Mohammad Yousuf the best pakistani batsmen ever?

[Lillian Thomson]

As is the case with Viv Richards, people who mock Zaheer Abbas are doing so with their nose in a book instead of actually having watched any cricket. Abbas quite doesn't compare with Javed Miandad or Inzy but he loses nothing in comparison with Yousuf....unless your only source of comparison is a pocket calculator.
Of course people can't help when they were born and can't help not having seen a particular cricketer, but it's probably best to leave out the laughter smilies when not armed with anything but a page from Wisden.

 

[Richard]

And Richard:
Dropped catches, wtf? I know you're talking about the ones when he set the world record, but there weren't as many as you make it look like. And the ones there were would have been anyway because no batsman is going to score 1700 odd runs without luck.

There were, actually, he was dropped - usually pretty early on - in far more than not of his innings in said period. I really CBA with going through it all again, I've already done it 2 or 3 times, but had all chances been taken he'd have scored about a quarter of the total he ended-up getting. Still wouldn't have been a poor year, obviously, but wouldn't have been anything remotely remarkable like the dropped catches made it seem.

 

[Richard]

He was also talking about the highest number of runs in a calender year which you ignored completely. The fact even the likes of Dravid, Kallis and other good players have never come close to scoring 1700 in a year means it was a huge effort from M. Yousuf

Every single one of those players almost certainly would had they received as much good fortune in such a short period of time as Yousuf did.

Heck, Ponting had a similar bout of good fortune in late 2005 and early 2006, it just happened not to coincide exactly with a calender-year. Scoring X runs in calender-years is pretty meaningless anyway - it's about runs per Test, not per year. If someone scores 2000 runs in 12 Tests over 3 years their feat is every bit as notable as someone who scores 2000 in 12 Tests in 1 year.

 

[shortpitched713]

whether or not he is as good as the legends being bandied about in this thread

Ah, I remember one of his cover drives. Knocked down an elephant that had wandered on to the field of play.

 

[Goughy]

Averages, whilst are a good indicator, certainly dont tell the whole story.

Take for example the story of the Kirstens. Peter averages low 30s in Tests and mid-40s in FC. Gary everages mid-40s in Tests and high 40s in FC cricket.

Yet noone that watched or knew either would suggest that Gary was the better batsman.

There are circumstances, stories etc behind averages.

Thats just in one family let alone across a generation or 2 with Yousuf and Abbas

 

[SJS]

Do you think he has become the best pakistani batsmen ever? his average definatly says so. He averages 56.27 in tests and 42.03 in Odi's. He is far ahead of most pakistani batsmens.

Yes of course and the best twenty bowlers in the world EVER , in order of ranking, are :

1. Lohmann, George A
2. Ferris, John J
3. Barnes, William
4. Bates, William
5. Barnes, Sydney F
6. Turner, Charles T B
7. Peel, Robert
8. Briggs, John
9. Ironmonger, Herbert
10. Spofforth, Frederick R
11. Tyson, Frank H
12. Blythe, Colin
13. Wardle, John H
14. Ulyett, George
15. Davidson, Alan K
16. Lockwood, William H
17. Higgs, Kenneth
18. Marshall, Malcolm D
19. Garner, Joel
20. Ambrose, Curtly E L

The best Pakistani bowler is Imran Khan at number 38 and the second best Shabbir Ahmed at 42.

 

[nightprowler10]

I think Javed, Hanif and Inzi in front of him atm

I would maybe even put Zaheer Abbas in that list. I'd put Yousuf in the top 5.

 

[Xuhaib]

I would maybe even put Zaheer Abbas in that list. I'd put Yousuf in the top 5.

People call Mo Yo a FTB but they seem to forget that Zaheer was an even greater FTB, even Imran said that he had never seen a batsman more mentally fragile then Zaheer and he was suspect to quick stuff aswell as indicated by his poor record against WI.

 

[Unattainableguy]

There were, actually, he was dropped - usually pretty early on - in far more than not of his innings in said period. I really CBA with going through it all again, I've already done it 2 or 3 times, but had all chances been taken he'd have scored about a quarter of the total he ended-up getting. Still wouldn't have been a poor year, obviously, but wouldn't have been anything remotely remarkable like the dropped catches made it seem.

I'm pretty sure when B Lara scored 400, he must have been dropped once or twice at least. Same with anyone scoring anything above 100, you usually have one or two dropped catches, if not then for sure some lbw appeals that were out but not given. Kallis on his tour to Pakistan had a lot of catches dropped of his batting as well as some LBW appeals turned down, so I guess if people went by what you're saying, he would be considered lucky to have got those runs which helped SA win the series. Also, I'm sure if the Pakistan team don't drop 4-5 catches every test match, they would win most of those matches rather than losing. So it makes no sense when you say dropped catches of his batting have boosted his batting average unless you can provide me with a stat that clearly proves there have been more dropped catches of his batting than any other batsman.

Every single one of those players almost certainly would had they received as much good fortune in such a short period of time as Yousuf did.

Heck, Ponting had a similar bout of good fortune in late 2005 and early 2006, it just happened not to coincide exactly with a calender-year. Scoring X runs in calender-years is pretty meaningless anyway - it's about runs per Test, not per year. If someone scores 2000 runs in 12 Tests over 3 years their feat is every bit as notable as someone who scores 2000 in 12 Tests in 1 year.

Runs per test, I'm sure his batting average during that period was around 100.



Besides, anyone with batting average of 56 is a lot more than just a decent batsman

 

[Anil]

not even close...ridiculous to bring it up now..

 

[Xuhaib]

This Mo Yo hate over here is baffling. I know his record against SA and Aus is not flash but then even Inzi struggled against these teams and ditto for Miandad w.r.t his record against WI.

