Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
I'm taking it as a given that the two ATG all-rounders are Sobers and Kallis, but who would you rank next?
The general feeling I get that it is either Imran Khan or Richard Hadlee but I have a soft spot for Keith Miller.
Imran, in 88 Tests scored 3807 runs @ 37.7 including 6 centuries. He took 362 wickets @ 22.8 - a fine average.
Hadlee played 86 Tests scoring 3124 runs @ 27.2 and made 2 centuries. He took 431 wickets @ 22.3 - another fine average.
Comparing the two, Imran clearly was the better bat and there is little to separate their bowling, though I'd lean slightly towards Sir Richard.
Let's now consider Miller. He played 55 Tests scoring 2958 runs @ 37.0 and made 7 centuries. He took 170 wickets @ 22.9 - right up there with the other two on average but far fewer wickets per match.
Two factors need consideration when comparing the trio.
Firstly we should consider where they batted. Miller went in at number 3 (11 times), 4 (17 times) and 5 (52 times) - a total of 80 of his 87 innings. At number 5, where he batted most frequently. he averaged 42.0
Imran Khan spent most of his career batting at number 6 (23 times), 7 (63) and 8 (30) with an average of 34.8 in his most frequented spot.
Hadlee batted even lower, going in at number 7 (48 times), 8 (53) and 9 (22) with an average of 27.4 at his favoured number 8.
Clearly, on batting Miller is well ahead of Khan with an even bigger gap to Hadlee.
When looking at their bowling performances, they had very similar averages but in wickets per game Hadlee (5.0) is clear of Imran (4.1) and Miller (3.1). But is it that clear cut? Miller had to share wickets with some pretty talented team-mates (Lindwall and other "Invincibles" and then Davidson and Benaud). Also, at times he was carrying an injury which prevented him bowling.
Summing up, I rate Miller alongside Imran and ahead of Hadlee. Other contenders (Botham, Dev et al) are further back though I must acknowledge Shaun Pollock as one who come close to the three I've discussed.
The general feeling I get that it is either Imran Khan or Richard Hadlee but I have a soft spot for Keith Miller.
Imran, in 88 Tests scored 3807 runs @ 37.7 including 6 centuries. He took 362 wickets @ 22.8 - a fine average.
Hadlee played 86 Tests scoring 3124 runs @ 27.2 and made 2 centuries. He took 431 wickets @ 22.3 - another fine average.
Comparing the two, Imran clearly was the better bat and there is little to separate their bowling, though I'd lean slightly towards Sir Richard.
Let's now consider Miller. He played 55 Tests scoring 2958 runs @ 37.0 and made 7 centuries. He took 170 wickets @ 22.9 - right up there with the other two on average but far fewer wickets per match.
Two factors need consideration when comparing the trio.
Firstly we should consider where they batted. Miller went in at number 3 (11 times), 4 (17 times) and 5 (52 times) - a total of 80 of his 87 innings. At number 5, where he batted most frequently. he averaged 42.0
Imran Khan spent most of his career batting at number 6 (23 times), 7 (63) and 8 (30) with an average of 34.8 in his most frequented spot.
Hadlee batted even lower, going in at number 7 (48 times), 8 (53) and 9 (22) with an average of 27.4 at his favoured number 8.
Clearly, on batting Miller is well ahead of Khan with an even bigger gap to Hadlee.
When looking at their bowling performances, they had very similar averages but in wickets per game Hadlee (5.0) is clear of Imran (4.1) and Miller (3.1). But is it that clear cut? Miller had to share wickets with some pretty talented team-mates (Lindwall and other "Invincibles" and then Davidson and Benaud). Also, at times he was carrying an injury which prevented him bowling.
Summing up, I rate Miller alongside Imran and ahead of Hadlee. Other contenders (Botham, Dev et al) are further back though I must acknowledge Shaun Pollock as one who come close to the three I've discussed.
