Garry Sobers v Imran Khan,Test Cricket:Poll

[kyear2]

Dude stop raking muck on others. Last time you claimed Imran changed the batting order so that he could make runs. Now you start throwing this at Kallis. Do you have any proper evidence to say what you are saying?

That is not muck raking, was showing why Kallis doesnt get the acknowlement Sobers gets, you are taking this way too personal.
That is a widely held view of Kallis up untile very recently. Not just my opinion.
Also what I said about Imran was something I read during the cricinfo process in a Pakistani publication to validate Akrams selection over Imran. Relax.

 

[bagapath]

I guess Sobers was the at his best in 1960s, just like Imran was in the 1980s. By the time they entered these respective decades these two had spent many years in test cricket honing their skills against various opponents and learning the tricks that eventually made them world champions. Even though they had their moments before these decades started, it is not stupid to assume that essentially the 60s for Sobers and the 80s for Imran were really the golden decades.

their stats in these decades read...

GS Sobers 1960-1969 49 4563 226 60.03 15 162 6/73 32.29 6 80 0
Imran Khan 1980-1989 54 2430 135* 44.18 5 256 8/58 19.12 18 19 0

I like teams with 6 batters + 4 bowlers + 1 WK. Because, I believe, a part timer to support the four main strike bowlers would be enough to bowl out any opposition. the 5 batters + 5 bowlers + 1 wk combo always looks lopsided to me even if one of the bowlers is a capable bat, like imran would be. My primary reason for choosing Sobers is only on this count, that I think he would be a more useful all rounder in an AT XI at no.6 than Imran or anybody else.

Gary was a great batsman and a useful bowler. Imran was a good batsman and a great bowler. And, of course, Sobers was a much much better fielder. But, man to man, it will be difficult to choose between the two of them. Because Sobers bowling to Imran would make a boring contest. And Imran bowling to Sobers would be a cracker. Only the fielding would ultimately tilt the scales in Sobers' favor I guess.

If I could take sobers at 6, gilly at 7 and imran at 8 then my team is complete; which means i see sobers more as an allrounder and imran mainly as a strike bowler.

 

[Ikki]

So dont you think that used properly as a 5th bowler, as Kallis is that his stats wouldn't have been better? Look at his economy rate, that was his primary job, and if you actually read about his medium space swing bowling when properly rested then you would understand. He was an over worked all rounder pressed into service as a strike, second change and when required spin bowler. Such was the work load of the man, and those who actually watched him, realised that.

And just for empasis name a genuine #6 batsman who comes close to Sobers as amatch winner in the 3 areas. Kallis batted for him self and begged of bowling when ever he could. Thats why Sobers is seen as the best by a mile.

You keep framing the discussion as if being the greatest all-rounder of all time is dependent on the fact of being a great #6 and someone who could bowl a bit. If the greatest compliment you could give him is that he has a good ER then the discussion should be already over.

The reality is that the stats don't match up with the stories. EVEN if we consider his overall record one where he was only a pure spinner...it still is not even as good as the average spinner of his time. You know what that means? It means the dilution of his record as a pacer should at least improve his figures to that of the average spinner during his era if he was in any way half decent as a pacer. Yet it doesn't.

There is one counter to the above argument. That is: he was so very crap, garbage, bad as a spinner that his great pace bowling still couldn't fix his overall figures and what they are right now is actually very good considering. However, this is such an illogical position because asking someone who is that good as a pacer to improve his overall figures that much inspite of his spin bowling to bowl spin is akin to asking Marshall to bowl spin.

But that not only doesn't match up with the commentary of his bowling, it doesn't match up to plain old common sense. Also, as I've already mentioned, Sobers bowled with at least 1, sometimes 2, recognised spinners throughout his career, as well as many other all-rounders. He bowled a hell of a lot, changed up his bowling too; but not because he was some martyr.

FTR, Kallis' bowling is better than Sobers.

 

[kyear2]

The key take out

That is the point that was raised earlier as well. The only team that he bowled well against was India. He played 18 tests against India and I have not looked it up but there might be a very good chance that out of the 19 matches where he crossed 650 the matches were against India many times.

Was that the only stat you took from that comparison.
That is called cherry picking.

 

[smash84]

That is not muck raking, was showing why Kallis doesnt get the acknowlement Sobers gets, you are taking this way too personal.
That is a widely held view of Kallis up untile very recently. Not just my opinion.
Also what I said about Imran was something I read during the cricinfo process in a Pakistani publication to validate Akrams selection over Imran. Relax.

I am not taking this personally. I think these are not fair accusations. While you choose to paint Sobers as a great team man who did so much for his team you choose to paint Imran and Kallis as selfish. Imran did a lot for Pakistan cricket as much as Sobers did for WI if not more.

 

[smash84]

Was that the only stat you took from that comparison.
That is called cherry picking.

No it is not. Did you read my earlier posts? I said that Sobers's batting was never in dispute. Please go and dig that up again. Hence I only did an analysis of the part that I thought was disputed.

 

[kyear2]

Never said Imran was selfish. This man is in my all time team and probably as vice captain.
My idea of an All Rounder is just different from yours. Can we just leave it at that.

 

[kyear2]

Imran spent all of 2 tests rated above 650 as a batsman, compared to 19 for Sobers above 650 as a bowler.

