Talk:Dennis Lillee

Untitled

"Still a huge hit with the fans, Lillee continued his international career until famously retiring along with Greg Chappell and Rod Marsh after the Sydney Test match against Pakistan in January 1984; many consider this 'triple retirement' had an adverse impact on the Australian national team as their performances soon slumped."

Whilest all 3 did retire from TEST cricket after that match I'm pretty sure Marsh continued on play out the World Series Cup of that Summer whereas Chappell and Lillee did not.

• Interesting, but I'm not sure it's particularly relevant to an article on Dennis Lillee. In adding the information about the possible adverse impact on the national team, I did so as more an indication that it happened. Certainly an article on the impacts of their retirements would be very interesting...--Cory 16:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

MRF School Of Pace

I think something should be mentioned in his role at the MRF (Madras Rubber Factory) sponsored School of Pace Academy in Chennai (formerly Madras).
He was made director of the school, founded in 1987, which was launched to help find good young fast bowlers in India

A couple of links:
http://www.chennaibest.com/cityresources/Sports_and_Recreation/sportsacademies01.asp
http://www.iloveindia.com/sports/bodies/mrf-pace-foundation.html

Fast bowlers who I think have trained at the school:
Javagal Srinath, Venkatesh Prasad, Ajit Agarkar (?), Ashish Nehra(?), Zaheer Khan(?), Irfan Pathan, Shanthakumaran Sreesanth, Munaf Patel(?), Rudra Pratap Singh(?)
Stonysleep 14:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DKLillee.jpg

Image:DKLillee.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

One and only caught & bowled dismissal in test cricket

No mention of Lillee's one and only caught and bowled in test cricket - the victim was Geoffrey Boycott. Having induced Boycott to hook with the previous ball ( a bouncer), Lillee repeated it - and Boycott skied it. Yelling "Mine!" at the top of his voice, Lillee ran to a short mid wicket position and delightedly took the catch. (This happened at Trent Bridge - but I am open to correction on the point.)

I think this deserves a mention. 81.102.15.200 (talk) 12:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

It was Dilley at Headingley, no idea if it was a hook shot, so maybe not that notable- or referenced.[1]The-Pope (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Info on Carl Rackemann

Carl Rackemann was NOT the Man of the Match in the second Test against Pakistan in 83/84 - that honour went to Geoff Lawson. Rackemann was Man of the Match for the FIRST Test. It also isn't clear, from what I can remember, that Lillee was going to be dropped for the Third. Tom Hogan came into the side as Rackemann's replacement - a left arm orthodox spinner! There would certainly have been a lot of public resistance to dropping a living legend like Lillee at that stage, not least from PBL who had disproportionate influence over the game at the time and who would have seen the Lillee name as a draw card. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.177.218.51 (talk) 05:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Other Controversies

Lillee was involved in more controversies than have been mentioned. During his comeback to First Class Cricket, he (and his mate Botham) destroyed an Honour Board in the small ground they were playing at in Tasmania. There is also the apparent undermining of Kim Hughes's authority when the latter was Captain of Australia, most notably the very public "disagreement" during a one day match in 1983. Much information on this can be drawn from the recent book "Golden Boy". When he was the stand in Captain of WA in his last season, he had a very public spat with the umpires over extra drinks for the team. Certainly the first two should rate a mention, particularly since the attitude of Lillee (and Marsh and the Chappell brothers) helped to undermine Kim Hughes as a Captain, his self confidence and perhaps ultimately his batting form. I'm a big fan of DK, but there is no walking away from this - although kicking Javed is the most notorious incident Lillee was involved in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.177.218.51 (talk) 05:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Lillee/Miandad Incident

I have removed this section which needs to be be written to comply with WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE. The link was dead (though I see an updated version is available), the quote was selective, and one source has been used for an incident that was widely written about and needs more balance for e.g what the media reaction). Flat Out let's discuss it 01:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dennis Lillee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831043509/http://www.mcg.org.au/default.asp?pg=toursdisplay&articleid=111 to http://www.mcg.org.au/default.asp?pg=toursdisplay&articleid=111

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Recent NPOV issues in the lead

This is in response to an IP user who's used multiple IP addresses.

