Sobers rates Subash Gupte over Shane Warne

[Jono]

Warne's a gun, Gupte was likely a gun but most never got to see him.

End of tbh


Oh and Murali was pretty good too

 

[bagapath]

Even you can do better than what you are doing in this thread!

my comment was not about the cricketing issues under discussion here. your accusation that these forum members are biased towards australians is what that bugged me. i dont think that is true. i dont think you should stoop to that level.

Firstly, from when did being critical to a team selected by someone equate to being critical of a specific comparison made by someone?

In case you didnt know this before, bradman selected the team from a pool of players and compared them with one another before making a final call; which means if he chose bedser and not malcolm marshall and arthur morris but not jack hobbs, then he was making specific comparisons between those players. his team was rubbished. which means his choice of one player over the other was criticized. so you should drop your anti-aussie argument and get back to the topic.

since you seemed to believe it is okay for sobers to rate gupte over warne giving gupte's ability to bowl a better wrong one as the reason, would you rate malinga over hadlee because he bowls better yorkers?

 

[Sanz]

my comment was not about the cricketing issues under discussion here. your accusation that these forum members are biased towards australians is what that bugged me. i dont think that is true. i dont think you should stoop to that level.



In case you didnt know this before, bradman selected the team from a pool of players and compared them with one another before making a final call; which means if he chose bedser and not malcolm marshall and arthur morris but not jack hobbs, then he was making specific comparisons between those players. his team was rubbished. which means his choice of one player over the other was criticized. so you should drop your anti-aussie argument and get back to the topic.

since you seemed to believe it is okay for sobers to rate gupte over warne giving the ability to bowl wrong one as the reason, would you rate malinga over hadlee because he bowls better yorkers?

But I don't remember anyone calling Bradman an 'idiot' and a 'troll' or someone who was bitter in life or he had a gambling problem and what not. And all of that is just in this thread, if you go on internet, it is much worse.

It is okay and reasonable to criticize Sobers for his selection or his statement, no one should be above that but to be called names is so not on.

 

[Sanz]

since you seemed to believe it is okay for sobers to rate gupte over warne giving the ability to bowl wrong one as the reason, would you rate malinga over hadlee because he bowls better yorkers?

You are making an assumption that as that only reason, for many of us Warne's failure against India is a major reason why we don't rate him as high as many others.

 

[bagapath]

You are making an assumption that as that only reason, for many of us Warne's failure against India is a major reason why we don't rate him as high as many others.

rating warne not as high as other cricket enthusiasts is one thing; rating him below gupte is something else. i am from india and i believe his indian record alone cant make him lesser. anyways, this thread is about sobers' opinion that gupte was a superior leg spinner. not what indian fans think of warne. from that statement of sobers' one can infer that the the ability to bowl the wrong one alone makes a leg spinner better than another who cannot. it is wrong; hence my malinga-hadlee-yorker example.

i didn't call him an idiot or a troll. but said he suffers from the same old problem of old men believing things were better in their times; bradman suffered from it too. harvey has the problem these days. bedi shows signs of it. they are not idiots. but still they are not always objective.

may be because sobers was a left hander he is assuming that it is easier to tackle a big spinning leg spinner who does not have a strong googly than playing another leggie who can surprise him with a wrong one every now and then.

 

[Ikki]

I don't remember anybody among those who are laughing/are enraged/are accusing Sobers of trolling or being idiotic now showing the same reaction when Bradman rated O'Reilly over Barnes for the same reason...But then again, both Bradman and O'Reilly are Aussies (unlike Sobers and Gupte); don't say a word against them please.

TBF, had I known exactly what Barnes bowled or how to gauge his record against others I might have been inclined to. All I know is Barnes is one of the greatest bowlers of all time and so is O'Reilly. In the Gupte/Warne comparison only one is, and it isn't Gupte.

And it has nothing to do with country. I said before: I love Warne, but I do think he is an idiot and a troll (there you go) when he is picking fights by rating Waugh, for example, so low in his 50 top cricketers list.

Also, I didn't call Sobers an idiot or a troll for that, I said at best he was being a troll and at worst an idiot by saying Waugh's team couldn't even win one test against Lloyd's. Meaning he is either purposefully starting a ****-storm or just lacks the grey matter when criminally demeaning Waugh's team.

Otherwise, I am pretty sure Bradman's list was treated rather harshly.

 

[weldone]

my comment was not about the cricketing issues under discussion here. your accusation that some of these forum members are biased towards australian greats is what that bugged me. i dont think that is true, and only what I think matters here. i dont think you should stoop to that level. If Leonard Hutton had the feeling that cricket pundits were biased towards English and Aussie players then that is acceptable, but not you weldone.

fixed

 

[weldone]

TBF, had I known exactly what Barnes bowled or how to gauge his record against others I might have been inclined to. All I know is Barnes is one of the greatest bowlers of all time and so is O'Reilly. In the Gupte/Warne comparison only one is, and it isn't Gupte.

You don't know exactly how Gupte bowled too, do you? Yeah both were greats, but Barnes might have been as better a bowler than O'Reilly as Warne is than Gupte. Who knows? And Bradman separated the first two on the exact same reason as Sobers did the last two.

