Garry Sobers v Imran Khan,Test Cricket:Poll

[bagapath]

ikki... my point is simple, if a batter averages 1 point over the global batting average and a bowler averages 1 points under the global bowling average, they are still not comparable; because these two stats dont have any connection whatsoever. a batsman with 5 points more than global batting average is still in the above average league, whereas a bowler with 5 points under global bowling average is already in the very good league.

so dont say sobers is less of a bowler than imran as a batsman because of their averages in relation to global averages.

34 bowling average is as good as a 37 batting average. kaneria is as useful to his team as atherton was to his. sobers was statistically as good a bowler as imran was as a batsman. this apple is as red as that orange.

 

[Furball]

On the other hand, just how much better do you think Sobers' bowling could be? All else being equal, someone who averages 34, strikes at 92, does not deserve the same kind of recognition as someone who averages 30 and struck at 80, even. Saying Sobers was better than his stats suggest is plausible, but it still falls far short of the praise he is given.

How many others have bowled seam, finger spin and wrist spin to a Test class level whilst simultaneously being the best batsman and fielder in the world?

 

[akilana]

right u are, shivfan. of course, miller runs imran even closer than kallis runs sobers.

no not really

 

[ankitj]

So the point about assessing batting and bowling all-rounders differently that I wanted to make, has been made. It's interesting how the criticism of not being high quality bowlers gets applied very similarly to both Sobers and Kallis. This only follows from the fact that only the best 4-5 bowlers in team bowl while all eleven bat. Therefore our levels of "acceptable" bowling stats are more elevated compared to those for batting stats when it comes to all-rounders. No wonder then that Sobers and Kallis are the only great batting all-rounders that come to one's mind while there's a much larger list of bowling all-rounders*. Yet, batting all-rounders with seemingly not so great bowling stats can lend a lot of balance to the team as useful change bowlers. This is something that became very obvious when Kallis couldn't bowl in the 3rd test of the recent Ind-SA series.

I generally maintain that Sobers' bowling is at par with Imran's batting. But as a batsman Sobers is easily among the best 2-3 of all time, while Imran might be between 6-10, or even 11-15 in some people's books. This is why I rate Sobers slightly above Imran.

* As an aside, Aubrey Faulkner is also a batting all-rounder for me. With an average of ~40 with bat and ~26 with ball might make him look like a very well rounded all-rounder, but for his era, bowling average of 26 wasn't exactly outstanding, while batting average of 40 certainly was.

 

[hang on]

yes, akilana. very really. unless u'd care to elaborate and justify your somewhat cryptic claim/denial. the stats certainly bear it out. the sheer charisma aspect also checks out. plus, if u really think about it, the fact that miller lost some good years to the war...

unless, of course, u mean that kallis is ahead of sobers.

 

[Blaze 18]

I generally maintain that Sobers' bowling is at par with Imran's batting. But as a batsman Sobers is easily among the best 2-3 of all time, while Imran might be between 6-10, or even 11-15 in some people's books. This is why I rate Sobers slightly above Imran.

Equally, Imran Khan might be the best fast bowler of all time in some people's books. No-one, on the other hand, would have Sobers as the best batsman ever. I think this line of reasoning is slightly flawed to be honest.

 

[ankitj]

Equally, Imran Khan might be the best fast bowler of all time in some people's books. No-one, on the other hand, would have Sobers as the best batsman ever. I think this line of reasoning is slightly flawed to be honest.

You could consider it my personal opinion. Though various lists of greatest batsmen and bowlers that I have seen actually are in line with what I said.

 

[Blaze 18]

You could consider it my personal opinion. Though various lists of greatest batsmen and bowlers that I have seen actually are in line with what I said.

Well, I daresay most all time list for fast bowlers would have Imran Khan in the top five - top three even. You'd be hard-pressed to name five better fast bowlers than him, let alone ten. Anyway, your opinion is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it.