The edits you're trying to put in place have a range of issues associated with them:

• to start with, you're removing a source and a direct quote. There's no need to do that, so don't. That quote actually does way more than the four you've added to the lead;
• you're then suggesting that he is "widely regarded as one of the greatest and a complete fast bowler" - which, by the way, doesn't actually make grammatical sense. Of the four sources you're putting up to support this, the Wisden one doesn't say either of those things, the CricInfo profile could be used to suggest that he is regarded as being "complete bowler", and that might be a useful thing to say in addition to the quote you keep on removing, CricketCountry has some general POV issues associated with it - I find it more reliable for factual points than for opinions -, and The Age makes neither claim. Use the CricInfo profile, sure, but use it carefully and with a bit more nuance please;
• the issue with him being sixth in the Five Cricketers voting is, again, that you're doing it crudely. Ultimately the vote was designed to select the top 5. Lillee didn't make that. He wasn't voted sixth - he came sixth-equal in the voting to select the top five and so failed to make the cut. If there had been a vote to select the top-10 people may have voted differently than they did in the vote to choose the top 5 - it's nuance again. Ultimately I think you'd be better off using the quote from Bird in the Wisden article about the vote as the key point - it's more of a telling point anyway;
• and we don't write "Dennis was...". There's a manual of style. We write "Lillee was..." - and it's red flag if you don't fwiw;

What does this boil down to? Hell, Lillee was good. Not as fast as some, not as skilled as others, but a fine bowler and one of the best I've seen (at times). And the article says that already. The lead could use a little work to be cleverer, sure, but that's not what you're doing here really I'm afraid. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing First of all the Cricket County article is by a renowned cricket historian so that hardly makes it a POV issue infact far from it..

• You are saying that being written as outstanding fast bowler of his er diminished his all time great status ?? Seriously there are articles which mentions Don Bradman, Viv Richards, Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara as premiere batter of their era does that prevent them from being top tier great batters ??

• Noone literally nobody can deny Dennis as an All-Time great in their right sense of mind for sure infact all great batters of that era rates him finest paceman of all time whether it's Viv Richards, Greg Chappell, Gordon Greenidge or West Indian pace quartet infact those who have serious reason to dislike him Miandad and Gavaskar are united in rating him as finest paceman that's ever lived.

Malcolm Marshall and Wasim Akram article mentioned that they are one of best ever so why not in case of Dennis Lillee ?

At last you claimed that he was not as fast as many ?? Not sure about that pre injury he was as fast as anyone Garry Sobbers said that he was fastest he ever saw. Even after those stress fractures he was still like greased lightning slower than Jeff Thomson but quicker than anyone else in the game. He clocked 155 kmph rocket in 1977 way after his stress fractures..

In skills well you must be ill-informed if you don't rate him in his skills

Overall there is literally no one that can deny his stature as an all-time great paceman and arguably the finest. 2409:4051:18B:75A3:38AC:5D71:90:3D3B (talk) 15:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

• Andy Roberts the Hitman one of finest ever rates him as greatest ever 'take a look here' 2409:4051:18B:75A3:38AC:5D71:90:3D3B (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

• Michael Holding another champion paceman rates him among four best ever along with Roberts, Marshall and Steyn 'source is here'

• Just for your bit on Wisden article that clearly mentioned that Happy birthday to DK Lillee, one of the great quicks refering to his iconic over to Viv at MCG in 1981.

I am pinging @Eagleash, Spike 'em, and Kirubar: Is there any issue in refering to Dennis as one of greatest ever fast bowlers in lead as it is used for Akram, Marshall and other great pacemans ?? 2409:4051:18B:75A3:38AC:5D71:90:3D3B (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I think a direct quote works best and ref bombing the lead is not necessary.Spike 'em (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, I'll try and respond here if I can manage to get a handle on what you're actually asking for.

