent is crazy, and it's the unpredictable nature of the man that makes him so likeable/unlikeable.