I'd definitely have backed Clive Rice to have managed it too.
Based on what ?
Nah not yet. Whenever I update this thread with an updated formula or something and post a new list (or indeed when the batting ones first come out) I'll edit the first post with a link to the post it so it doesn't get lost.
First of all Kapil was miles (Yes Miles) ahead of Akram) as a batsman. I am not going to make excuses for Kapil's batting average, he fully deserves what his stats are.
Possible. Also, Stan Jackson was probably the only test cricketer who suffered (and survived) an assassination attempt. This happened when he was the governor of bengal in british india.
Kapil was probably a much more gifted batsman than Imran by most accounts. He probably didn't apply himself as much Imran. In fact all the other great all rounders (maybe not Hadlee) seemed to be more naturally gifted with the bat than Imran. Imran worked very hard as a batsman and he wasn't usually very aggressive in test matches (except for the earlier part of his career). He would usually anchor the innings and play a sub-dued role (and so would usually run out of partners or declare, hence the huge number of not outs). Having seen a bit of Imran in his test career and also hearing others talk about his batting I think that is a reasonably accurate picture.
Interesting that no Tendulkar innings made it...
Don't think it's too much of a surprise tbh. The Chennai knock is the only one I would have put in my list. IMHO, Innings, for an exercise such as this, should be rated purely on it's quality and effect of the match alone and factors such as age of the player, whether it is the player's debut, whether he scored it in painful physical circumstances should not be considered. The Perth knock was only special because Tendulkar was 17 at the time, and was just a very good Innings and The Chennai 100* is a tad overrated, IMHO.
Haha, worst bloke.
Miller was professional enough to already be arguably the greatest rounded all-rounder. I think that says enough about him. But he clearly was not one to heap on runs when the contest was becoming a foregone conclusion. Actually the opposite; he was highly competitive provided it was a contest.
Kapil was more of a slogger and an attacking batsman. He probably was for a time better than Imran. Imran on the other hand was more of a match saver but towards the end he was better than Kapil. Even in terms of runs per innings he is ahead.
At this point probably on Prince's hard drive
wrong on all counts ikki. he was an aggressive batter, but not a slogger. one cant slog the windies pace quartet to test centuries. imran's batting, other than evolving into a decent average, never had the impact as kapil's batting had. not even imran would be able point out five innings from his career that would match kapil's top knocks.
Imran probably wouldn't recall too much of his cricket in any case he is too much into other things for a long time now
.....
Neither did Marshall make it to the list, which is a bigger surprise to me.
Well, I didn't mean that in a demeaning way. I meant it how you said: he was aggressive. Yes, he did have 100s against the WIndies but that does not really make him a better batsman than Imran overall. Imran too has great knocks and scored a fine century himself against the WIndies attack. Imran was also far more adept away from home. Even in terms of the rate they scored 50s/100s Imran equals Kapil (a bit more 100s, a bit less 50s). He is 7 points higher average wise - yes, I know a bit exaggerated but he is still ahead even in terms of runs per innings.
