Top Five Most Underrated Cricketers Ever.

[G.I.Joe]

He apparently used to bowl pace on a spinning wicket and spin on a pacey wicket. He was wicked smaht.

 

[Blocky]

Kallis,
Sangakkara
Chaminda Vaas
Heath Streak
Chanderpaul
Mark Richardson

 

[Blocky]

Hadlee too - guy was one of the greatest pace bowlers of all time and a more than handy batsman, yet you never see him put in the "Greatest All Rounders" discussion.

 

[the big bambino]

I do consider him the GOAT all-rounder partly because of this. That doesn't mean his bowling wasn't overrated.



A combination of SR and wkts/match shows that even though he was a versatile bowler he was never much more than a stock bowler in practice. When people hype him up as the GOAT all-rounder it's usually "and he could bowl anything", without much focus on his actual record.

Of course it's based on his record. What else would it be based? I'm just stating his bowling role impacted on his stats. His bowling suit was stronger than practically every other all rounders batting suit

 

[fredfertang]

There is one thing that never ceases to amaze me about this place and that is why so many people who are genuinely knowledgeable about the game continue to dismiss Gary Sobers' ability with the ball. The bloke was a brilliant bowler. On an English greentop he was a lethal swing bowler and his left arm spin, as has been pointed out, was good enough to get him selected as a specialist above Alf Valentine. But his strike rate average and haul of wickets are not good enough for some. They don't, but should, bear in mind that for most of his career he was mainly a stock bowler - he was the third seamer behind Hall and Griffith, or the orthodox spinner who kept the batsmen tied down while long-fingered Lance spun them out - he'd have been picked for those teams for his bowling alone

 

[wellAlbidarned]

He was clearly a decent bowler, but the problem is where it's suggested that he'd make the side on bowling alone. Absolutely not based on the results he put up. Simple as that for me. That doesn't mean he's not in the top 3 allrounders of all time, mind.

 

[harsh.ag]

The major difference between Sobers and Kallis as a bowler is that Kallis, on average, bowled 12 over per innings, while for Sobers the number was 22, which is equivalent to front-line bowlers. Clearly, the Windies side considered him as good as a front-line bowler. Even if you ignore his initial selection as a bowler, this should put your mind at rest (given that you have not made up your mind already).

 

[MrPrez]

Sobers also bowled more overs because he bowled slower, over-consuming stuff. Kallis bowled a heavy ball, and was a big guy, so he often didn't bowl a full bowler's quota for the sake that he was primarily a batsman, and needed to stay fit and relatively fresh for his batting. People underestimate how crucial Kallis was to our batting. We had some other good batsmen - Kirsten, Cullinan, Gibbs etc - but we never had a full, strong batting line-up as many tend to believe. Our batting appeared to be strong largely because Kallis would dig in more often that not, and one or two others would often stand up with him.

I mean obviously our batting was never atrocious, but it was never in the same league as Aus/India either. Without Kallis our batting was very middle-of-the-pack. I reckon the only player that was more crucial to their team's performance was Brian Lara.

 

[G.I.Joe]

If Sobers gets credit for bowling more overs than Kallis, why doesn't Kallis get credit for batting on for longer than Sobers?

 

[harsh.ag]

We were only talking about bowling, it wasn't a Sobers vs Kallis thing. I used the two of them to show why Sobers was not a 5th bowler like Kallis.

 

[cnerd123]

If Sobers gets credit for bowling more overs than Kallis, why doesn't Kallis get credit for batting on for longer than Sobers?

Consider Sobers averaged 2 runs more with the bat than Kallis, I suspect the difference between their bowling loads is significantly higher than the difference in their batting loads.

 

[MrPrez]

We were only talking about bowling, it wasn't a Sobers vs Kallis thing. I used the two of them to show why Sobers was not a 5th bowler like Kallis.

Kallis wasn't a typical 5th bowler either though, he just bowled less because there was no point giving him an excessive workload when we already had 3 high-quality pacers in the attack.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Consider Sobers averaged 2 runs more with the bat than Kallis, I suspect the difference between their bowling loads is significantly higher than the difference in their batting loads.

You don't measure stay at the crease in terms of averages. You use time or deliveries faced. Since Kallis has been proven to perform significantly better than placebo as a sedative, it stands to reason that he spent a lot more time at the crease with the bat than Sobers did.

 

[G.I.Joe]

We were only talking about bowling, it wasn't a Sobers vs Kallis thing. I used the two of them to show why Sobers was not a 5th bowler like Kallis.

Sobers had the workload of a first-4 bowler with the output of a 6th or 7th bowler. I don't know that that's necessarily a ringing endorsement. Kallis was the exact opposite.

 

[harsh.ag]

Sobers had the workload of a first-4 bowler with the output of a 6th or 7th bowler. I don't know that that's necessarily a ringing endorsement. Kallis was the exact opposite.

It was about Sobers being selected as a bowler only. Was writing with strict regards to that, not anything else.

 

[MrPrez]

It was about Sobers being selected as a bowler only. Was writing with strict regards to that, not anything else.

And their records would imply that while Sobers may have actually had the workload of a first-4 bowler, Kallis put out performances more deserving of such a role. Which is why you can't justify Sobers bowling more overs being a pro over Kallis, imo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sobers had the workload of a first-4 bowler with the output of a 6th or 7th bowler. I don't know that that's necessarily a ringing endorsement. Kallis was the exact opposite.

I agree with some of what you're saying but which 7th bowler averages 34?

The discussion wasn't really who's better with the ball between Kallis and Sobers tbh. Just a discussion on Sobers' strike rate, which wwhile high, isn't really as terrible as viriya makes it out to be.

 

[the big bambino]

A sixth or seventh bowler would be someone like ponting or hussey and they'd never have the output of sobers aggregate or average

 

[MrPrez]

Also, @Fred being picked over a specialist spinner doesn't necessarily mean he is better than the spinner. Just like how many believed JP Duminy at 7 and 4 pacers was a viable composition for Test cricket - few would argue that Duminy is the best spinner on offer. And while I know you know that, I feel that it is important to highlight it. Particularly for a pace-bowling nation like the West Indies, Having a fourth pacer in the team and a less-impactful spinner is often preferable. Sobers bowling ahead of a specialist spinner says nothing more than "Sobers could bowl spin at a somewhat respectable level."

 

[OverratedSanity]

And their records would imply that while Sobers may have actually had the workload of a first-4 bowler, Kallis put out performances more deserving of such a role. Which is why you can't justify Sobers bowling more overs being a pro over Kallis, imo.

Hmmm... Which performances are you talking about here? Kallis' bowling is underrated imo, but saying he produced performances or results of a frontline bowler more than Sobers is patently false.