Biggest sports star ever?

[microcrayfish]

Not. You can't even state that Gretzky was better than Lemieux. Had Lemieux not had back problems

Those guys don't even come close. The man is Don Bradman. Cricket may not be mainstream in America but it ranks only behind soccer in terms of world wide following and Bradman dominated like no other.

Bradman's career batting average was 99.94 and the next best is 60.97. That's like Jordan averaging 50 ppg or Woods winning 30 majors. You can argue who's the best in other sports, Jack or Tiger?, Ali or Sugar Ray Robinson?, Jordan or a whole bunch of guys? But if you ask any cricket fan who the best ever was it'll be Bradman every time.

[Paulbee]

Those guys don't even come close. The man is Don Bradman. Cricket may not be mainstream in America but it ranks only behind soccer in terms of world wide following and Bradman dominated like no other.

Well he did more damage to England than the Luftwaffe. Up there with the defining greats from his sport. Probably little else you can hope for in any sport. Kids growing up wanting to be Ali or Tiger or Jordan or Don, to name just a few.

[ctyankee]

Those guys don't even come close. The man is Don Bradman. Cricket may not be mainstream in America but it ranks only behind soccer in terms of world wide following and Bradman dominated like no other.

Oh, please. Big sports stars are known by people that NEVER played the sport. Cricket ... great world wide following? That's a joke as the attached map shows.

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-cricket-map.htm

[sean_miller]

Oh, please. Big sports stars are known by people that NEVER played the sport. Cricket ... great world wide following? That's a joke as the attached map shows.

In spite of the topic title, his post was in reponse to iacas' response to another post - related to players who dominated their sport. I don't claim to know anything about cricket (other than what I've seen on TV - in the few moments before I changed the channel) so I'll have to take his word that Don Bradman was an awesome batsman (sp?).

Whether Wayne Gretzky (the record book doesn't lie - much), Mario Lemieux (most raw talent - electrifying goals see 1987 Canada Cup), Nick Lidstrom, Bobby Orr, Guy Lafleur, Ken Dryden, Gordie Howe, Bobby or Brett Hull, Maurice Richard, or even for one glorious rookie year - The Finnish Flash: Teemu Selanne, dominated NHL hockey doesn't matter - most non-hockey fans don't consider these to be household names - and besides the KLM line, Fetisov and others The Rusian Red Army team were the most dominant hockey players in my lifetime. Ask an Aussie his favourite player from this list: Ovie, Sid, Geno, Anze, Zach, Kane or Toews The answer will be something along the lines of, "What the F are you talking about?" Ask his opinion on Kane's pre-season taxi ride in Buffalo - WTF?

[doof_dizzler]

Some good points made in this thread.

I'd say that Pele, Ali and Jordan are the biggest sports stars of the last 50 years. in the previous half century: Bobby Jones, Babe Ruth, Jesse Owens, Jack Dempsey and Walter Hagen

[PiustheDrGolf]

I just read an article about Today's top athlete.
Here is the link:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nascar/blog/...=nascar,204180

[Lefty-Golfer]

Oh, please. Big sports stars are known by people that NEVER played the sport. Cricket ... great world wide following? That's a joke as the attached map shows.

The map shows the US listed as Cricket playing associate?? not sure what that means but i know that not many people here even know what it is...some kind of baseball lite where you can bat for days and foul balls are fair.

[Acropo]

Oh, please. Big sports stars are known by people that NEVER played the sport. Cricket ... great world wide following? That's a joke as the attached map shows.

In terms of area, your point is reasonable but you missed out something - population.

USA - 307 million (according to the CIA - but then, are they allowed to undertake internal stuff like population census?? ) Canada - 33.5 million. So 340 million pretty much covers the (gridiron) football, hockey, basketball and baseball-loving/playing/following world. Major cricket playing nations: India - 1.16 Billion Pakistan - 176 million Bangladesh - 156 million England (Not UK/British Isles) - 50 million S Africa - 49 million Australia - 25 million Sri Lanka - 21 million Total: heck of a lot. The countries of the West Indies, Wales, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, Netherlands, etc, etc - say another 50 million. Or even miss them out completely. The point is, although cricket isn't watched in the US, cricket IS a big global sport, played in countries that account for around 1/3rd of the world's population, far, far more people than American football,baseball, hockey, etc. The American sports are followed/watched by by less than one-tenth. So Don Bradman is a big name - a very big name. So are Satchin Tendulkar, Clive Lloyd, Viv Richards, Ian Botham, Wasim Akram, Imran Khan and others too numerous to mention and who many responders here will never have heard of - but that does NOT mean they aren't big.

Absolutely spot on - I have no more idea who these people are, than others have of the cricketers' list. And I haven't even BEEN to Australia.

The Don is a big name - but I will stick by the three I mentioned earlier: Ali, Pele and Tiger. Ali is first, the others currently probably equal second - Ali simply transcends everything. There may be people who have heard of him and recognise him who don't even know he was a boxer. (Although I take everyone's word that Michael Jordan is very big/good, I don't think he makes the top three, any more than Bradman does. But don't feel too bad - two out my top three are American!)