• the article currently says, with a direct quote, that he was the "outstanding fast bowler of his generation". That's a pretty strong statement of greatness. I'm quite happy if that's added to a touch - but don't remove it because it's actually stronger, in my view, than saying that "he was great, really great";
• lots of articles claim greatness. In most cases that's debatable at best (I mean, Bradman, sure); it's unfortunate that far too many articles use phrases such as that in my view. As I wrote above, no one's arguing that he wasn't a damned fine bowler. I said: "use the CricInfo profile, sure, but use it carefully and with a bit more nuance please". Calm down and write properly. What if we wrote a lead paragraph that said something along the lines of:

Dennis Keith Lillee, AM, MBE (born 18 July 1949) is a former Australian cricketer rated as the "outstanding fast bowler of his generation".(ref with the BBC article) Lillee was known for his fiery temperament and 'never-say-die' attitude(can we find a direct ref for this?) and is generally considered one of the most "complete" fast bowlers of the 20th century.(use the cricinfo reference)

This could lead into a second paragraph that discusses him being the leading Test wicket taker, for example. And that into a third paragraph where his awards are summarised: Hall of Fame, Australia's test team of the century, cricketer of the year etc...

This would give the lead more balance;

• I could pick through the individual points you make of course - the Wisden line you quote was from an embedded tweet not from the article; my issue is with CricketCountry as a rather hyperbolic site rather than with Arunabha Sengupta as a writer etc... But that would be pointless (I mean, if you want me to, just ask);
• By the way, I should note that John Woodcock has him 19th in his list of the 100 Greatest Cricketers of all time. I can dig the Times reference out for you if you want - it's online at Gale; and Wisden's obituary of Bob Willis mentions Lillee a few times - it's an interesting comparative view;
• We need to be more, well, encyclopaedic. The National Portrait Gallery does a half decent job of a short bio that has things that could be used, for example. But what you're currently insisting on is poorly written and, as Spike says, the ref bomb is completely unnecessary - given that everything in the lead should be backed up in the body of the article anyway;
• Currently you're writing Dennis Keith Lillee, AM, MBE (born 18 July 1949) is a former Australian cricketer who is widely regarded as one of the greatest fast bowler of cricket history.[1][2][3][4] In 2000, Dennis was voted as sixth greatest cricketer of the 20th century along with Frank Worrell by a 100 member panel of experts and was first fast bowler in the list.[5] This has a number of issues:

• don't link Australian - WP:OLINK issues;
• one of the greatest fast bowler of cricket history doesn't work grammatically. I hinted at this above;
• don't use Dennis - use Lillee. I specifically pointed this out above, yet you've just put the same thing back again;
• again, unfortunately, Dennis was voted as sixth greatest cricketer of the 20th century along with Frank Worrell by a 100 member panel of experts and was first fast bowler in the list is grammatically full of issues. It's interesting that you called me a "typical Pom" in this edit summary; are you aware that we can approximately geolocate IP addresses?;
• you piped fast bowling to bowling, which was unfortunate.

• cut a bit of the hyperbole, write in a balanced way. That's all. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing:

lots of articles claim greatness. In most cases that's debatable at best (I mean, Bradman, sure); it's unfortunate that far too many articles use phrases such as that in my view

What can we make of this ? So apart from Bradman no other great batters ever played ?? Master Blaster Viv Richards ?? Perhaps the finest of all post war batters..Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Greg Chappell, Javed Miandad are all in top echelon of great players. Only you can debate or belite their greatness infact it was Bradman who is a bit overrated smashing helpless Poms everyday.

• My point has always been with these specific quote that he was outstanding paceman of his era ?? I have some articles which mentions Viv as most destructive batter ever, does that prevent him from being an all-time great ?? Some mentions Brian Lara as magician batter so does it makes him any lesser ATG batsman ?

• At last instead of using this baseless quote rather write a common consensus about his status that DK is an all-time great and one of finest ever pacemans thats ever lived.

So, here is my suggestion for the same:-

Dennis Keith Lillee, AM, MBE (born 18 July 1949) is a former Australian cricketer who is regarded as one of the greatest fast bowlers in the history of cricket

            OR

Dennis Keith Lillee, AM, MBE (born 18 July 1949) is a former Australian cricketer who is widely regarded as one of the greatest fast bowlers of all time.

