Aussie leg-spinner Shane Warne is the only one in the top 25 still playing. The knights lead the way - Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Garfield Sobers, Sir Jack Hobbs and Sir Vivian Richards.

England's hero, Ian "Beefy" Botham, is down in 16th place, while Steve Waugh, captain of world champions Australia, is not even listed.

So has Wisden got it wrong? Who is your all-time greatest?

Your reaction

You all know that Brian Lara is the greatest ever by miles, so why don't you acknowledge this? No-one else even compares so give him his recognition.
Niall Daly, Ireland

It is surprising Shane Warne is listed above truly many greats in the game of cricket.
Ramakrishna, India

I am unable to comprehend what yardstick was followed while selecting Warne.

Anuvind Bhushan, India/USA

How can Warne be rated above cricketers of the calibre of Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Imran, Hadlee, Marshall and Botham. I am unable to comprehend what yardstick was followed while selecting Warne ahead of the above greats. Wisden I am afraid has got it totally Wrong.
Anuvind Bhushan, India/USA

This list will be a good topic for a never ending debate. Although I personally do not agree with some of the rankings, the names included are some of the greatest to grace the sport of cricket and to see their names included in a list of the "Greatest�." is an honour by itself.
Rajeev Prabhu, USA

The list compiled sees fine. However, Wisden needs to review their criteria and recognise that it is quite difficult to compare players and measure greatness. Shane Warne is brilliant, but I do believe that, Sir Richard Hadlee, Imran Khan,Ian Botham and Sunil Gavaskar should have featured more prominently. Warne may be very good but Steve Waugh does the job when Australia needs it.
Sean , Guyana

Stuart Atkins of England says Warne has almost single-handedly resurrected the spin bowling. Well, only almost - how could he forget the contribution of his own countrymen who have surrendered abjectly to him on more occasions than one can keep track of. And, how about the man who has torn to shreds the resurrector of spin bowling on more occasions than even Warne can keep track of? Need I name him?
Sanjeev Kumar,

Its hard to believe that Sachin's name has not been in, Bradman himself has termed as one of the best. I don't think the panel had better cricketers than Bradman and of course Shane Warne, he should not belong to the top elite.
Premchand, USA

We can not compare the modern cricket achievements with pre commercialisation era. In early days, it was all about the ability and national pride. Right now, it is all about money.
Vijay Ojha, UK

No Wasim Akram and Imran Khan. I think what Imran has contributed for Pakistan's cricket is not comparable. He has given to us the best pace bowlers of modern era. Wasim and Waqar. Wake up Wisden - You should have listed the players fairly!
Gohar Latfi, Pakistan

Sobers is the greatest ever and Bradman follows second to him.

Murphy S, Malaysia

The 100 so-called experts probably rated Bradman as the greatest ever based on the common misperception that cricket is a batsman's game, which actually is not.
To my opinion Sobers is the greatest ever and Bradman follows second to him. And come on, Warne and Richards in the top five?? They should be in Wisden's Top Five Cricketers Ever Played Against England!!
Murphy S, Malaysia

How can they forget players like Wasim Akram, Sunil Gavasker, Kapil Dev and Duleep Mendis and of course Sachin Tendulakar. The above players have made more contribution in the field of cricket and in bringing this game to such a stage as we enjoy now. Shane Warne is of course a good player, but can he be rated above those players?
Sonam Rinchen, Canada

This is a vote about cricket ability. Shane Warne demonstrates unparalleled control and ability for a spin bowler. The spin bowler has not reached such heights since the days of uncovered wickets. If he continues to play out a normal cricket career, he will without doubt, be the world's greatest wicket taker
John Busby, Australia

Shane Warne does not deserve to be in the top five, Hobbs too does not. Hadlee changed the game for New Zealand single-handedly, Lille changed the nature of fast bowling, Akram has been dominant in One-dayers and tests for the last 15 years.
Gavaskar dominated batting, and gave India a new start, winning against the Windies for the first time in '71. How can we forget these achievements. Warne at best has taken wickets against England and New Zealand, there is no doubt he is good, not that good though.
Sumedh Pathak, India

