The ICC does it again!

I have been having a whale of a time since the ICC released its infamous list of 100 all-time great cricketers though I am yet to go through the complete work with a fine comb. More than the list, it is the reaction that has kept me engaged.

Before going any further let me admit that I'm a compulsive 'list maker'. At school, it was a favourite pastime and later in life I got well paid to do it professionally. And even now, after almost two decades in the trade, I cannot resist the temptation of making a list of my favourite team just before a big event.

In the process, I have been accused of bias, blamed of being unpatriotic and even my mental balance has been questioned from time to time, like when I included the maverick leg-spinner B S Chandrasekhar in my favourite one-day team during my apprenticeship at a local newspaper in Bangalore in the mid 80s.

Since then I have come across thousands of 'lists' involving many sports, entertainment (particularly films) and even politics (mainly involving George W Bush). But I concede nothing has matched the ICC list for glaring anomalies and lack of plain and simple logic.

And this is not just because India's greatest cricketer Sachin Tendulkar is ranked a lowly 26th much to the annoyance of a billion cricket-mad fans.

There are far too many dots in the list which when joined does not make a comprehensive picture or provoke a sensible debate. The deeper you dig the greater the anomalies. Take for example all the modern day greats and highest run getters in the history of the game - Steve Waugh, Allan Border and Brian Lara apart from Tendulkar.

None of them are rated above Matthew Hayden who completes the top 10 - 18 places above Waugh and 16 above Walter Hammond. Even the most destructive batsmen of two different eras - Javed Miandad and Virender Sehwag - are allotted 34th and 51st positions respectively in a list headed obviously by Don Bradman.

At another level, Sunil Gavaskar at number 20 maybe acceptable for the sheer number of runs and centuries he scored against the fearsome West Indies attacks, but the moment you see Mike Hussey, Mohammad Yousuf and Doug Walters above him, the whole exercise seems irrational. Even Bradman's greatest rival for batting supremacy, Hammond, is ranked a low 27, six slots below another great George Headley.

The bowling list is no less contentious or controversial. The greatest spinner of all time Shane Warne comes in at 15 and the greatest left-arm pacer Wasim Akram at 59. In between this wide chasm come two names, Dennis Lillee at 34 and Shoaib Akhtar at 45.

By now it must be clear that the whole exercise seems like a great mishap and grossly miscalculated. It's true that such lists never win universal and unanimous acclaim. But if it even manages to spark a lively and rational debate or present an attractive reference point for future ratings and rankings, it would be worthwhile.

Unfortunately, the ICC list, like many other similar works, falls terribly short in all aspects.

The rankings in tennis, for instance, became a joke some time ago when Amelie Mauresmo was given the top slot even though she was yet to win a Grand Slam. In soccer, teams are downgraded even though they have not played any international matches during the period under review. Golf rankings too have their own shortcomings.

But the ICC have taken the rankings game to new heights in hilarity. As one report put it they are a 'sham of a mockery of a charade'.

The ICC's damage control exercise has not helped matters either. "This does not necessarily mean he (Hayden) is the 10th-best Test batsman or 18th-best ODI batsman in the history of the game. The rankings give an indication of how players peaked during their careers but do not give a full picture of those players' level of consistency or longevity in the game," the ICC said a day after the rankings were released.

But by then, I'm afraid, it was too late. However, I'm still keen to go through the full list and see for myself if the names Andy Ganteaume and Eric Hollies figure anywhere.

Ganteaume is the man who has a better Test average than Bradman - the wicket-keeper batsman played just one Test for West Indies and scored 112. Hollies, of course, is the famous leg-spinner who bowled Bradman for his farewell second-ball duck and cut his average to a more romantic 99.94.

Keep in touch for an update or make your own 'list'.