As simple as this articles of other great fast bowlers like Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Dale Steyn, Michael Holding, Malcolm Marshall, Curtly Ambrose simply acknoweldge them as ATG fast bowlers.

About Wisden assesement of him can be discussed a bit later. 2409:4051:18B:75A3:588F:7030:2690:3802 (talk) 10:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

No reply in last 4 days now so as per silence I am assuming consensus here. 2409:4051:4E82:767:D570:AAE4:7F3D:A93B (talk) 03:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Other than the fact that 2 people have disagreed with you. Spike 'em (talk) 07:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing and Spike 'em: Ok, then Dennis was not an all time great ?? Bring out a source that say so that he was not a great bowler ??

You both sounds like helpless Poms whom he and Thommo made a mess of and in response Poms cried about too many bouncers but they enjoy same when they found Jofra Archer. 2409:4051:6:51E4:4A19:4D7C:E435:67F2 (talk) 07:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:NPA Spike 'em (talk) 07:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that your interpretation of WP:SILENT is necessarily spot on here - people are busy and don't get a chance to repond to everything. Fwiw I was thinking about what you'd written but was in work for much of this week. I'm not sure we're at the stage yet where we have a consensus for the change you proposed - although it was an improvement on your past edits.

I was wondering how frequently other sports use the wordings "greatest" or "great" and in what circumstance. I see it surprisingly often in cricket articles, although often having been added by editors who appear to be from the sub-continent - I don't know if there's a subtly different meaning in regional versions of English at all. It's a slightly troubling term - we seem to have an awful lot of "great" or "greatest" cricketers which, logically, is tricky to resolve.

TLDR: I need to think about this a bit more I'm afraid. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I'd not read it before, butt did find this section pertinent: Withdrawing from communication with a tendentious or quarrelsome editor does not give that editor consent to do what they like. Similarly, in the presence of a revert, there is neither silence nor consensus. Spike 'em (talk) 08:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing I don't know that you are making much sense here; a lot of articles use greatness as a yardstick for cricketers, so what ?? If there is universal consensus among the cricket fratinity among certain individuals as one of finest or greatest then no doubt it should be mentioned. Apart from great figures DK was kind of trendsetter for future fast bowlers by coming of from severe back injuries who no one knew back then. We aren't using greatness here for someone like Peter Siddle or even Merv Hughes.

This quote is as meaningless as is India's current series loss to perhaps worst ever RSA team I know in 45 years. What is consensus among greats for judges for Dennis ? Simply one of the greatest ever or some says the greatest those some are Viv Richards, Richie Benaud, Ian Chappell, Ian Botham, Sunil Gavaskar, Tony Greig and Imran Khan or Javed Miandad so I will rather go with them instead of you two who are simply giving silly reasons of why he wasn't one of best ever. 2409:4051:2005:1066:50B2:2A8F:E4FF:CA8A (talk) 07:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Spike 'em I am far from quarelsome editor but it's you guys who are making a issue out of it. Earlier rant about Poms was bit over the top but it's a fact they made Lillee and Thommo or later West Indian quicks literally as mobs introduced bouncer rule and made the game sissy. But when they get someone like Archer they love the same brutness. #On On. 2409:4051:2005:1066:50B2:2A8F:E4FF:CA8A (talk) 07:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

There isn't anything like "universal consensus". In that vote for the top 5 cricketers of the 20th century there was only "universal consensus" about one man - no one else got votes from all the judges. One other chap got 90 iirc.