An analogy - When you look at Muhammad Ali in the ring (and out of it for that matter) you say he is the greatest. Similarly, when one watches cricket players one says this guy is great. By this measurement the likes of Thomson, Lillee, Marshall, Khan, Gavaskar, Younis, Tendulker,Greenidge, DeSilva, are also great. Their performances a times defying belief. How can people be so myopic with such an abundance of greatness?
Naveed Ahmed, UK

I can't believe that the inclusion of Shane Warne has caused uproar- he has shown the world what the art of leg spin is about and I am sure he is also responsible for a whole new birth of budding leg spinners.
In response to the system of voting in the top 25 of all time, the demands of characters of the game are changing constantly and it would be impossible to bracket players from different eras in the same team together. We can all argue about what our ideal best XI would be, but how can we possibly tell who are the real greats?
Adam Gowland, England

I find it hard to believe that Sir Richard Hadlee was not included in the top five. He had a Test batting average of around 30 runs and his bowling figures speak for themselves. He was also the first man to get 400 Test wickets. A pretty good argument!
M.D. Doolin, New Zealand

I think Wisden has gone nuts. How can they omit Steve Waugh? I think Kapil Dev should be in the top five as he has taken 434 test wickets without an injury break.
Bommi, India

The new players play more and are expected to perform consistently...you cannot compare different eras.
T Kain, UK

The Wisden system of ranking is outdated and outmoded.

Samir Singh, Singapore

The Wisden system of ranking is outdated and outmoded. Putting Shane Warne before players like Gavaskar, Tendulkar and Border is nonsensical. Tendulkar has pulverised Warne virtually every time they've met on the field. Gavaskar and Border's records speak for themselves.
Samir Singh, Singapore

To exclude Courtney Walsh, Wasim Akram, Sir Richard Hadlee is beyond belief and to include Shane Warne, must be the biggest crime of the millennium.
Christopher, USA

I feel sorry for the list of 100 players. How can the judges forget about the Sri Lankans. Are the Australians paying for the place of Shane Warne in first five?
Costa, Japan

I am astounded that Sir Len Hutton was not much higher on the list.

Keith Crossland, Canada

I am astounded that Sir Len Hutton was not much higher on the list. He was the batting mainstay of a struggling England team which was repeatedly torn apart by Lindwall and Miller. He did the job, won the "ashes", and gave English cricket its dignity back. He also for many years held the world record for highest score in a Test Match. Len definitely rates above Compton.
Keith Crossland, Canada

In my opinion Clive H. Lloyd is one of the most successful captains in the history of test cricket. I really do not understand why his name appeared at that bottom. And why did players like Pakistan's Javed Miandad not even appear.
Kabir Bhuiyan, UK

Ahem! Shane 'Tubby' Warne in the Top 5 cricketers of the century. Apart from anything else, this is a man involved in betting scandals and is not quite what I would call a good sportsman.
Zak McGregor, South Africa

I beg to differ! Shanie might be one hell of a cricketer but he isn't a gentleman. I feel that the only two that Wisden got right was Jack Hobbs and Bradman. Yes I am perplexed with the fact that Beefy was left out of the top ten. He is certainly one of the most charismatic cricketers of all time.
Francis, Canada

There are many great players but in my opinion Wasim Akram is one of the greatest players.
Hassan Babar, United States

Warne's inclusion as the centuries top five cricketers is surprising. I expected Dennis Lillee or Truman to make the list. The other four choices are bang on target.
Atri Guha, USA

Defending Aussies does not come easily to this Englishman ... but hands off Shane Warne!

Damian, UK

Defending Aussies does not come easily to this Englishman ... but hands off Shane Warne! He gets wickets galore on ALL types of pitches and spins the ball prodigiously. Surely the best leg-spinner ever. As for the No 1, it has to be Bradman. He was head and shoulders better than any batsman before, after or during his career.
Damian, UK

Graeme Pollock should have been higher. His career was ended at the age of 26 well before his peak, yet he still had the second best ever test batting average and he didn't play against any weak teams only Australia and England in the 1960's.
Mike H, England

No Graeme Pollock, amazing! He kept the game alive in SA throughout isolation.
Matthew Tattersall, UK

Where is the one and only Wasim Akram, he is much better that Shane Warne will ever be.
Usman, England