Personally I feel Sir Garry Sobers was, purely as a cricketer, better than everyone bar Sir Donald Bradman. I voted for Imran Khan because of his immense contribution to Pakistan cricket. Captaining Pakistan is definitely the toughest job on this planet, and he did it admirably well. Not only that, it was he who apparently hand-picked Abdul Qadir, Inzamam-ul-Haq, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, etc. just by watching them play in the nets. He was the one who unconditionally backed Inzamam-ul-Haq in1992 before the semi-final, despite a run of poor scores; the rest, as they say, is history.

I must admit, I've been reading a lot of Imran Khan of late so my opinion here may be heavily influenced by bias.

 

[hang on]

Well, I daresay most all time list for fast bowlers would have Imran Khan in the top five - top three even.

while this (top 5) might be the case, i would be quite surprised if it actually were on a regular basis. marshall, ambrose, lillee, hadlee, mcgrath, at least one of the 2 Ws, and perhaps least one of holding/garner/roberts might be classified as better fast bowlers. and i am leaving out lindwall, trueman. top 3 would be, obviously, even rarer.

sobers, on the other hand, would figure far more frequently in the top 5 batsmen of all time. and even top 3 wouldn't be that rare, certainly not as rare imran being a top 3 fast bowler. (let us not forget that we are leaving out all spinners here. warne and murali could also be considered by many to be a better bowler than imran).

of course, wouldn't at all mind having a gander at those lists alluded to so that i could be - gladly - shown up for the obstinate old fool that i am (at least according to the better half, and certainly the fruits of my loin!).

 

[weldone]

Tough choice as Sobers and Imran have very little in common other than the all-rounder tag. Sobers the greatest batting all-rounder of all time. Imran the greatest bowling all-rounder of all time.

The batting of Khan roughly cancels out the bowling impact of Sobers. Khan doesn't quite make my top five greatest bowlers of all time. Sobers is unquestionably in my top three batsman of all time. Sobers would also be the only player of the two I would select in my All Time XI.

Adding the impact of a number of other intangible aspects I would rate Sobers higher. But still a very tough comparison.

...couldn't agree more...

 

[ankitj]

Well, I daresay most all time list for fast bowlers would have Imran Khan in the top five - top three even. You'd be hard-pressed to name five better fast bowlers than him, let alone ten. Anyway, your opinion is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it.

Well, I wasn't talking of fast bowlers alone but all bowlers. For me he might just about miss the top 5 fast bowlers, while certainly making the top 10. Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, McGrath and Trueman edge Imran out as bowlers in my opinion.

 

[Blaze 18]

while this (top 5) might be the case, i would be quite surprised if it actually were on a regular basis. marshall, ambrose, lillee, hadlee, mcgrath, at least one of the 2 Ws, and perhaps least one of holding/garner/roberts might be classified as better fast bowlers. and i am leaving out lindwall, trueman. top 3 would be, obviously, even rarer.

sobers, on the other hand, would figure far more frequently in the top 5 batsmen of all time. and even top 3 wouldn't be that rare, certainly not as rare imran being a top 3 fast bowler. (let us not forget that we are leaving out all spinners here. warne and murali could also be considered by many to be a better bowler than imran).

of course, wouldn't at all mind having a gander at those lists alluded to so that i could be - gladly - shown up for the obstinate old fool that i am (at least according to the better half, and certainly the fruits of my loin!).

I don't rate Muralitharan or Warne higher than Imran Khan, and I'd be more than a little surprised if most others do. I realize that there a few names that merit comparison with Imran Khan, but there are also a few who you could argue are better batsmen than Sir Garry Sobers : Sir Donald Bradman (of course!), Brian Lara, Viv Richards, Jack Hobbs, Barry Richards, Graeme Pollock, Sachin Tendulkar, etc. I am not sure why Sobers' position in the top three batsmen of all time is any more of a certainty than Imran's in the top three bowlers of all time.

In general, everyone picks both Imran Khan and Sobers in their all-time sides (I realize that Sobers is the second pick after the Don for a lot of people), so we really are splitting hairs here.