In terms of the players you selected to use to judge Lillee - yes, jolly good, I'm sure they all did. How did they judge Frank Woolley as a bowler? Or Alfred Mynn? There was an awful lot of cricket played before colour tele got invented you know. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing: Well you are making it into a unnecessary argument. Universal consensus so called means how a player is rated by champions who were around or by experts. I will doubt anyone ever claimed Lillee was not an all-time great. A guy that Roberts and co. said best ever or someone like Viv greatest ever rates him as best or Sobbers then we hardly can doubt it. He is Godfather of modern fast bowling. Bradman no doubt avg 100 but how would have he fared against Clive Llyod's team or Imran and Wasim or later Wasim and Waqar ?? Sure he wouldn't have done much better than Viv or Lara or Sachin. The cricket was hardly competitive back in days and more then it most teams apart from Aussie and Poms were awful. There is no mention about his famous tussles with Viv here either. Ok, answer quickly was DK not great or in same echelon of Macko Marshall, Wasim, Waqar, Imran, Roberts, Mickey Holding, Steyn ?? 2409:4051:2005:1066:1B5C:9826:C70:69AF (talk) 17:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I didn't bring up the idea of there being a "universal consensus". There's also a massive difference between saying that he's one of the greatest of all time and saying that his contemporaries regarded him as one of the best bowlers they played with. From looking at a few other sports, the idea of caveating things like this seems to be a key. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing Well mate you are deliberately twisting statements to keep this rather tedious argument going on. Further not only his peers all cricket historians, great bowlers rated him as one of the best ever or simply the best. Godfather of modern day fast bowling. Obviously you also got judged by your peers too who rate him as finest ever. An all rounder like Imran Khan said he became a fast bowler after seeing the great man bowl.

I seriously doubt anyone in right sense of mind can dispute greatness of Lillee as an All-time great paceman. Well you even said Viv was not great so your knowledge being hearsay is pretty evident. 2409:4051:2E14:2C11:E8A0:CC92:BA54:86EF (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not twisting anything. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Again : WP:AGF, WP:NPA Spike 'em (talk) 16:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing You are unfortunately not many in their right senses can deny Lillee or Viv as among the finest our game has seen. A guy whom even greatest pace attack admired most hardly needs a certificate from others; also those who have serious issues with him like Miandad and Gavaskad are united in rating him finest fast bowler that's ever lived. 2409:4051:2E14:2C11:E8A0:CC92:BA54:86EF (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

see WP:AGF, WP:NPA. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Like BST, I have a problem with the hyperbole in many cricket articles, where it seems people see one player rated as (one of) the greatest ever and then mirror this in articles about their particulate favourite. I don't doubt that many players rate Lillee as the best they've faced, but things like this, and polls for "greatest ever" always suffer from recentism. It is very difficult to compare players across generations other than by the use of statistics. Spike 'em (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Spike 'em Well; calling or describing players like Lillee, Viv, Greg Chappell, Warne, Sunny, Tendulkar, Marshall, Akram, Imran, Lara, Greenidge, Sobbers as among the finest is far infact a world away from hyperbole.

I am not saying to describe Lillee as greatest ever in the article; I agree this can always be debated because there were guys like Malcolm Marshall, Wasim Akram who were in same echelon as of Dennis but to describe him among the finest ever is hardly a hyperbole or even recentism.

This quote is basless almost saying that Lara was a magician batter of his era does that prevent him from being an all-time great ?? 2409:4051:18C:6366:B81B:D93D:9915:BAE4 (talk) 04:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Your ever expanding list of "greatest ever" players shows the problem: Is Viv one of the greatest? Quite probably. Were Gordon Greenidge or Greg Chappell among the greatest-ever batsmen? I would say not: they were clearly very, very good and among the best of their era, but I wouldn't say they were in the, say, top-25 players ever (this is not to say that is my measure of "greatness", just an example). Spike 'em (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

In his introduction to his list of 100 greatest cricketers in The Times (7 June 1997 - p.159), John Woodcock writes: When asked what he thought of Brian Lara, the West Indian who had relieved him of his record Test score, Sir Garfield Sobers had this to say: "The word great is used too often. You can't call Don Bradman great and David Gower great too. If Gower was great you have to invent a different word for Bradman, who was an all-time great, like Everton Weekes." ... Sobers is right: the word "great" is not used discerningly enough He has many other interesting things to say fwiw (on the subject of greatness versus genius, for example) - it seems to be available via the Wikipedia library these days.