This list should not be taken (too) seriously. Lists are there to be discussed and argued over. Most of the cricketers mentioned, played before I was born. We are in a different era (covered wickets, one day internationals, etc)....However, if I was asked to name my top five cricketers of all time, it wouldn't have strayed far from the Wisden list.
Darren Letford, England

Well done with the compiling of this list but I feel the attributes of Shane Warne are somewhat of a sticking point considering he is still playing. My own favourite would have been Abdul Qadir. The man did more for the art of spin than Warne could ever achieve in a lifetime.
Karl London, England

I can't belive all this negative comment about Warne's inclusion in the top 5. He is by far the greatest cricketer of the modern generation - both in terms of his records and his impact upon the game. He has been the spearhead that has seen Australia become the no.1 side in the world - who can forget that spell in the World Cup semi-final. My major gripe with the 5 is the lack of a pace bowler - surely Hadlee, Lillee or Marshall should have been in instead of Hobbs?
Nick Johnson, UK

How could Wisden leave out such greats as Richard Hadlee and Ian Botham, and include Shane Warne?

Adrian Cockett, UK

How could Wisden leave out such greats as Richard Hadlee and Ian Botham, and include Shane Warne? Warne has never succeeded against Asian countries and his achievements have been short-lived.
Adrian Cockett, UK

Of all modern bowlers Hadlee was by far the best (look at his record) and I'd put him ahead of Warne though Warne has almost single-handedly resurrected the spin bowler.
Stuart Atkins, England

Who are the 100 "experts" who participated in this exercise? I would love to know. Do they reflect the modern-day realities of the game's following? Or were they mostly White experts from England, Australia and New Zealand? If the experts were not truly representative of the game, then India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka should launch a parallel top 100 poll. Then maybe a Sri Lankan such as Aravinda de Silva will figure in it.
Sanjay, India

Garfield Sobers could do just about everything so he should really be first.

Craig, Wales

I think the quality we are looking for here is the ability of one player to change the course of matches and win games virtually on his own. All the players mentioned have that ability.
However, Curtly Ambrose's ability to terrorise whole teams, take bursts of wickets whilst conceding only two runs per over, for an out and out quicky remember, must surely put him near the top. But Garfield Sobers could do just about everything so he should really be first.
Craig, Wales

Without doubt the greatest player of all time is Sir Garfield Sobers, batting, bowling, fielding, captain, brill.
Brian Yourell, England

As the comments suggest, there is a great deal of debate. The most contentious entry is Shane Warne. The other four are without doubt right.
Neil HP, England

Everyone so far seems to have queried Warne's inclusion. I don't agree with this. His contribution to the game is significantly greater than his 366 wickets to date. He has changed the whole mood of the game. My query is Sir Jack Hobbs. He should not have been included simply because he was a pioneer. He is not a league above others like Bradman, Sobers and Richards were in their day.
Monuhar Ullah, UK

I look on in disbelief that Ian Botham was only at number 16. If a similar poll were to be done in 50 years time, he will probably be in the top three.
Jeffery Archer, UK

What a rating without the great Wasim Akram's name not falling amongst the top 25 greats! I was shocked to one of the all time greats with almost 800 international wickets to his credit is not amongst the elite band. And not to forget the natural leadership of this cricketing legend. Wisden you could have made a better rating had you included the great deceptive and skilful pace man.
Sanjeep Karki, USA

Sad he was isolated for so long...one MJ Procter would surely have graced this band of elite men...
Kev, Singapore

I am perplexed by the inclusion of Shane Warne.

