The Greatest All-Rounder of All Time

[Ikki]

I'm not sure it matters that much. He still managed an average over 40 for a significant period while being phenomenally good with the ball. Aside from Botham, has anybody really come close to that achievement?

Even if he was a lower order batsman, he still produced the goods. And when he was injured as a bowler, he was still selected purely as a batsman and performed well, removing any doubt over his batting capabilities.

Well, it certainly does matter when people rate him as a batsman. He did produce the goods often batting that low but it does help his average. I am not sure if Botham had a peak like it TBH. What I do recall, having looked at Imran's career before, was that he didn't perform many of his feats with both disciplines together. IIRC SJS has a good breakdown of this.

Miller, for example, averaged 45 with the bat and 22 with the ball for half his career. And he was batting from 3,4 and 5. So it's a different beast altogether.

 

[aussie]

Well, it certainly does matter when people rate him as a batsman. He did produce the goods often batting that low but it does help his average. I am not sure if Botham had a peak like it TBH.

Well its not as if he came in @ 7 with the score 300 for 5 or something all the time. Surely he would have had to score runs from difficult positions.

What I do recall, having looked at Imran's career before, was that he didn't perform many of his feats with both disciplines together. IIRC SJS has a good breakdown of this.

I dont which specific feats together this could be. But using the clear peak period from Karach 1980 to Bridgetown 1988, where he combined solid batting with 90 mph bowling. He does have a few top-class all-round performances.

Faisalabad 1983 - A hundred & 11 wickets on a flat pick againts a very strong IND batting line-up.

1982 in ENG. His all-rounder performances was better than Botham, who was still at his peak.

1987 in England he scored a hundred a took a 7 wicket haul during the series.

Plus i'm sure a few more. Although it wont be as dynamic as what Botham did.

Miller, for example, averaged 45 with the bat and 22 with the ball for half his career. And he was batting from 3,4 and 5. So it's a different beast altogether.

Well yes it would be a different beast with the bat & clearly Miller was a better batsman. But that doesn't discredit the fact Imrand did do well as a batsman in the role he was given.

 

[MrIncredible]

Well, it certainly does matter when people rate him as a batsman. He did produce the goods often batting that low but it does help his average. I am not sure if Botham had a peak like it TBH. What I do recall, having looked at Imran's career before, was that he didn't perform many of his feats with both disciplines together. IIRC SJS has a good breakdown of this.

Miller, for example, averaged 45 with the bat and 22 with the ball for half his career. And he was batting from 3,4 and 5. So it's a different beast altogether.

I remember u from a post on Sobers talking about Ind/Pak/Nz being Zimbabwe-esque therefore in like manner i think it only fair we incl Miller's stats vs the non-minnow team(s) of his time:

England/RSA:

Bat ave: 33+/-
Bowling ave: 22+/-
38 mts 3 hundreds and 117 wkts

Nothing special with the bat and a great bowler (though WPM kinda low). Still great all rounder but nothing there to show him to a "beast" of ne kind.
Bowl ave:

 

[Ikki]

Well its not as if he came in @ 7 with the score 300 for 5 or something all the time. Surely he would have had to score runs from difficult positions.

He scored about 1900 runs in 8 years; surely he didn't score that many runs either.

I dont which specific feats together this could be. But using the clear peak period from Karach 1980 to Bridgetown 1988, where he combined solid batting with 90 mph bowling. He does have a few top-class all-round performances.

Faisalabad 1983 - A hundred & 11 wickets on a flat pick againts a very strong IND batting line-up.

1982 in ENG. His all-rounder performances was better than Botham, who was still at his peak.

1987 in England he scored a hundred a took a 7 wicket haul during the series.

Plus i'm sure a few more. Although it wont be as dynamic as what Botham did.

IIRC we already had a thread where we went through Sobers', Imran's, Botham's and Miller's records of performing with both and Imran was behind. I am not saying he didn't ever do it, just less.

Well yes it would be a different beast with the bat & clearly Miller was a better batsman. But that doesn't discredit the fact Imrand did do well as a batsman in the role he was given.

It should go without saying, clearly he is in the best handful of all-rounders of all-time. I am just saying that him averaging 19 with the ball and 51 with the bat is kinda exaggerating how good he really was.

 

[Ikki]

I remember u from a post on Sobers talking about Ind/Pak/Nz being Zimbabwe-esque therefore in like manner i think it only fair we incl Miller's stats vs the non-minnow team(s) of his time:

England/RSA:

Bat ave: 33+/-
Bowling ave: 22+/-
38 mts 3 hundreds and 117 wkts

Nothing special with the bat and a great bowler (though WPM kinda low). Still great all rounder but nothing there to show him to a "beast" of ne kind.
Bowl ave:

Yeah, I was talking about Sobers purely on a batting plain compared to all other all-time great batsmen.

