Is Harbhajan Singh one of the greatest fingerspinners ever ?

[silentstriker]

Fair enough if you're picking horses for courses, bit of an insult to Bedi actually benching him on every tour

Sucks to be him. I play to win. He can whinge if he wants. Plus, knowing Bedi's captaincy style, he would object to ball tampering.

Ahead of Kumble??

At home, I play two spinners in Bedi and Kumble and away I play one spinner in Gupte. But yes, if I had to pick one at home, I'd definitely go Bedi over Kumble. Chances are, with India's strong batting lineup and a relatively weak bowling lineup, there's going to be a fourth innings where teams will fancy themselves to chase targets. Bedi will be vital.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

SJS on why Gupte was a badman!

Word!

 

[Uppercut]

S to da J to da S

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Boom!

 

[aussie]

Bukam!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Too far, bruv. Too far.

Anyway, Gupte for the w.

 

[AaronK]

I've seen him bowl, but I've never found any footage enabling the intimate study of his action, because in the 1950s precious few such footage was shot.

Murali was not remotely inspired by Saqlain because Murali's stock-ball and Saqlain's stock-ball are totally different in every respect apart from the direction in which they turn. And even before he developed his Wrong-'Un Murali was still a vastly superior bowler to Saqlain and Harbhajan and in fact any other fingerspinner.

Saqlain was indeed the first one to use the Doosra in his era but he was not the inventor of the ball, because others had bowled it before him.

Saqlain being the best fingerspinner since, say, 1995 is quite fair enough - he may have been better than Harbhajan, but equally he enjoyed just 5-6 years at the top of his game, while Harbhajan has already enjoyed more than that and may yet have many more ahead of him. So putting Harbhajan as > Saqlain is far from outrageous.

That is why i asked because considering the technology of those days.. i don't think anyone could pick that up.. except maybe the batsman facing..I am almost sure that u r not that old to say that u have faced him as a batsman.. so That makes me not buy what u r saying about him...

I never said saqalin was the first one who used it but he used it better anyone else except maybe murali (after 2001 when he fully learned the technic). I don't agree with u when u said Murali was better than him before 2000s.. Saqalin was better specially in ODI.. His average speaks for that..In test maybe slightly the same considering that he did much better than Murali in india.. Murali still struggles against india in indian pitches..

yes Saqalin didn't play much and declined but I would still pick him ahead of Harbhajan singh simply because his doosra is much more effective than Harbhajan singh..

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

In test maybe slightly the same considering that he did much better than Murali in india.. Murali still struggles against india in indian pitches..

Surely Saqlain has only played less than a handful of Test matches in India. Surely.

 

[Richard]

That is why i asked because considering the technology of those days.. i don't think anyone could pick that up.. except maybe the batsman facing..I am almost sure that u r not that old to say that u have faced him as a batsman.. so That makes me not buy what u r saying about him...

What I said about Ramadhin is speculation - nothing more. Don't paint it like I said anything was close to a certainty.

I never said saqalin was the first one who used it but he used it better anyone else except maybe murali (after 2001 when he fully learned the technic). I don't agree with u when u said Murali was better than him before 2000s.. Saqalin was better specially in ODI.. His average speaks for that..In test maybe slightly the same considering that he did much better than Murali in india.. Murali still struggles against india in indian pitches..

I couldn't care less about ODIs when I'm talking about Tests, and in Tests Murali has always been miles better than Saqlain and any other fingerspinner virtually since his debut. You can hardly compare the performances of Saqlain and Murali against India - I'd back any spinner, including both of them, to succeed on the pitches Saqlain faced them on and fail on the ones Murali did.

In Test cricket Murali has always been a superior bowler to Saqlain. There was not a single point in their career where I'd have picked Saqlain over Murali, under any circumstance. Even when Murali had only a single delivery and Saqlain had two, Murali was better.

yes Saqalin didn't play much and declined but I would still pick him ahead of Harbhajan singh simply because his doosra is much more effective than Harbhajan singh..

A dangerous ploy. I'd have someone who can be slightly less effective for 13-14 years over someone who can be slightly more for 6-7.

 

[daghetto]

he was supposed to be an exponent of the arm ball. this would start from outside the off stump, like an offspinner, but swing into the batsman instead of going away, pitch in line with the off and middle and spin towards first slip. prasanna once demonstrated on tv about how the grip makes all the difference. he seemed to cup the ball in his palm a little more to get this delivery bowled. he was of the opinion that it would be impossible to make the ball spin away too much for an off spinner without straightening the arm, essentially claiming most of the doosras are chucked in.

mate, what prasanna did was an arm ball. the doosra is completely different and involves imparting over spin on the ball. and you can bowl it without chucking, as saqlain and now hauritz are doing.

 

[daghetto]

I've seen him bowl, but I've never found any footage enabling the intimate study of his action, because in the 1950s precious few such footage was shot.

Murali was not remotely inspired by Saqlain because Murali's stock-ball and Saqlain's stock-ball are totally different in every respect apart from the direction in which they turn. And even before he developed his Wrong-'Un Murali was still a vastly superior bowler to Saqlain and Harbhajan and in fact any other fingerspinner.

Saqlain was indeed the first one to use the Doosra in his era but he was not the inventor of the ball, because others had bowled it before him.