He is right about the hyperbolic nature of greatness - more so now, given the sheer amount of cricket played these days and the nature of it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Spike 'em: Well bit of the topic but Gordon wasn't as celebrated because of Viv's aura surround him; Mickey Holding once said that Only Viv Richards stood between Greenidge and all time greatness In terms of away wins Gordon was most successful of that era; he avg 54 in away wins even better than Viv who too avg 52. Greg was indeed a great player: Viv was rated as fifth greatest cricketer of twentieth century and only batsman of post war era to be in that list. In ESPN Legends of cricket list he was third behind Bradman and Sobbers. If taking into account most dominant pomp of all batters that's lived (4 year span, 3000 runs and 10+ tons) Viv is second to only Bradman. 2409:4051:18C:6366:14F0:7DE3:77DC:74B5 (talk) 15:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing Well John himself said that If I am picking pacemans in my best XI..The first one to make the cut after SF Barness will be Dennis Lillee, the man simply rewrite the fast bowling coach manual; this was said by him during interview with Michael Atherton, Allan Lee and Christopher Martin-Jenkins.

This was their XI Shane Warne capt, Barry Richards, Sunil Gavaskar, Don Bradman, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Ian Botham, Alan Knott, Malcolm Marshall, Dennis Lillee, Muttiah Muralitharan.

This happened in 2001 when Lara and Tendulkar were still around as active players. You simply won't found anyone saying Lillee as not one of the greatest. 2409:4051:18C:6366:14F0:7DE3:77DC:74B5 (talk) 16:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing and Spike 'em: So; now can we finally conclude Dennis as an all-time great ?? Funny enough that we are putting a bowler of Lillee's class into dispute here for being a all-time great and one of best pacemams ever. 2409:4051:2E89:5330:4518:7FC1:3D17:183E (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

per NPOV, no. We need to employ nuance. As you’ve been told numerous times Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I still think the direct quote describing him as the best of his generation has more impact then the wishy-washy "all-time great" which is undefined (how many greats are there?) and I'd happily remove similar statements about other players. Spike 'em (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing: Mentioning him as one of the greats backed up by good quality sources doesn't breach any NPOV case. @Spike 'em: The source doesn't mention him as best of his era; this can be debatble as Andy Roberts too was sublime infact they both goes head to head for best tittle. There are sources which mentions him as an all-time great. You both failed to give sources which states Lillee was not an all-time great. 2409:4051:39B:C2E9:1506:A722:18A5:A5C1 (talk) 13:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I probably won't find any quotes saying Scott Boland (just throwing out a random name of a current player) isn't an all time great either. Wikipedia isn't stating that Lillee is the best of his age, it is reporting that someone else has done so and I guess we'll need to add Andy Roberts to the ever expanding list of all-time greats too then? Spike 'em (talk) 14:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

^ this. My working list of greats includes Grant Stewart - I mean, seriously, his performance in that day-night match at Canterbury had him hooping the ball like a banana; single best bowling performance I've ever seen, so surely that makes him an all-time great. And I've seen Stevo (clearly the greatest of all time btw - on that track in Hobart he'd have had eight before drinks) bowl a lot... Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Spike 'em Well atleast don't poke in if your knowledge of the game is that sub standard. Comparing Boland case to Dennis Lillee ?? I mean really ? This is getting out of laughter zone aa well; Yes Pomies can even claim that Zak Crawley is a better player than Viv Richards.

Anyway; mocking Andy Roberts now ? Do you know who he was ?? He was actually the original leader of the pack; a men from whom Mickey Holding and later Marshall learnt a lot from; Ask Gavaskar, Two Chappel's or Pakistan batters who he was they will give an better idea. When Cliv Llyod was asked to choose between his great bowlers he mentioned a close run between Andy Roberts and Malcolm Marshall despite having Joel Garner, Michael Holding, Collin Croft and even Sylvester Clarke. Ok, Dennis was not an all-time great but how all these fools who played with him or saw the game and some remonwed cricket scholars manage to call him probably the finest ?? I fail to get how spike can manage to call Viv, Lillee as ordinary cricketer one ranked fifth and other sixth in Wisden list. Surprising isn't it ?? 2409:4051:39B:C2E9:DDDB:83B2:E26C:BD5D (talk) 02:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

