Keith Miller v Sir Garry Sobers

[BhupinderSingh]

The pool of "hardcore Sobers fans" includes virtually all the players and journalists who saw him play. I listed some of them in an earlier post:

John Arlott, Trevor Bailey, Bishan Bedi, Dickie Bird, Don Bradman, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, Denis Compton, Colin Cowdrey, Ted Dexter, Jack Fingleton, Tom Graveney, Charlie Griffith, Wes Hall, Ray Illingworth, Brian Johnston, Alan Knott, Jim Laker, Dennis Lillee, Clive Lloyd, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Hanif Mohammed, Barry Richards, John Snow, E.W.Swanton, Derek Underwood, Clyde Walcott, Peter Walker, Everton Weekes, Ian Wooldridge.

If we have to ignore the testimony of these experts, how can we evaluate Sobers' bowling using anything other than the crudest of statistics?

What Sanga said.Personally,I rate players more on basis of stats and less on opinions od others.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Why does he have to? He made it clear it was an assumption and if you were paying attention Perm's point was not in favour of Sobers at all.



That's debatable. There were many instances where Sobers performed with bat and ball. Dare I say, more than Imran whose form with both disciplines weren't really simultaneous to the best of my memory. His talent with the bat is also usually overstated as well. He, unlike a Miller, was not a middle-order batsmen for most his career.

If you are going to argue that Imran made less 100 runs and 5 wickets in same match than Sobers or anything simiular,then thats not fair because Imran played just 1.4 innings per test whereas Sobers played 1.7 innings per test.Thats not due to any flaw or bad performances by Imran and therefore such a claim stands no leg.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Of course yes. But rather than having a good bowler who could bat at #8, I would go for a out and out fast bowler / spinner who will destroy a side.

And Imran was such type of bowler and would easily get into my alltime XI on bowling alone.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

If you are going to argue that Imran made less 100 runs and 5 wickets in same match than Sobers or anything simiular,then thats not fair because Imran played just 1.4 innings per test whereas Sobers played 1.7 innings per test.Thats not due to any flaw or bad performances by Imran and therefore such a claim stands no leg.

He batted less because for the first half of his career there was nothing to suggest that he was going to be anything better than a number 7 or 8.

 

[Ikki]

It could have simply meant that it was THAT difficult at that time to get wickets at a good strike rate that even the best got only 300.... That is where relative comparisons come in...

No because the strike rates of the time were quite lower than what Sobers achieved. That's the relative comparison: he struck much slower than the norm.

He just played that much longer than everybody else at the time. That's the biggest reason for his accumulation of wickets.

 

[Ikki]

Not going to comment on the actual debate, but this statement seems a little curious


Everyone in the team is a batsman, not an all-rounder, because they have to bat.:
So, McGrath is a batsman. He has to bat.

Only a few, mostly one, will be an all-rounder who is also asked to bowl a fair share of overs.
So, McGrath, who is going to bowl a fair share of overs is an all-rounder?

May be that came out wrong?

No, I think the converse applies to McGrath. Whereas bowling you are restricted to how many overs you bowl by how good you are - because your side lets you bowl more or less - in batting it is upto how good you are that you stay on to bat. Just because someone bats and bowls doesn't make them an all-rounder. You'd have to be quite proficient at your weaker discipline to be regarded as an all-rounder. Let's not muddy the waters with the definition. McGrath is not an all-rounder.

But PS. I think you're right, my wording was off.

 

[Migara]

And Imran was such type of bowler and would easily get into my alltime XI on bowling alone.

But still, Marshall, Hadlee and Barnes are better seamers than him.

 

[Ikki]

Of course yes. But rather than having a good bowler who could bat at #8, I would go for a out and out fast bowler / spinner who will destroy a side.

Miller would probably bat higher than number 8. Anything from 5-7 he is quite suitable for.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Richards
Miller
Sobers
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee

I can see an argument to not even have an all-rounder. But Miller is really as good as any other spinner or fast bowler you could replace him with and with the kind of batting no other bowler, except Botham (IMO), can get close to.

But to have 5 bowlers? Don't think it's necessary - in fact, I'd say it's not a wise decision - but to each their own.

 

[Ikki]

If you are going to argue that Imran made less 100 runs and 5 wickets in same match than Sobers or anything simiular,then thats not fair because Imran played just 1.4 innings per test whereas Sobers played 1.7 innings per test.Thats not due to any flaw or bad performances by Imran and therefore such a claim stands no leg.

Sobers' peak period coincides with him both performing with bat and ball. I don't necessarily mean they took x wickets and made x runs in the same match. Imran, AFAIR, achieved most of his feats separately. Imran was a greater bowler at one stage and then he stopped bowling much and did well batting.

As for Miller, he was not only excellent at both feats during the same time, he did it for half his career. Miller was a full-fledged all-rounder from day 1.

 

[Migara]

Miller would probably bat higher than number 8. Anything from 5-7 he is quite suitable for.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Richards
Miller
Sobers
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee

I can see an argument to not even have an all-rounder. But Miller is really as good as any other spinner or fast bowler you could replace him with and with the kind of batting no other bowler, except Botham (IMO), can get close to.

