Geoff Armstrong- The 100 Greatest Cricketers

[Satyanash89]

But Ikki you are missing the point, he is the fifth bowler, he would be there to give relief and keep things tight and even sneak ot a wicket, all things he and Kallos was capable of doing. They aee not there as strike bowlers or to bowl out the side.

Actually this only became a topic of discussion when some people chose him as the third seamer to play two spinners in the team, which imo is overrating Sobers in the extreme. Dont think anyone denies that Sobers is a superb fifth bowler (fourth seamer) option

 

[fredfertang]

While I do not go as far as Sobers1 and I do acknowledge that Bradman is the best batsman in the history of the great game, I do support that Headley was his cloest comtemporary and rival. Their averages againts England are comparable, especially if one excludes his matches after the war which was inadvisable at best, with Bradman having an approximate 10 run advantage. Where the significant difference in their averages comes in where as the other team that Headley faced was a strong Australia team away from home, Bradman faced only minnows and all at home. He averaged over 200 and 178 vs South Africa and India with very weak attacks. Had he had to face his own team instead of the minnows of his time and Headley got to face N.Z, India or S.A. the numbers may well have been reversed. Let me repeat that I do consider the Don to be the best, but the difference between the two are not double as some proport.

I don't necessarily disagree with you but you do need to bear in mind that the England sides Headley faced in the Caribbean were some way below full strength, particularly in bowling

 

[kyear2]

The first one yes. Because of a less than ispiring performance by our first touring team to England. They didn't make that mistake again.

 

[sobers no:1]

at the age of 45 , hobbs averaged 50-55

add him to the list of super human batsmen (along with WG , don and headley )

 

[fredfertang]

The first one yes. Because of a less than ispiring performance by our first touring team to England. They didn't make that mistake again.

With respect they did - the batting was much stronger in 34/35, but of the bowlers who Headley faced only Ken Farnes had played in the 34 Ashes

 

[Ikki]

But Ikki you are missing the point, he is the fifth bowler, he would be there to give relief and keep things tight and even sneak ot a wicket, all things he and Kallos was capable of doing. They aee not there as strike bowlers or to bowl out the side.

If all you want is someone to bowl a few cheap overs then you're not using them as an all-rounder. That's the kind of job a part-timer like Richards would do.

But considering the match-up the proposed line-up will be up against why would you bowl him at all? I'd rather bowl 4 ATG bowlers and let them rotate than to give any overs to someone who is liable to lose the match for me in those few overs. 4 ATG bowlers average ~90-100 overs an inning anyway.

 

[kyear2]

Understand your perspective.

 

[Red]

at the age of 45 , hobbs averaged 50-55

add him to the list of super human batsmen (along with WG , don and headley )

Who said he wasn't a great batsman?

 

[fredfertang]

Who said he wasn't a great batsman?

sobers no:1 I think

 

[the big bambino]

The first one yes. Because of a less than ispiring performance by our first touring team to England. They didn't make that mistake again.

Wrong. Headley played 3 full series against Eng at home and both were well under full strength. Bradman played against full strength teams all the time. Therefore the facts are the opposite as you suggest. Headley faced the weaker opponents. Bradman the stronger.

 

[the big bambino]

exactly

thnk u

You mean like those competitive teams like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?

Then again you could be right. As Pakistan and NZ can't bat to save themselves anymore, India can't handle the short stuff and Australia, though a jittery joke, are amongst the better batting sides in the world! So I would say the difference in competitiveness isn't as great now. Its just that none, outside of Sth Africa, are any good.

 

[sobers no:1]

Who said he wasn't a great batsman?

Mr.nobody

but

jack hobbs at 45 = sachin at 25 ??

 

[the big bambino]

Mr.nobody

but

jack hobbs at 45 = sachin at 25 ??

Btw you do know that your choice of no.1 opener scored a vast swathe of his runs against 2nd and 3rd rate Aus and WI teams? Time to over rate him I guess,

 

[sobers no:1]

Btw you do know that your choice of no.1 opener scored a vast swathe of his runs against 2nd and 3rd rate Aus and WI teams? Time to over rate him I guess,

already did
no:1 opener and greatest batsman ever IMO

 

[Red]

already did
no:1 opener and greatest batsman ever IMO

Your 2nd XI would absolutely smash your 1st XI.

 

[the big bambino]

already did
no:1 opener and greatest batsman ever IMO

Unfortunately your opinion falls shy of the facts. Your greatest bat ever could be portayed as a minnow basher and ftb. Clearly over rated.

 

[archie mac]

While I do not go as far as Sobers1 and I do acknowledge that Bradman is the best batsman in the history of the great game, I do support that Headley was his cloest comtemporary and rival. Their averages againts England are comparable, especially if one excludes his matches after the war which was inadvisable at best, with Bradman having an approximate 10 run advantage. Where the significant difference in their averages comes in where as the other team that Headley faced was a strong Australia team away from home, Bradman faced only minnows and all at home. He averaged over 200 and 178 vs South Africa and India with very weak attacks. Had he had to face his own team instead of the minnows of his time and Headley got to face N.Z, India or S.A. the numbers may well have been reversed. Let me repeat that I do consider the Don to be the best, but the difference between the two are not double as some proport.

Not that anyone should every have to justify Bradman

The Don did face all the Aust. bowlers at Sheffield Shield level and pasted them all. On one occassion there was a match after the 1935-36 Aust tour of SA which Bradman did not make. The Aust team on the back of Grimmett and O'Reilly destroyed SA.

The match was between the Aust XI that had toured SA and a Bradman XI. Grimmett and O'Reilly were keen to take on Bradman and show he was not missed on the tour of SA. Bradman murdered them smashing 200 odd in an easy win.

 

[sobers no:1]

Your 2nd XI would absolutely smash your 1st XI.

man to man
gavaskar - hutton
barry - hobbs
viv - don
sachin-hammond
lara-pollock
sobers-kapil
gilly-ames
procter-imran
hadlee-marshal
akram-lillee
murali-warne

batting
even if u think don wl mk 50 runs more thn viv , tht wl b compensated by sobers' 25 runs>kapil , gilly > ames , procter > imran , hadlee > marshal , akram > lillee

bowling
only difference kapil > sobers

1st 11 advantage - more competent modern cricketers

 

[archie mac]

man to man
gavaskar - hutton
barry - hobbs
viv - don
sachin-hammond
lara-pollock
sobers-kapil
gilly-ames
procter-imran
hadlee-marshal
akram-lillee
murali-warne

batting
even if u think don wl mk 50 runs more thn viv , tht wl b compensated by sobers' 25 runs>kapil , gilly > ames , procter > imran , hadlee > marshal , akram > lillee

bowling
only difference kapil > sobers

1st 11 advantage - more competent modern cricketers

my ratings in bold, would be a good match but Bradman would swing it I should think

 

[kyear2]

Not that anyone should every have to justify Bradman

The Don did face all the Aust. bowlers at Sheffield Shield level and pasted them all. On one occassion there was a match after the 1935-36 Aust tour of SA which Bradman did not make. The Aust team on the back of Grimmett and O'Reilly destroyed SA.

The match was between the Aust XI that had toured SA and a Bradman XI. Grimmett and O'Reilly were keen to take on Bradman and show he was not missed on the tour of SA. Bradman murdered them smashing 200 odd in an easy win.

So you are honestly saying that there would have no difference between facing an Australian attack for those 10 tests instead of India and South Africa?

There is no need to defend Bradman, but nothing wrong with a civil constructive conversation.