The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[fredfertang]

Sobers was the greatest, by a country mile

 

[bagapath]

Sobers was the greatest, by a country mile

as a batting all-rounder, yes. with kallis coming second.

but it is impossible to split between miller (all-round consistency throughout career), imran (one of the best bowlers ever, and a very effective batsman in the later half of his career), and botham (peaking in bowling and batting together for five seasons).

 

[Red]

It's interesting, I consider Miller and Botham to be better batsmen (in terms of natural talent) than Imran by a margin, but Imran's stats ended up better as a batsman.

Imran got everything out of himself he could, didn't he?

 

[mr_mister]

The more I hear about Hadlee the more it seems like his batting was probably Warne/Akram/Marshall calibre. Higher average sure but 27 shouldn't really put you in many sides top 7. Depends on the keepers batting ability I guess

 

[Red]

The more I hear about Hadlee the more it seems like his batting was probably Warne/Akram/Marshall calibre. Higher average sure but 27 shouldn't really put you in many sides top 7. Depends on the keepers batting ability I guess

Yeh, Hadlee spent the majority of his career at #8 and a fair bit at #9, although he did spend a fair bit of time at #7 also.

For mine, an all rounder really has to be competent enough to bat in the top 7, or even top 6, as conventionally positions 8,9,10,11 are bowler's slots, hence 8 or below is pushing the all rounder definition.

There are a lot of guys I put in the same category: Hadlee, Wasim, Warne, Mitch Johnson, Lindwall, Marshall. All were capable batsmen, most scored test tons and could probably bat at 6 if needed, but they are better suited at #8.

All that said, they are still correctly classified as bowling all rounders in the sense that it is a massive benefit to a team to have a number 8 and even a number 9 who are decent bats. One of Australia's strengths over the last few decades was the fact that Warne, Gillespie, Lee, Bichel, Johnson etc could all make runs from 8/9. Having capable bats in those slots can often make a total of 350 turn into 500 plus.

 

[watson]

Just checked Hadlee's stats;

No.7
Innings = 36
Average = 32
HS = 151*

No.8
Innings = 39
Average = 27
HS = 103

No.9
Innings = 18
Average = 20
HS = 53*


Yeah I like your idea Red Hill that a true Bowling Allrounder should be capable of batting at No.7.

From what I can tell Hadlee fits the definition reasonably well.

I also remember NZ batting against Dennis Lillee during the early 80s. Basically many of the specialist batsman would struggle and look out of their depth. Hadlee would eventually come in, time the ball perfectly and make batting look easy in comparison. From what I can remember he was an exceptionally talented batsman held back by the fact that he had to bowl so much.

 

[watson]

.

 

[AndrewB]

It's interesting, I consider Miller and Botham to be better batsmen (in terms of natural talent) than Imran by a margin, but Imran's stats ended up better as a batsman.

Imran got everything out of himself he could, didn't he?

Not disagreeing with any of that; but it's noticeable that Imran had an unusually high proportion of not-outs for a batsman averaging over 30 (25 out of 126 innings), while Botham had an unusually low proportion for a late-middle-order batsman (6 out of 161). Botham actually average more runs per innings than Imran (32.30 to 30.21).

I'm not suggesting that not-outs should be ignored when calculating averages, but I think their value as Test batsmen was closer than the averages suggest.

(And of course comparing their overall averages is a bit misleading, since Botham was streets ahead in their early careers, and Imran was even further ahead in their late careers).

 

[OverratedSanity]

Batting average isn't the only relevant stat.. . Botham scored 14 hundreds to Imran's 6. Easily a better batsman imo.

 

[smash84]

The difference between Imran and Botham is mostly about work ethic and determination.

Botham was easily the "naturally" better batsman. But as Red Hill aptly points out that Imran got all that he could out of himself.

Imran worked very hard on his game (probably harder off the field ) and maintained his fitness (despite a very bad injury at his peak) while Botham kind of just fell away in the latter part of his career. Imran was a solid batsman who could hold his own and stay at the wicket building partnerships (speaking of test cricket) but he couldn't take the attack to the opposition like Botham could. Of course it bears reminding that Botham couldn't sustain his excellence over a long period of time but depending on what you look for in your batsman it is easily arguable that he was the better batsman despite his average not being that much better (he wasn't terribly consistent IIRC, cbf looking back on his career stats).

On their bowling too while Botham was very very good in the first 5 years or so he fell away in that too. Imran on the other hand didn't really come into his until he was 5 years into his career. WSC really brought out the best in him while also getting tips on moving the ball around from the likes of Dennis Lillee and John Snow. He was just way more determined and focused than anybody else in his time. Something that is just a part of him i guess. It's this dogged determination that his allowed him to stay in pakistan politics for 20+ years, and the politics here is possibly the dirtiest and most dangerous of any country in the world. Heck, he is probably the only one to go from a medium pace trundler to an all out express fast bowler in the history of cricket.