Saqlain being the best fingerspinner since, say, 1995 is quite fair enough - he may have been better than Harbhajan, but equally he enjoyed just 5-6 years at the top of his game, while Harbhajan has already enjoyed more than that and may yet have many more ahead of him. So putting Harbhajan as > Saqlain is far from outrageous.

sorry bro, your wrong there.


‘Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra. He showed me the way, but I created my own style’


look at this interview of murali, he said himself, '‘Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra. He showed me the way, but I created my own style’. Your telling me this isnt inspiration? If saqlain showed him the way, and he said invented it, obviously he then got inspired to create his own style of it.

i woulda tooken saqlain over murali any day back in 99-2000 where saqlain was in his prime. this being because he was the fastest to take 50,100,150 and 200 wickets ever in ODI's, ahead of murali and the rest. of course he got injured which led him out of the team, but at that form he was probably one of the best.

 

[honestbharani]

Because you're DENIGRATING THE GREATS OF THE GAME!!!111!!! and this shows that you obviously know nothing about cricket.

Nah.... I don't like to rate players I have never seen...


But then again, it ain't a patch on the person saying a great batsman was not "that" good because he only scored in draws and dead rubbers...


Coz they knew it was a draw when it was in progress, right?



And of course, to comment on guys you know NOTHING off and to pass judgement that they weren't any good is denigrating the greats of the game.


CW's Mendis, indeed!!!!

 

[slippy]

No Robert croft is

 

[honestbharani]

SJS on why Gupte was a badman! here.

But......but he took a lot of wickets in drawn tests!!!!








PS: I dunno if he did, but there is always a typical reply in here like that..

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Nah.... I don't like to rate players I have never seen..

First off, I hope the majority of this post was in jest, because otherwise you missed the point severely.

But do you not rate Bradman then? Or Headley of the George variety?

 

[Furball]

First off, I hope the majority of this post was in jest, because otherwise you missed the point severely.

But do you not rate Bradman then? Or Headley of the George variety?

I rate their accomplishments and achievements very highly.

However, having never seen them, I can't objectively rate them. I can read what Wisden etc has to say about them, but that's me absorbing someone else's POV.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I agree with you. But some achievements are undeniable. And I think it's fair to judge the quality of a player based on his/her results, in context. In terms of who I prefer to look at? It can be style over substance (though substance allows style to last longer) but in terms of judging greatness, it often boils down to who had more substance. Statistics don't tell the whole story, but they do tell a significant one.

 

[Uppercut]

I agree with you. But some achievements are undeniable. And I think it's fair to judge the quality of a player based on his/her results, in context. In terms of who I prefer to look at? It can be style over substance (though substance allows style to last longer) but in terms of judging greatness, it often boils down to who had more substance. Statistics don't tell the whole story, but they do tell a significant one.

I'm very much substance over style too, which is what makes hb periodically go off on a tangent about how little I know about cricket. It's not that I ignore what contemporaries have to say, but I do count how many runs they score and wickets they take as more important, because that's the bottom line.

 

[Migara]

Did u actually see ramadhin bowle?

Saqalin was the master and first one to use it in his era.. Guys like Murali and Bhajji and so was inspired by him.. at first Murali wasn't good at it but around 2001 or 02, he learned the technic.. lets give Saqalin the credit that he deserve.. he is the best finger spinner i have seen.. i rate him highly..

I have in fact heard that Prasanna has used it. Harbhajan came in to scene very close to Saqlains debut. Harbhajan was very proficient in his doosra even in his debut match (bowled Michale Slater with it IIRC). Murali learned it later. But it was Kumar Dharmasena who demonstrated how Saqlain bowls it.

I have seen Jayananda Warnaweera sending some "doosra-like" deliveries which spun like leg breaks. In ealy 1990s against India he sent Kambli Packing after a doosra spun back to caught him on the crease. In home series against England, Warnaweera bamboozled Gatting with a doosra which he edged to Tillekaratne. I am not sure how Warnaweera bowled it TBH.

 

[Richard]

sorry bro, your wrong there.


‘Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra. He showed me the way, but I created my own style’


look at this interview of murali, he said himself, '‘Saqlain Mushtaq invented the doosra. He showed me the way, but I created my own style’. Your telling me this isnt inspiration? If saqlain showed him the way, and he said invented it, obviously he then got inspired to create his own style of it.

Murali's stock-ball is a completely different delivery than Saqlain's stock-ball; likewise, Murali's Wrong-'Un is a completely different delivery than Saqlain's Doosra.

If Murali says he was "inspired" to bowl a Wrong-'Un by Saqlain it's clearly true, but it's no more bowling the same ball as the fact that Mark David Chapman was inspired to murder John Lennon by The Catcher In The Rye was Chapman doing the same as the author.

Murali's ball which turns the other way is a completely different ball to anything else that has ever been bowled, and being the phenomenal bowler he is I rather doubt that if he'd not had Saqlain to give him the idea of bowling a Wrong-'Un he'd not have found someone else to do so.

i woulda tooken saqlain over murali any day back in 99-2000 where saqlain was in his prime. this being because he was the fastest to take 50,100,150 and 200 wickets ever in ODI's, ahead of murali and the rest. of course he got injured which led him out of the team, but at that form he was probably one of the best.

Will people stop talking about ODIs? This is CricketWeb.net - here, discussion centres around Test cricket unless otherwise stated. There is some amount of case for Saqlain being better in ODIs than Murali at some point, but in Tests there is no contest, Murali was better (often miles better) than Saqlain all career, end of.