If you were to break-up every all-rounders stats like that of course they'd fall short. Even Sobers at his best as a bowler couldn't average sub-30 against either Australia or England with the ball.

---
Of course, in the period I am talking about Miller averaged 46 & 41 with the bat and 20 & 23 with the ball against England & S.Africa respectively.

 

[MrIncredible]

TBH i wasnt serious just thought i'd butt in on one of ur debates the same way u did on mine. But i do recall a series where Sobers made like 700 runs in England and took 20 plus wickets for under 30 so IMO that qualifies as a peak performance.

 

[Ikki]

TBH i wasnt serious just thought i'd butt in on one of ur debates the same way u did on mine. But i do recall a series where Sobers made like 700 runs in England and took 20 plus wickets for under 30 so IMO that qualifies as a peak performance.

We are talking about an extended peak, not just a single series, AFAIK.

 

[MrIncredible]

O my bad. Still overall i'd rate sobers, miller and Imran as the top 3 in whatever order (personal choice) with botham below them as well as Kallis (y he's so underated is beyond me)

 

[Ikki]

Kallis is ridiculously underrated and we had a longass thread on that if you care to search.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Kallis is ridiculously underrated and we had a longass thread on that if you care to search.

I seem to remember that discussion being so bad that CricInfo nicked it.

 

[JBH001]

He scored about 1900 runs in 8 years; surely he didn't score that many runs either.

IIRC we already had a thread where we went through Sobers', Imran's, Botham's and Miller's records of performing with both and Imran was behind. I am not saying he didn't ever do it, just less.

It should go without saying, clearly he is in the best handful of all-rounders of all-time. I am just saying that him averaging 19 with the ball and 51 with the bat is kinda exaggerating how good he really was.

Yes. IIRC Botham scored a double hundred and took a ten fer (along with Imran, who scored a hundred, the only other man to do it once), he also scored a hundred and took a five fer in the same match 5 times, Sobers and Kallis did it twice, while Imran did it once. Again, iirc, from some stats read long ago, Botham also scored a 50 and took a 5 fer in the same match 8 times - again, I think, more than any other all-rounder.

 

[MrIncredible]

When I think of the top all rounders:

Sobers, Kallis, Imran, Botham, Miller, Greig etc my criteria is if that player would make my all time XI on both traits individually. Based on stats Imran and Miller would make it in as bowlers but not as batsmen. Conversely Sobers and Kallis would make it in on batting but not on their bowling alone.

 

[aussie]

When I think of the top all rounders:

Sobers, Kallis, Imran, Botham, Miller, Greig etc my criteria is if that player would make my all time XI on both traits individually. Based on stats Imran and Miller would make it in as bowlers but not as batsmen. Conversely Sobers and Kallis would make it in on batting but not on their bowling alone.

Miller could make it in both facets at his peak TBF. Thanks to interruption of WW2, he debuted at his peak combining high quality to-order batting with deceptively quick bowling.

 

[subshakerz]

Miller could make it in both facets at his peak TBF. Thanks to interruption of WW2, he debuted at his peak combining high quality to-order batting with deceptively quick bowling.

At his peak, though, Miller only took 78 wickets in 28 matches. That hardly good enough for a proper bowler, let alone an all-time great.

 

[MrIncredible]

Maybe at his peak but im talking overall.

 

[MrIncredible]

From the time of his 1st test hundred to his retirement gary Sobers averaged 61 with the bat and 34 with the ball. Not especially special with the ball but still over 84 tests wow. His record vs NZL does let him down though

 

[Ikki]

At his peak, though, Miller only took 78 wickets in 28 matches. That hardly good enough for a proper bowler, let alone an all-time great.

IIRC that has to do with his injuries and age restricting him from bowling long spells. Although, he could be a work-horse if the need arised, he usually wasn't. Still, his average and strike-rate are superb (with respect to his era) and about as good as our other bowlers who would vie for a bowler's spot.

With no doubt in my mind, he's the most complete player the game has seen. He wasn't even originally a bowler but took it up for the team. He was an excellent fielder and leader to boot.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

When I think of the top all rounders:

Sobers, Kallis, Imran, Botham, Miller, Greig etc my criteria is if that player would make my all time XI on both traits individually. Based on stats Imran and Miller would make it in as bowlers but not as batsmen. Conversely Sobers and Kallis would make it in on batting but not on their bowling alone.

That's what happens when you base everything on stats.

 

[MrIncredible]

Well having never seen Miller live i have to base it on stats and opinions of the experts (to some extent). Like Benaud, CHappell and Bradman himself, they seem to be in no doubt that Sobers was the greatest ever (and by sum margin). I disagree i think its a close run thing between Sobers, Imran, and Miller but none of these players (overall and based on their stats) are making ne all time team on both traits.

 

[Ikki]

I think the player that'll be able to play in an all-time XI with either ball or bat will essentially rival The Don for the greatest cricketer ever.