You a resorting to personal attacks again, and I refuse to engage with you any more. As mentioned above, my future silence is not to be taken as silent consensus. I object to the change that you want to make and Withdrawing from communication with a tendentious or quarrelsome editor does not give that editor consent to do what they like.Spike 'em (talk) 03:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I also object. There clearly isn't consensus to make any changes that you're suggesting. Feel free to take this to anyone else and see what they think of course - make sure you direct them to this discussion so that they can see what they're getting themselves into though. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:11, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Spike 'em To hell with personal attacks it really gets annoying when someone are giving wierd logics for their claim without any source; It's actually both of you who are not giving any subtle reason as why Lillee isn't one of the greatest ever. BST quote John Woodcock and pop in David Gower who isn't really in same class as Viv, SOBBERS or Tendulkar kind of batters. Even John mentioned Lillee as first pick of all great pacemans he saw. If every player that played with or against him rates him finest; commentator or anaylyst like Richie Benaud, Bill Lawry, Jim Laker, Fred Truemen and knowledgable cricket scholars rate him among the greatest ever then there is no reason to not mention it and instead go with this basless quote. You can't simply deny and move on give logical reasons why Lillee isn't a great Fast bowler. 2409:4051:4E8D:FFF8:F97:C794:9C3A:E6CA (talk) 02:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Woodcock didn't see everyone bowl. And what I quoted was from 1997. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing No one in history have seen everyone play but what circket scholars and knowledge person knows through stats and impact on game we judge greatness of players and players like Viv, Lara, DK, Macko fall in top echelon.

You used Woodcock as a scape answer of how he said great is a term toosed up way too often. I don't think any knowledge or sane human will argue that Dennis was not an great or this term is gifted to him. 2409:4051:315:F964:91B5:BB7F:B9CA:4C7B (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

The lead already says what it needs to in this regard. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing This lead is dubious; doesn't mean much in calling someone outstanding or extraordinary bowlers of that era..bit like Warne as a magician or Viv as Smokin Joe... I don't know how bowler of his class can't be described as one of the greatest ever when all cricket historian, his peers and experts like Benaud, Tony Cozier said so. 2409:4051:389:D437:40BD:2596:EBE0:ECCF (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

The lead already says what it needs to in this regard. The quote is much more powerful than anything else we might add. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Square Thing: Well it's rather wierd that a random quote taken from a profile is powerful than these cricketing piece written by a renowned cricket historian 2409:4051:4E89:5010:77E9:EE33:EFFC:9DF7 (talk) 07:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Because a) it says what we need it to say; b) it's caveated appropriately; c) it's a well-established, super-reliable, globally renowned source; d) it's blanched; e) it's not a source prone to hyperbolic nonsense; f) were actually quoting it; g) it's short enough; h) it's concise; i) it reads well. Next? Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

One of WP:DR or WP:DTS needs to happen here. Spike 'em (talk) 09:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing What a wierd way to justify these source. Who rated him as such ?? Any reliable author ?? WP:OR is best way to finish it. 2409:4051:2E07:83CD:D451:3F05:335B:8A3E (talk) 16:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Here is one more source from ESPN Cricinfo which call him perfect fast bowler so describe him as perfect fast bowler according to it ? 2409:4051:2E07:83CD:D451:3F05:335B:8A3E (talk) 16:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Blue Square Thing So now we should go with this new quote that describes DK as perfect fast bowler of his generation; since it is from Cricinfo it won't have any issue.

Fact is this shows how naive you have been in cherry picking some random quotes instead of going with well established consensus among cricket fratinity that DK was among the greatest ever. 2409:4051:4E1A:CA:BF4:D51:EBD8:ACDA (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Dispute resolution has been suggested. I think that's a good idea. Because you're using a dynamic IP address which changes frequently it's impossible to reliably be able to open a user talk page dialogue with you, so you'd better open the DR. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

References