But to have 5 bowlers? Don't think it's necessary - in fact, I'd say it's not a wise decision - but to each their own.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Richards
Miller
Sobers - Sobers > Miller as a batsman. So he'll be #5.
Gilchrist - Gilchrist > Miller as a batsman.
Hadlee -
Marshall -
Warne
Lillee

Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Lillee - All these bowlers are better than Miller. When you have these four, why bother to bowl Miller? The same question you asked, why you would allow to bowl Sobers in such a line up? Question still remains unanswered,

Finally, with that bowling line up, get Kallis in to the team. He's better tha Miller with the bat.

Now you'll see that in All time XI Miller will not have a batting position above #8. And he'll not have a place in the bowling line up as well.
But his competitors, Sobers, gets in by merit of batting, Imran and Hadlee by merit of bowling.

 

[Ikki]

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Richards
Miller
Sobers - Sobers > Miller as a batsman. So he'll be #5.
Gilchrist - Gilchrist > Miller as a batsman.
Hadlee -
Marshall -
Warne
Lillee

Um, you obviously don't know that Sobers is a #6 and Miller generally a #5. Also, Gilchrist can do at #7 what he could do at #6 whereas the opposite may not be true of Miller. Gilchrist was a better batsman than many of the Australian team he played for, but still batted #7.

Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Lillee - All these bowlers are better than Miller. When you have these four, why bother to bowl Miller? The same question you asked, why you would allow to bowl Sobers in such a line up? Question still remains unanswered,

No it doesn't. If you bowl neither because you think neither are good enough, then you ARE NOT picking an all-rounder, are you? That's the point. If you ARE picking an all-rounder then Miller is clearly the better choice. If you AREN'T then neither are. TBH with you, what Miller probably lacks to those you think he is a poorer bowler than, he surely makes it up with his batting.

Finally, with that bowling line up, get Kallis in to the team. He's better tha Miller with the bat.

But is he better than Miller at batting AND bowling? No.

Now you'll see that in All time XI Miller will not have a batting position above #8. And he'll not have a place in the bowling line up as well.
But his competitors, Sobers, gets in by merit of batting, Imran and Hadlee by merit of bowling.

You're wrong my friend. You clearly have not thought about this properly. Look at my reply and respond again.

 

[Migara]

Um, you obviously don't know that Sobers is a #6 and Miller generally a #5. Also, Gilchrist can do at #7 what he could do at #6 whereas the opposite may not be true of Miller. Gilchrist was a better batsman than many of the Australian team he played for, but still batted #7.

Don't try to escape from the question, If Miller is used as #5, I would use Tendulkar there. Far, Far superior batsman.

 

[Ikki]

Don't try to escape from the question, If Miller is used as #5, I would use Tendulkar there. Far, Far superior batsman.

LOL, you keep missing the point. So if you are using a specialist batsman instead of Miller then you ARE NOT using an all-rounder. You are picking 7 specialist batsmen and 4 specialist bowlers. That's fair enough.

But if you DO want an all-rounder, then it's a different ball of wax.

 

[Migara]

No it doesn't. If you bowl neither because you think neither are good enough, then you ARE NOT picking an all-rounder, are you? That's the point. If you ARE picking an all-rounder then Miller is clearly the better choice. If you AREN'T then neither are. TBH with you, what Miller probably lacks to those you think he is a poorer bowler than, he surely makes it up with his batting.

Got ya, Sobers is doing the exact same.

Sobers - Bat - 56, Bowl - 34
Miller - Bat - 37, Bowl - 22

Batting and bowling average over test cricket is around 29 - 30. Let's use 30.

Sobers will score 26 more than a ordinary batsman and will give 4 than an orinary bowler.

Miller its 7 and -8.

Sobers, 26 - 4 = +22
Miller, 7 - (-8) = + 15

Decide on who'll be making uo their weaker side more.

 

[Migara]

LOL, you keep missing the point. So if you are using a specialist batsman instead of Miller then you ARE NOT using an all-rounder. You are picking 7 specialist batsmen and 4 specialist bowlers. That's fair enough.

But if you DO want an all-rounder, then it's a different ball of wax.

Now here's the catch. The all rounder's job can be either batting oriented or bowling oriented. If I wanted a batting all rouder, I'd go for Kallis or Sobers. If I wanted a bowling one, I'll go for Imran or Hadlee. Or go for Botham at his peak. The balance of the team decides what is all rounders predominant duty.

 

[Ikki]

Got ya, Sobers is doing the exact same.

Sobers - Bat - 56, Bowl - 34
Miller - Bat - 37, Bowl - 22

Batting and bowling average over test cricket is around 29 - 30. Let's use 30.

Sobers will score 26 more than a ordinary batsman and will give 4 than an orinary bowler.

Miller its 7 and -8.

Sobers, 26 - 4 = +22
Miller, 7 - (-8) = + 15

Decide on who'll be making uo their weaker side more.