 

[White Lightning]

He's a fantastic batsman, but i wouldn't give him the mantle of the best.

Definetaly behind Maindad, and probably 1 or 2 others. he's in the best 5 though.

don't be too fooled by his performances in recent times. it'd be likely a rise in his career like a lot of batsman had but he's likely to go through a rough patch and bring that average down.

 

[White Lightning]

This Mo Yo hate over here is baffling. I know his record against SA and Aus is not flash but then even Inzi struggled against these teams and ditto for Miandad w.r.t his record against WI.

correct

inzy v aus ave 32, sa 31
yousuff v aus ave 29, sa 29
javed v windies ave 29

 

[Lillian Thomson]

This Mo Yo hate over here is baffling. I know his record against SA and Aus is not flash but then even Inzi struggled against these teams and ditto for Miandad w.r.t his record against WI.

No one hates him, the question is in the title, the opinions and explanations are in the thread.

 

[Richard]

This Mo Yo hate over here is baffling. I know his record against SA and Aus is not flash but then even Inzi struggled against these teams and ditto for Miandad w.r.t his record against WI.

Yousuf has struggled against more than just South Africa and Australia - his record against Sri Lanka is abysmal and Javed certainly didn't "struggle" against WI (he did less well against them than others, as anyone would do, but still played several superb knocks). Inzy's relatively poor record against Australia in particular is none too indicative, as circumstances conspired against him more than once.

 

[Richard]

Averages, whilst are a good indicator, certainly dont tell the whole story.

Take for example the story of the Kirstens. Peter averages low 30s in Tests and mid-40s in FC. Gary everages mid-40s in Tests and high 40s in FC cricket.

Yet noone that watched or knew either would suggest that Gary was the better batsman.

There are circumstances, stories etc behind averages.

Thats just in one family let alone across a generation or 2 with Yousuf and Abbas

Averages are nothing without context, and the fact that Peter had no Test career at a "normal" cricketing age says it all.

Mind, you do need to be careful about calling someone the better\worse batsman because of how "natural" they look. Gary Kirsten suffers in this respect more than most.

 

[Richard]

I'm pretty sure when B Lara scored 400, he must have been dropped once or twice at least.

Nope.

Same with anyone scoring anything above 100, you usually have one or two dropped catches, if not then for sure some lbw appeals that were out but not given.

Rubbish. It does happen, and when it does said innings obviously should have ended at said chance. But chanceless centuries are perfectly common - you aren't going to get many centuries against decent catching units unless they're chanceless ones.

Kallis on his tour to Pakistan had a lot of catches dropped of his batting as well as some LBW appeals turned down, so I guess if people went by what you're saying, he would be considered lucky to have got those runs which helped SA win the series.

Yep, obviously.

Also, I'm sure if the Pakistan team don't drop 4-5 catches every test match, they would win most of those matches rather than losing.

Probably.

So it makes no sense when you say dropped catches of his batting have boosted his batting average unless you can provide me with a stat that clearly proves there have been more dropped catches of his batting than any other batsman.

I have, 3 or 4 times. I'm not doing it all over again.

Runs per test, I'm sure his batting average during that period was around 100.

It was, 105 IIRR. And on first-chance average it was IIRR 50 or so at best.

Besides, anyone with batting average of 56 is a lot more than just a decent batsman

Nope. An overall career average usually tells you little about a batsman. You need far, far more than that.

 

[White Lightning]

you can go on about chances all you want, but at the end of the day the fielding side has to take them...

it's a tad ambigious...

1 - do you take into account half chances, is a ball that skims the finger tips of a fieldsmen who was never going to catch it, considered just as good as chance as a sitter in mid on..

2 - surely then you have to ignore inning where a batsman copped a rotten lbw or caught behind decision... and you have no idea how many more runs that batsman would've gone on to make the innings.

3 - you can't really make judgement until you watch every innings ever, which is quite impossible.

4 - do we extend those chances to lbw decisions which are still in a lot of cases a matter of opinion. i wouldn't trust hawk eye as far as i could throw it sometimes.

5 - what about run outs pre televesion umpire days??

 

[Richard]

you can go on about chances all you want, but at the end of the day the fielding side has to take them...

Obviously - the point is cricket would be far better if they were all taken.

1 - do you take into account half chances, is a ball that skims the finger tips of a fieldsmen who was never going to catch it, considered just as good as chance as a sitter in mid on..

No such thing as a half-chance - something either should be caught or it shouldn't. If something skims the fingers it's clearly got zero realistic likelihood of being caught. It's not a chance.

2 - surely then you have to ignore inning where a batsman copped a rotten lbw or caught behind decision... and you have no idea how many more runs that batsman would've gone on to make the innings.

No, you just count it as a not-out.

3 - you can't really make judgement until you watch every innings ever, which is quite impossible.

Erm, why not? What happened in 1922 doesn't change what's happening presently.

4 - do we extend those chances to lbw decisions which are still in a lot of cases a matter of opinion. i wouldn't trust hawk eye as far as i could throw it sometimes.

An lbw that is clearly out is clearly out; one that's 50\50 or less is not-out, obviously. Pretty well every lbw doesn't even need a HawkEye.

5 - what about run outs pre televesion umpire days??

Where you can tell, tell; where you can't, there's little that can be done.

 

[White Lightning]

Erm, why not? What happened in 1922 doesn't change what's happening presently.

fair enough on your others points, personally i couldn't be bothered with it as its all jut a bit too much for me, but i think you've missed the point on this one.

even comparing today's batsman against each other, if you want to take into account chances given you still have to watch everything... which would required far too much time in front of the box.