So in terms of batting if i wanted to take the attack to the opposition i would go with botham, if i wanted somebody to hunker down and tick the scoreboard over, i would take imran.

 

[Engle]

Imran Khan is the only cricketer who could make Test Crickets Top 10 on 3 lists :
1. Top 10 Captains
2. Top 10 All-Rounders
3. Top 10 Fast Bowlers

 

[stephen]

Imran Khan is the only cricketer who could make Test Crickets Top 10 on 3 lists :
1. Top 10 Captains
2. Top 10 All-Rounders
3. Top 10 Fast Bowlers

Ever heard of a bloke named Richie Benaud.

Top ten captains
Top ten spinners
Top ten all-rounders
Best ever commentator

 

[watson]

Here are some stats from the BIG 4 against the toughest batting assignment of their time - the West Indies pace attack.


Ian BOTHAM V West Indies

Overall
Tests = 20
HS = 81
Average = 21.40

Home
Tests = 11
HS = 81
Average = 27.55

Away
Tests = 9
HS = 38
Average = 14.00 (Ouch)



IMRAN Khan V West Indies

Overall
Tests = 18
HS = 123
Average = 27.67

Home
Tests = 10
HS = 123
Average = 33.57

Away
Tests = 8
HS = 47
Average = 21.78



KAPIL DEV V West Indies

Overall
Tests = 25
HS = 126*
Average = 30.83

Home
Tests = 16
HS = 126*
Average = 31.91

Away
Tests = 9
HS = 100*
Average = 28.75



Richard HADLEE V West Indies

Overall
Tests = 10
HS = 103
Average = 32.41

Home
Tests = 6
HS = 103
Average = 42.00

Away
Tests = 4
HS = 39*
Average = 22.83


Just looking at the raw numbers and not taking 'match context' into account I reckon its.....

Kapil Dev > Imran Khan = Richard Hadlee > Ian Botham.


Kapil Dev scored 3 centuries against the West Indies but his 100* off only 95 balls to help India draw the match at the Port of Spain (1983) seems top-shelf. The bowlers were Holding, Roberts, Marshall and Garner.

2nd Test, India tour of West Indies at Port of Spain, Mar 11-16 1983 | Match Summary | ESPNCricinfo

 

[Engle]

Wasim Raja beats all of them.

Away Matches

Matches 5

Runs 517

HS 117*

Bat Av 57.44

 

[smash84]

IIRC mohinder amarnath had a fantastic record against WI didn't he?

 

[AndrewB]

Averaged 66 against them in one series, 0.16 in the next... his average in the West Indies was a very impressive 54.81

 

[smash84]

Averaged 66 against them in one series, 0.16 in the next... his average in the West Indies was a very impressive 54.81

yeah, just looked him up again.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

what a weird record. Pretty crap at home and fantastic away

 

[Howe_zat]

Allan Border turned into a bowler vs West Indies: bowling average 24.31, with two five-fors. He got Viv Richards out three times.

Against everyone else he averaged 53 and only once took more than two wickets.

 

[kyear2]

Was Pollock not just as magnificent in his test opportunities? Just curious as what makes you think he was not in the same class as the other middle order batsmen.

In my opinion, not quite.

Sachin and Lara were both tested over a decade plus in a variety of conditions and opponents. They endured the ups and downs and surges and slumps in form that the test of time provided.

Pollock basically played 20 tests in what may have been his absolute prime. Even though Headley played a similar amour of tests, his were spread out over a decade plus.

And before it is mentioned, even though Barry played in fewer tests. He proved his mettle in various arenas over his career. Be it first class cricket in different countries against the best of the best or WSC. Pollock basically played the remainder of his career playing 1st class cricket for S.A..

There was also anecdotal evidence that he struggles vs the short ball.


I am not saying he wasn't great, but Sachin and Lara just proved them selves beyond a shadow of a doubt against the very best in all conditions and against all comers. They had the technique, flair and resolve that only the very best had.

 

[mr_mister]

In my opinion, not quite.

Sachin and Lara were both tested over a decade plus in a variety of conditions and opponents. They endured the ups and downs and surges and slumps in form that the test of time provided.

Pollock basically played 20 tests in what may have been his absolute prime. Even though Headley played a similar amour of tests, his were spread out over a decade plus.

And before it is mentioned, even though Barry played in fewer tests. He proved his mettle in various arenas over his career. Be it first class cricket in different countries against the best of the best or WSC. Pollock basically played the remainder of his career playing 1st class cricket for S.A..

There was also anecdotal evidence that he struggles vs the short ball.


I am not saying he wasn't great, but Sachin and Lara just proved them selves beyond a shadow of a doubt against the very best in all conditions and against all comers. They had the technique, flair and resolve that only the very best had.

Headley and Pollocks test careers were pretty much both spread accross the 30s and 60s respectively. 30-38 and 63-70. Not much separating those time spans.

If you really want to include Headley's crappy 2 performances in 48 and 54 go ahead but I think it's silly