[ctyankee]

In terms of area, your point is reasonable but you missed out something - population.

YOU brought up cricket ranking "only behind soccer in terms of world wide following." Now, it's changed to American sports ... funny how that happens ... well that's wrong too but it's not the topic at hand.

Field Hockey is bigger than cricket world-wide for Pete's sake AND is the national sport of India and is an Olympic sport. So, cricket is behind field hockey in world importance as a sport. Any further discussion necessary?

[sean_miller]

YOU brought up cricket ranking "only behind soccer in terms of world wide following." Now, it's changed to American sports ... funny how that happens ... well that's wrong too but it's not the topic at hand.

So basketball is only played by the US and Canada now? Don't tell the other continents - Canada will have a guaranteed silver in London in 2012. Woot!!

[Acropo]

YOU brought up cricket ranking "only behind soccer in terms of world wide following." Now, it's changed to American sports ... funny how that happens ... well that's wrong too but it's not the topic at hand.

Look at the numbers - football (soccer) is way, way out in front because it's played pretty much everywhere to International/world class standards, except in the Vatican City. Oh, and the US and Canada.

Field Hockey is bigger than cricket world-wide for Pete's sake

I think you are having a laugh. Really, you must be.

If you truly are serious, take the time to compare the size of the crowd at a cricket Test match (International, between different countries) and the crowd at a field hockey match in India or Pakistan, where they really are crazy about it. Cricket: there will be at least 100,000 inside the ground (assuming it's a smallish one) and anything from 100,000 to 1,000,000 in the streets outside, listening to the commentaries on their radios but wanting to be within sight of the ground. And the noise when India get a wicket - it sweeps from the middle up the stands and rolls across the city streets like a wave, a tsunami of noise. It's so intense you experience it like a physical hit. And an international hockey match? Doesn't compare, really.

AND is the national sport of India and is an Olympic sport. So, cricket is behind field hockey in world importance as a sport. Any further discussion necessary?

Not until you do a bit more research, no.

The point is that, if you're looking for the 'greatest sports star ever', you have to look beyond the back yard and national boundaries. It was suggested that Don Bradman is huge: he is, because the sport he played is so big around the world. But it isn't big in the States - even The Don's supporters accept that, and accept that he won't be in the top three. But to suggest that hockey players are known worldwide is, well, risible - sorry, but it's true. 'The greatest star' has to be known beyond their sport and beyond their own national boundaries. That's why Ali, Pele and Tiger, for me.

[iacas]

Look at the numbers - football (soccer) is way, way out in front because it's played pretty much everywhere to International/world class standards, except in the Vatican City. Oh, and the US and Canada.

I'm being slightly facetious here... but not entirely...

Popularity is a lousy way to measure this type of thing. What percentage of people in Brazil even have televisions or newspapers? Or Colombia? There's more to it than just "popularity." There's got to be a component for an informed public, too. Non-golfers recognize Tiger Woods. A lot of people who play soccer might not identify Maradona or Zidane.

[Acropo]

There's more to it than just "popularity." There's got to be a component for an informed public, too. Non-golfers recognize Tiger Woods. A lot of people who play soccer might not identify Maradona or Zidane.

No, not facetious in my book. You're right - people who don't play golf recognise Tiger; people who don't box recognise Ali; people who don't play football (soccer) recognise Pele. That's the point: they may be sports stars but they transcend their sport.

On the other hand, people who don't play (ice) hockey, baseball, (American) football, cricket, etc have no idea who these various stars of their games are. They may be very good but they are not in the same league as Ali, Tiger and Pele. In my most humble opinion, of course! And if I have to narrow it down to one - it's Ali. Who else is recognised just by that 'surname', a name that is so common? Can you name anyone who would be recognised by the name Smith, or Davies, or Schmidt, Singh, Patel, Ng, whatever? (Possible exception - Senna)

[kennay92]

I'm being slightly facetious here... but not entirely...

i only know two international/former international soccer players. beckham and ronhaldino (however you spell it)

[doof_dizzler]

There seems to be a lot of willful ignorance of history and the rest of the world. Reading this thread makes us come across as a bunch of xenophobic 20 year olds!

[sean_miller]

There seems to be a lot of willful ignorance of history and the rest of the world. Reading this thread makes us come across as a bunch of xenophobic 20 year olds!

Can I use this generalization to critique your "Calgary Stampeders v. the Edmonton Eskimos" as an example of the greatest rivalries in the world of sports?

[GolfBallin2395]

I agree that Tiger Woods is one of them, but Pele is too because soccer is the biggest sport that all country's play.

[michaeljames92]

Field Hockey is the national sport of india, Cricket is most popular. Wiki is your friend.
In terms of basketball it is pretty popular in europe. When arguing this point of most popular sportsperson, you have to distinguish between well known faces and the sports star who more people have heard of. I spose you could say Yao Ming since there are like 1.6 billion chinese and as many have done here it is assumed the whole country knows him.

I think Ali, Jordan are good guesses, but surely a football/soccer name would have to win since it's huge popularity?