 

[Ikki]

You're missing the difference. There's a lot of debate over whether Barnes was actually a spinner or a pacer and you can't really do a stats comparison the same way either. If the standing of both bowlers had a bigger gap and we knew more about them I am sure I'd have been equally dismissive of that opinion. As I tried to illustrate earlier: my favourite cricketer is Warne but I don't take his word for gospel when it's quite obviously ridiculous.

Separating them over that reason is not the problem. It's that they're not close enough to separate them for that reason - just look at Bagapath's many comparisons to show why it is just ridiculous (Malinga v Hadlee). If two batsmen had essentially the same record but one had everything the other had plus a great pull-shot...ok, people can live with that. But when you compare Mark Waugh with Steve Waugh and say Mark was a better batsman because he had more strokes then you're just flaming.

 

[honestbharani]

robin uthappa is a better batsman than viv richards because richards never played the reverse sweep; uthappa doesnt reverse sweep either. but i dont care.

wow man.. bad day at the sets? That is the worst post I have seen from you ever...

 

[honestbharani]

I don't see the problem with Sobers' rating any one player over another. Tbh I know so little of Gupte that I find when past greats raise these things it makes for some interesting reading.

If Gupte was as good as or better than Warne, then I'm just sorry I never saw him play.

so in other words, you plagiarised my post..


But completely agree with that and it really should be </thread> wtih that.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, the thing about Warne is he didn't just do it in one or two series against a particular set of batsmen. When you think of his hold over the Englishmen starting from that ball against Gatting to the fifth day of Adelaide 2006, it lasted a decade and a half.

Would personally rate some of his big hauls against the Windies higher than his hauls against England...

 

[honestbharani]

rating warne not as high as other cricket enthusiasts is one thing; rating him below gupte is something else. i am from india and i believe his indian record alone cant make him lesser. anyways, this thread is about sobers' opinion that gupte was a superior leg spinner. not what indian fans think of warne. from that statement of sobers' one can infer that the the ability to bowl the wrong one alone makes a leg spinner better than another who cannot. it is wrong; hence my malinga-hadlee-yorker example.

i didn't call him an idiot or a troll. but said he suffers from the same old problem of old men believing things were better in their times; bradman suffered from it too. harvey has the problem these days. bedi shows signs of it. they are not idiots. but still they are not always objective.

may be because sobers was a left hander he is assuming that it is easier to tackle a big spinning leg spinner who does not have a strong googly than playing another leggie who can surprise him with a wrong one every now and then.

Bedi IS an idiot though coz he keeps bringing up the same stuff and same accusations when it is actually PROVEN he is wrong. When it comes to comparing across eras, each one is as likely to be right as the other and generally, GENERALLY, you place a bit of premium on what guys who have "been there and done it" say...

Agree that most players tend to rate the guys they played against higher than the ones they didn't get to play against but that is normal.

 

[bagapath]

wow man.. bad day at the sets? That is the worst post I have seen from you ever...

ha ha... leaving for shoot again tomorrow HB... that post was meant to be sarcastic you see... it is like saying malinga's yorkers make him better than hadlee. all in response to sobers' claim that gupte's googly make him better than warne

 

[G.I.Joe]

since you seemed to believe it is okay for sobers to rate gupte over warne giving gupte's ability to bowl a better wrong one as the reason, would you rate malinga over hadlee because he bowls better yorkers?

I don't know why you feel the need to keep repeating that weak point. It's apparent that Sobers feels that mastery of all aspects is a valid differentiator in Gupte and Warne's case because they're comparable bowlers otherwise. Malinga and Hadlee are not comparable bowlers to begin with, unless you believe that bowling averages of 33 and 22 are close enough.

 

[Ikki]

Bagapath's point is that they're not comparable; hence the comparison between Migara and Hadlee. He stated that only Murali, O'Reilly and Grimmett are comparable to Warne. I happen to firmly agree with him. As great spinner as Gupte was, I would put him on the plane of Chandra, Benaud, and co but not with Warne.

 

[weldone]

hence the comparison between Migara and Hadlee.

lol. you love CW, don't you?

 

[weldone]

As great spinner as Gupte was, I would put him on the plane of Chandra, Benaud, and co but not with Warne.

Me too, but Sobers won't. And calling him an idiot for that is idiotic.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Bagapath's point is that they're not comparable; hence the comparison between Migara and Hadlee. He stated that only Murali, O'Reilly and Grimmett are comparable to Warne. I happen to firmly agree with him. As great spinner as Gupte was, I would put him on the plane of Chandra, Benaud, and co but not with Warne.

*Malinga

That doesn't matter though. I probably would say they aren't in the same plane too, but it's ridiculous to pretend that Malinga-Hadlee have the same degree of comparability/uncomparability. Sobers feels Gupte and Warne are comparable. If Sobers felt Malinga and Hadlee are comparable, he would have mentioned it. There isn't the matter of a 11 point difference in average between Gupte and Warne to pretend that the analogy with Malinga and Hadlee is credible.

 

[weldone]

*Malinga

That doesn't matter though. Sobers feels they're comparable. If Sobers felt Malinga and Hadlee are comparable, he would have mentioned it. Besides, there isn't the matter of a 11 point difference in average between Gupte and Warne to pretend that the analogy with Malinga and Hadlee is credible.

Ya, comparing Warne and Gupte might equate to comparing Holding and Kapil as bowlers (for example, in terms of widely held opinions about their relative greatness)...but saying that it equates to comparing Hadlee and Malinga (for whatever reason), is pointless.