 

[Blaze 18]

Well, I wasn't talking of fast bowlers alone but all bowlers. For me he might just about miss the top 5 fast bowlers, while certainly making the top 10. Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, McGrath and Trueman edge Imran out as bowlers in my opinion.

Do you rate Warne and Murali higher than Imran ?

 

[weldone]

Well, to me Sobers>Miller>Imran

 

[Fusion]

I agree with the rest.But your valuation of Javed as a captain is someway off the mark.Javed is regarded,by many people,to be better tactically than Imran.However,Javed was too brash in terms of personality which is why he was never going to get along with others.Imran on the other hand,was a brilliant man manager and knew how,when and where to talk to a person.

That's why I mentioned charisma and leadership. Javed IMO was certainly a better tactician than Imran. In fact, Imran frequently listened to Javed's input as it related to match situations. However, Javed lacked the charisma, leadership, and man-management skills that Imran possessed. Hence Javed never was able to solidify his hold on the Captaincy, whereas once Imran took over there was no turning back for him.

 

[hang on]

i don't rate Muralitharan or Warne higher than Imran Khan, and I'd be more than a little surprised if most others do.

i know that i certainly rate warne and murali above imran. and know others who do but i would not want to label it a consensus or even majority position. (actually, might be a good idea for a poll on here! might actually give it a shot).

regarding your statement that generally everyone picks sobers and imran in their world 11s, again, i'm afraid that just is not the case. for example, the cricinfo all time team exercise did not have imran there. there was another one a little while ago conducted by the times (and martin jenkins and woodcock and suchlike other luminaries - mind, i don't consider their world to be gospel), which actually had botham over imran. many of the old timers whom i have spoken to would have miller over imran in a shot. some would prefer a hadlee. but, u can bet that each and everyone of them had sobers.

and i wouldn't have imran in my world 11 either. but he would, just, make the second 11 over kallis and miller....on a good day!

so, it's not a case of splitting hairs at all.

 

[Maximus0723]

i know that i certainly rate warne and murali above imran. and know others who do but i would not want to label it a consensus or even majority position. (actually, might be a good idea for a poll on here! might actually give it a shot).

regarding your statement that generally everyone picks sobers and imran in their world 11s, again, i'm afraid that just is not the case. for example, the cricinfo all time team exercise did not have imran there. there was another one a little while ago conducted by the times (and martin jenkins and woodcock and suchlike other luminaries - mind, i don't consider their world to be gospel), which actually had botham over imran. many of the old timers whom i have spoken to would have miller over imran in a shot. some would prefer a hadlee. but, u can bet that each and everyone of them had sobers.

and i wouldn't have imran in my world 11 either. but he would, just, make the second 11 over kallis and miller....on a good day!

so, it's not a case of splitting hairs at all.

That's b/c Cricinfo XI only allowed one all-rounder in the team.

What's your XI?

 

[Ikki]

How many others have bowled seam, finger spin and wrist spin to a Test class level whilst simultaneously being the best batsman and fielder in the world?

What good is it to bowl those types if you are largely ineffective bowling all those? You'd think a bowler with that repertoire who could adapt to conditions would at least be as good as the average bowler during his time. He wasn't near it.

As Prince mentioned, batting all-rounders take away overs that other bowlers could bowl. In terms of an overall cricketer, I take Imran without much hesitation really.

 

[weldone]

That's b/c Cricinfo XI only allowed one all-rounder in the team.

Nah, pretty clearly it gave one the option of picking more than one allrounders...

Before picking the team itself, it gave you the choice of deciding your team combination...

I picked both Hadlee and Sobers, tbh.

 

[hang on]

maximus,

i know the selection criteria in the cricinfo poll, and while i agree that some could have found it somewhat constraining, i thought it was fine.

my team - please bear with my dodgy memory:

hobbs
gavaskar
bradman
tendulkar
lara
sobers
gilchrist
warne
marshall
ambrose
murali

and i also gave myself the option of a 12th man -- hadlee

i must confess that lara over richards was the hardest decision for me. followed by hobbs over hutton.