Sujay Kumar, USA

I am perplexed by the inclusion of Shane Warne. Dominating the hapless English should not be the sole criteria to be recognised as a great bowler. Where are the great Hadlee's, Kapil Dev's, Imran's and Akram's,
Sujay Kumar, USA

What happened to all time greats such as Sir Richard Hadlee, Clive Lloyd and Allen Border.
Suranga Jayasekara, Sri Lanka

Wisden's list I am afraid is not an ideal one. Perhaps the most controversial inclusion is of Shane Warne's in top 5. Can't agree to rank him higher than many greater cricketers of the recent past, e.g. Imran Khan, the man who made such a huge impact on his country's cricketing fortunes. Through his performance and leadership, during the course of a decade, he transformed his team-mates into world-beaters.
Wasim Akhtar Khawaja, Pakistan

Wasim Akram is easily the one of the best fast bowlers of all time....Wisden have no idea what they are talking about. But if they did have a criteria (like oldies first - which is what their list really looks like) then what is Shane Warne doing there?
Fareed, USA

Perhaps the next survey in a hundred years time, a Sri Lankan may get one candidate in the list but probably somewhere between 90 and 99.
Mark Schuller, Australia

Shane over Ambrose and Walsh wake up people!
Glen, Bermuda

This gives me the chance to express my disbelief that Geoff Boycott could have been left out of the top 100. If we had a GB equivalent today we would not suffer quite so many embarassing batting collapses and he's a Yorkshireman.
Duncan, UK

The need to perform and win at any cost, has created some amazing players.

D Beers, NZ

The people on this ranking report are all great cricketers. The fact that in the professional era, the need to perform and win at any cost, has created some amazing players, but also the competition that restricts the overall performance. It is difficult to compare the players of yesteryear, with the current players, and this report does not accurately show the standards of the current teams and players, like Steve & Mark Waugh, Brian Lara, and Courtney Walsh.
D Beers, NZ

Wisden has got it wrong, how could you not include Steve Waugh in the top 100. How many times did he dig Australia out of trouble during the 1990's and also why isn't Alan Border in the top 10?
Shane, UK

Why are Muthiah Muralithran and Aravinda De Siva's name in not there. In fact there are no Sri Lankan cricketers name on the first 100. Sri Lanka were the previous World Cup holders.
Kumar Mahadevan, England

I would say that the top 100 players surely should be dominated by Indian batsman, past and present. This would reflect the very nature of those that set the threshold of championship cricketers
Shimal Thakrar, United Kingdom

Does Wisden REALLY want me to believe that Mr. Warne is a better, more successful cricketer than Clive Lloyd?

Guru Sahajpal, USA

I'm shocked to see Shane Warne on this list. What is Wisden's selection criteria? Is it success? Longevity of a player's career? Or are they simply basing this on players who are popular and have "done things" for the game of cricket? I mean, does Wisden REALLY want me to believe that Mr. Warne is a better, more successful cricketer than Clive Lloyd? Is he a bigger cricket 'role-model' than Sir Richard Hadlee, Sunil Gavaskar, Dennis Lillee, Kapil Dev, Allan Border or Sachin Tendulkar? Sorry, Wisden, but you're wrong.
Guru Sahajpal, USA

Beefy should have been higher - the way he battered the Aussies in '81 is legendary. Agree with the position of Viv - another great entertainer
Mark, England

I am a Sunil Gavaskar fan and so am biased. The mark of greatness is what the player achieves against the greatest challenges. Contrast Gavaskar's achievements against the West Indies fast bowlers of the 70's and 80's and examine Viv Richards' domestic performance against the same bowlers - Gavaskar's record is infinitely superior. On the same theme it would be interesting to look at Warne's record against India/Sri Lanka - those countries who can play spin - with his averages against the West Indies and England - those who can't.
Arnab Banerjee, UK

As highly as I rate Shane Warne's ability I am flummoxed that he figured so prominently in the list whereas the tenacious, match-winning Steve Waugh is nowhere to be seen.
Gary Burchett, Australia

An impossible task to choose the five best cricketers. But no pace bowlers? Surely one of the West Indian greats from the past two decades should have made the top five list.
Rob Cory, England

Wisden has got it right. Not only were they great cricketers, they are great sportsmen and gentlemen.
Chris Klein, UK

How they could omit Sir Richard Hadlee and include Shane Warne is beyond me!
Ali Leghari, Pakistan

The men at the top were not old timers when they played. Looking at it from and English perspective, unlike many of today's cricketers they would have played outside constantly as children, learning great ball skills. They would not have their potential stifled by political correctness, video games or the lack of interest by teachers.
Bob Gardiner, England

Without doubt, my cricketing hero was Ian Botham. I'm not sure England's cricket has been the same since!
Colin, Netherlands