 

[smash84]

My idea of an All Rounder is just different from yours. Can we just leave it at that.

Yeah I said that earlier too. Your definition is also quite different from the classical definition of an all rounder. Marc and I had pointed it out. Fair enough if your definition of an all rounder is different from mine but you shouldn't have come up the a wrong classical definition of an all rounder .

 

[marc71178]

For the early half of his career Imran didn't get to bat too often because of the strong batting line up. However when he did get the chance he performed quite well.

For series' where Imran did really well

against England 1981-82
against India 1982-83
vs England 1987
vs WI 1986
vs WI 1988

He was up there in both batting and bowling in all these series and these make up 25% of his career

Erm actually only in one of those series did he perform with bat and ball at the same time. the 1982 series (212 runs and 21 wickets in 3 Tests)
The 1982/83 series he batted 5 times in 6 games.
In 1987 he batted 5 times in 5 games.
The 2 West Indies series he scored 115 @ 28.75 and 90 @ 22.50.

 

[smash84]

Erm actually only in one of those series did he perform with bat and ball at the same time. the 1982 series (212 runs and 21 wickets in 3 Tests)
The 1982/83 series he batted 5 times in 6 games.
In 1987 he batted 5 times in 5 games.
The 2 West Indies series he scored 115 @ 28.75 and 90 @ 22.50.

The point was that he did well in the games that he did both.

in 1987 series none of the Pakistan batsmen batted more than 5 times throughout the series. Was one of the highest run getters for Pakistan and the highest wicket taker in the series.

In the WI series what were the comparative scores from Pakistan (or both) sides. The 86 series was very low scoring due to the awesome bowling attacks from both sides. He was only behind Miandad and Ramiz Raja (only just) as the highest run getter for Pakistan. Again the highest wicket taker in the series. Didn't do that well in the 88 series though (with the bat)

In the 82-83 series against India he batted so few times because it wasn't needed. The wins were comprehensive thanks to Imran's bowling but whenever he batted he did well. I don't see what's wrong with 247 runs in 5 innings. If anything the way the pitches were he would have only improved his stats.

 

[marc71178]

The point is those series do nothing to dispell the notion that he didn't do both at the same time, which is the true test of an all rounder.

 

[smash84]

Why not? Please don't post that list again (the one with 250 runs as the cutoff point)

 

[marc71178]

Because he quite clearly has not had to shoulder the twin burdens of batting and bowling. If a bloke doesn't even bat once per match in a series then he is not having to contribute.

Including those last 2 WI series is extremely pointless as well, averaging under 30 in one of his better all round series shows his all round efforts off really well.

I don't care if you don't like that list, because it is incredibly telling as to the all-rounders who performed and those who never actually showed themselves to be performers of the highest calibre.

 

[smash84]

Because he quite clearly has not had to shoulder the twin burdens of batting and bowling. If a bloke doesn't even bat once per match in a series then he is not having to contribute.

Including those last 2 WI series is extremely pointless as well, averaging under 30 in one of his better all round series shows his all round efforts off really well.

I don't care if you don't like that list, because it is incredibly telling as to the all-rounders who performed and those who never actually showed themselves to be performers of the highest calibre.

The reason I don't like that list as I had stated earlier is that almost all of the all rounders in that list are either playing 4 or 5 or 6 match series (barring 1 or 2 IIRC) and also because you were treating it as a Bible refusing to see that Imran had 247 runs in 5 or 6 innings in the 6 match series that he played in. 250 was just an arbitrary number and anything so close to it is the same thing.

The 86 WI series is not pointless because he finished as the 3rd best batsman for Pakistan despite the fact that he was not playing as 1-5 batsman. None of the batsmen averaged very high in that series, not even Viv Richards. Regarding the 88 series I'll admit that I did not remember it correctly

 

[marc71178]

Yes, but even when scaled down to take into account lower number of matches, he still doesn't get in there as an all-round performer.

And I don't care if he finished 3rd in the averages if all he averaged was sub-30 scoring less than 120 runs, that is not part of an all-round performance.

 

[smash84]

And I don't care if he finished 3rd in the averages if all he averaged was sub-30 scoring less than 120 runs, that is not part of an all-round performance.

Ok. I don't care if a person averages the lowest or highest in a series but he needs to have at least 1000 runs and at least 60 wickets in a series for him to have it classified as an all round performance.

 

[smash84]

Yes, but even when scaled down to take into account lower number of matches, he still doesn't get in there as an all-round performer.
.

And exactly what kind of scaling are you using? I think using straight averages and extrapolation he probably will make it.

 

[Tom Halsey]

FTR, Kallis' bowling is better than Sobers.

No it's not. Sobers from roughly '62 until the end of his career was a better bowler than Kallis by quite a large margin.

 

[Sanz]

#1, you don't have the stats to prove that average. #2 average is not the only problem. If his 34 average was all that was bad, sure; but his SR is usually horrendous. You cannot be a good fast bowler when you are striking in the 80s and 90s.

The Stats are there @ Cricinfo for anyone to see, if you knew how to look them up, his average as an opening bowler is 30.75. And it does not matter to me what you think of that stat. It is good enough for me to consider him a good fast bowler.

Anyway, if you are basing your stats argument on the above then it shouldn't need me to tell you how weak it is.

My main argument is not based on that and I guess that is mentioned perhaps a zillion times on this forum.