Not winning tournaments because he was against 3 better players doesn’t make someone a great. Boro would be top of the league if we didn’t have 3 better sides in the league by that logic
Hamilton won at least 2 championships without the best car, possibly 3
Interesting although unsurprising that you are only the second poster to list Froome on this thread and yet his achievements are unprecedented for a Brit. Only one of three men in history to hold all three Grand Tours concurrently.Btw I added the non mechanical clause as other wise the winner is froome no question. To win one TDF is insane for anyone let alone a Brit but he is on another planet.
Not only is Rooney not United’s best ever player, but a lot of the time he wasn’t even their best player at the time (until they stopped winning trophies).This has been mentioned previously the question was greatest. N ot sure how we are interpreting that but Rooney isn't even man utd greatest ever player. Kenny Dalglish was twice the player
edit I know dalglish didnt play for united.
I see your point and if senna was british we wouldn't have this thread cos we would all agree. Except he was be disqualified too.Don‘t think Boro are playing against the 3 greatest teams of all time.
Murray only failed to win more because of the 3 greatest players of all time.
How many greats of all time did Hamilton drive against win winning them 2/3 championships.
No I'm saying any sport has equipment that has advantages for the user, you have ruled out other sportsmen and women for using sporting equipment for being mechanical assisted in some way. If Fred Perry had the full advantage of modern materials and sport science would he have been better? Probably?Are you really saying Murray has an unfair advantage over his opponent through his racket ???
Despite most players having basically the same one
You can only be judged against what era you play in, no way of knowing how he would have done if he played 20 years before, but you can’t be classed as a great in any sport if you won barely anything because 3 better players were alive at the same time.Don‘t think Boro are playing against the 3 greatest teams of all time.
Murray only failed to win more because of the 3 greatest players of all time.
How many greats of all time did Hamilton drive against win winning them 2/3 championships.
Exactly it’s phenomenal what he’s done he is by far the greatest that’s not even a debate for me.Interesting although unsurprising that you are only the second poster to list Froome on this thread and yet his achievements are unprecedented for a Brit. Only one of three men in history to hold all three Grand Tours concurrently.
Bobby Charlton won more, and for many of us oldies was a better player.Rooney won everything at club level and had huge success with England, he has to be considered. Fury has won the lot in his sport
F1 definitely isn’t just about the car, if that was the case anyone could do it
I don't think that's what Jedi has done. If it were my thread I would have said you have to get sweaty and out of puff for it to be a sport.No I'm saying any sport has equipment that has advantages for the user, you have ruled out other sportsmen and women for using sporting equipment for being mechanical assisted in some way. If Fred Perry had the full advantage of modern materials and sport science would he have been better? Probably?
Like I said, you seem to have applied a set of arbitrary rules that make selecting a winner heavily focused in certain directions.
Surely the 'Greatest British Sportsman' should be one who has dominated his/her sport, for a long time, winning multiple world ranked titles/competitions?
They shouldn't need any caveats saying 'but there were three world class opponents better than them' so they are really are a true great other than those three.
I like him, he's a great sportsman and a great advert for grit and determination, not giving up etc.
But like I said, you have to try quite hard to rule out our multiple world champions in various other fields, to narrow it down to a set of criteria where Andy Murray is the greatest British sportsman of all time.
IMO
Do you think Andy Murray could make a tennis ball or racquet?I see your point and if senna was british we wouldn't have this thread cos we would all agree. Except he was be disqualified too.
My gripe with F1 is, and I have said this, without a huge backup team the drivers would be useless. Most drivers can't change a clutch never mind rebuild an engine. It is, more than any other sport a team game.
It's like arguing about who is the best team in Scotland. There's only two in it generally, and a very good reason for it.I mean it just IS Lewis Hamilton isn't it? The only people who can argue against him are arguing on a technicality "iT's tHe CaR' and not able to argue against his ability. That tells you something
You're right, he was crap. I prefer Andrew Castle.So on the handful of occasions he was temporarily ranked #1, that meant he was “dominating” the sport? He never came close to dominating the sport.
Why have you started a thread asking if Andy Murray is the greatest ever British sportsman then?Exactly it’s phenomenal what he’s done he is by far the greatest that’s not even a debate for me.
Odd retort. So are you claiming he DID dominate tennis?You're right, he was crap. I prefer Andrew Castle.
Oooh I see what you did there. It's not the same thing, and I am sure you know that.Do you think Andy Murray could make a tennis ball or racquet?
Peaty is as great shout as well.Bobby Charlton won more, and for many of us oldies was a better player.
Adam Peaty must take some beating in the modern era. 3 Olympic golds, 8 world championships