No, he doesn't. Not at all; what does the average bowling average matter here?

Here, look at this:

Per Inning Performance:

Batting
Sobers: 50 runs
Miller: 34 runs

Bowling
Sobers: 1.5 wickets for 51 runs and 138 balls
Miller: 1.8 wickets for 41 runs and 111 balls

Difference: 16 runs or 0.3 wickets 10 less runs and 27 less balls conceded.

The difference between their bowling and batting is quite large and gets larger the more Sobers bowls. Which is the point - why let him bowl at all...

 

[Ikki]

Now here's the catch. The all rounder's job can be either batting oriented or bowling oriented. If I wanted a batting all rouder, I'd go for Kallis or Sobers. If I wanted a bowling one, I'll go for Imran or Hadlee. Or go for Botham at his peak. The balance of the team decides what is all rounders predominant duty.

LOL, are you thinking about this before you push the post button?

There is a huge difference when picking a bowling all-rounder or a batting all-rounder in an all-time side.

The four bowlers themselves are capable of bowling the whole load by themselves. To give any overs to Sobers or Kallis is to actually disadvantage your side. Bowling, unlike batting, is optional. You can choose to put the ball in the hand of a player, but the bat will always be there.

That's why Miller walks in, in an all-time team it is balanced. In teams where they need batsmen more than bowlers or in teams where they need bowlers more than batsmen your point is relative.

 

[Migara]

Per Inning Performance:

Batting
Sobers: 50 runs
Miller: 34 runs

Bowling
Sobers: 1.5 wickets for 51 runs and 138 balls
Miller: 1.8 wickets for 41 runs and 111 balls

Difference: 16 runs or 0.3 wickets 10 less runs and 27 less balls conceded.

Let's look at like this.

Runs that are scored more by Sobers than a normal player = 54 - 30 = 24 (Considered not outs give an equal cance to reduce and increae the score. So, (57.8 + 50.2) / 2 taken as runs per outing)
Runs he concedes more = (34 - 30) * 1.5 = 6

Net efefct = 24 - 6 = 18

Runs scored more by Miller = 35.5 - 30 = 5.5
Runs less conceded by Miller = (30 - 23) * 1. 8 = 12.6

Net effect = 5.5 + 12.6 = 18.1

Pretty damn close. I first said that due to unhelpful conditions Sobers' Average of 34 will be the best who are averaging 34. Considering that, if he bowled on helpful tracks, Sobers would have lowered his average still more

EDIT: I just did it for Imran Khan and Hadlee as well.

Imran; (34 - 30) + (30 - 22.8) * 2.55 = 4 + 18.4 = 22.4
Hadlee, (25.2 - 30) + (30 - 22.29) * 2.873 = -4.8 + 22.2 = 17.4

So Imran will lead it big time.

 

[Ikki]

Let's look at like this.

Runs that are scored more by Sobers than a normal player = 54 - 30 = 24 (Considered not outs give an equal cance to reduce and increae the score. So, (57.8 + 50.2) / 2 taken as runs per outing)
Runs he concedes more = (34 - 30) * 1.5 = 6

Net efefct = 24 - 6 = 18

Runs scored more by Miller = 35.5 - 30 = 5.5
Runs less conceded by Miller = (30 - 23) * 1. 8 = 12.6

Net effect = 5.5 + 12.6 = 18.1

Pretty damn close. I first said that due to unhelpful conditions Sobers' Average of 34 will be the best who are averaging 34. Considering that, if he bowled on helpful tracks, Sobers would have lowered his average still more

EDIT: I just did it for Imran Khan and Hadlee as well.

Imran; (34 - 30) + (30 - 22.8) * 2.55 = 4 + 18.4 = 22.4
Hadlee, (25.2 - 30) + (30 - 22.29) * 2.873 = -4.8 + 22.2 = 17.4

So Imran will lead it big time.

Miller essentially cancels out any run advantage Sobers has with the bat - I think you showed this. What you didn't show is that Miller also takes more wickets while doing this. So as you can see, even just comparing strength to strength, weakness to weakness, Miller is ahead. Where Miller comes out even more ahead is that when it comes to performing WELL, Miller had a long peak and was a more consistent all-rounder.

But you know what? I say, okay, even if Miller is ahead like this, it is still very close. But do you know what the populous likes to believe? That Sobers is beyond dispute the greatest. That it is a foregone conclusion. Look at this poll itself as evidence of that misconception.

Also, whether you think his 34 is better than other 34s is one thing, but his batting average is higher than what would really seem accurate. He belted the crap out of Pakistan and India who at that time were not really strong bowling sides. His era of batting is also one of the higher averaging eras.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

But you know what? I say, okay, even if Miller is ahead like this, it is still very close. But do you know what the populous likes to believe? That Sobers is beyond dispute the greatest. That it is a foregone conclusion. Look at this poll itself as evidence of that misconception.

Another example of looking blindly at stats and jumping to conclusions. A one-sided poll doesn't mean that at all. You could have a 100-0 result but that doesn't mean that all or any of the 100 don't think it's close between the two.