Imran v Hadlee v Miller

[trundler]

Thing is, Kallis was good enough to be a first change bowler for virtually any side in the world during his playing years. He was also an all time great batsman. That makes him one of only two guys in history that could do that job. He was something special.

I honestly think that Kallis is not only a captain's dream, but he's also a selector's dream since he gives you so much flexibility with your composition. You can go in with 4 seam bowlers and a spinner or 3 seamers and two spinners without sacrificing batting at all.

Sure, he's behind Sobers but honestly in any real side in history he's the player first or second picked.

If we're doing the Imran's batting average was misleading thing, surely this isn't true either. Kallis didn't have a frontline bowler's workload either. As a package surely he's the inverse of Hadlee. And there have been more than 2 players who could do his job. Hammond, Simpson, Worrell, Mushtaq Mohammad to name 4.

 

[Line and Length]

And there have been more than 2 players who could do his job. Hammond, Simpson, Worrell, Mushtaq Mohammad to name 4.

Surely you jest! In 85 games Hammond took just 83 wickets, Simpson 71 in 62 games, Worrell 69 in 51 games and Mushtaq 79 in 57 games. By comparison, Kallis took 292 wickets in 166 games with a far superior average to all but Mushtaq. Kallis was more than just a batsman who bowled occasionally and picked up a few wickets here and there.

 

[h_hurricane]

jadeja ****ing lol. **** can do something away from home first.

An unpopular truth is that Jadeja has done well away from home as well. I don't have a strong opinion about it anyways.

 

[smash84]

Miller was certainly the most debonair.

I think Imran has Miller beat in that department too.

Imran in his heyday

"He wore the Sussex cap and from its band flowed the signature mane that rested upon the nape of his neck. The martlets on his sleeveless jumper appeared as if newly embroidered and occasionally, when the morning sun broke, shone like little blue sapphires on his chest. Imran Khan was some sight. Outrageously handsome, athletically built and light on his feet, he carried himself like an emperor."


https://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1224397/when-imran-khan-blew-me-away

 

[Line and Length]

I often wonder if Keith Miller would have had an even more illustrious career had he not clashed with Bradman.

During WWII, as a pilot, he was known to clash with authority (as he did with Bradman).

"Dashing Australian pilot Keith Miller was not one to kow-tow to his superior officers. Primarily because he found them to be mostly inferior. Earlier in World War II he had served in the Australian Army motor division and been fined for using offensive language to an officer. When he later joined the RAAF his disdain for anyone with a higher rank continued.

One day when walking back to base with a mate after a few days leave an officer pulled up alongside him in a staff car and told him to take his hands out of his pockets “immediately”. His only response was “Get stuffed”. The officer drove off in a huff."

 

[subshakerz]

All rounders need to perform with the bat and the ball at the same time - something Imran most definitely did not do.

This is a common misconception. Imran was purely a bowler for the 70s and a good batsman + useful bowler from 89 - 92.

However, for Imran's bowling peak, from 1980 to 1988, he averaged 17 with the ball. But he also averaged 40 with the bat! He had several series, such as England 1982, India 1983 and England 1987, when he performed well with both the bat and ball. And when he had an off series with the ball, he would still deliver the goods with the bat, such as against India in 86.

 

[subshakerz]

Averaging over 45 sounds good till you realise that in 25 Tests he scored 1176 runs - hardly a heavy workload.

Imran rarely, if ever put together a series where he had to put in a considerable effort with the bat whilst also having a considerable workload with the ball - it was either one or the other and that to me is not an all rounder. It's a very valuable cricketer but if you compare it to others who actually did perform with both disciplines at the same time, he comes up short.

He did that against England in 82 and 87 and against India is 83. And its not like averaging 40 in the 80s is a joke.

 

[bagapath]

if sobers and kallis are the best batting allrounders, then miller, botham and imran should be the top candidates for the bowling allrounder title. never considered imran's batting and miller's bowling to be of world beating standards. but their bowling and batting, respectively, place them automatically in contention, with their weaker suits still good enough to earn them a place in their teams. imran, with zero wickets, and Miller, with a batting avg of 5 could still have played for their countries, I agree. but pound for pound imran as a batsman and miller as a bowler were only as good as kallis the bowler.

botham is probably the only guy in the history of the game to have such stellar records in bowling (world ecordd haul) and batting (14 centuries) and should be the most "true all rounder".

For the question asked in the thread, I will go for miller, imran and hadlee in that order.

 

[Howe_zat]

but pound for pound... miller as a bowler [was] only as good as kallis the bowler.

I find that a very strange claim. Miller opened the bowling, averaged 10 runs per wicket less than Kallis not just in Tests but also across his much longer first class career, and took double the number of 5-fors. He didn't quite have a full time fast bowler's workload but he got results to an extent that Kallis certainly didn't.

 

[ankitj]

IIRC Imran scored a century and took a fiver in same match twice. No one other than Botham has done it more times. So I don't accept that Imran never did it with bat and ball together. If anything he deserves more credit for adapting to loss of zing in bowling and becoming one of the main batsmen in the side.

It's just mad what all Imran could do.

 

[subshakerz]

If you refer to the article below, Imran's performance in the 1982 series against England is considered the best ever in terms of all-round output, followed by Sober's in the 1966 series against England.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22034780/top-allrounders

I think posters are seriously underestimating how difficult it was to average 35 plus in the 1980s.

 

[ankitj]

Everyone gets their best against England

 

[AndrewB]

IIRC Imran scored a century and took a fiver in same match twice. No one other than Botham has done it more times. So I don't accept that Imran never did it with bat and ball together. If anything he deserves more credit for adapting to loss of zing in bowling and becoming one of the main batsmen in the side.

It's just mad what all Imran could do.

He scored 117 and took two 5fers in a match against India, but that was the only time.

 

[h_hurricane]

Imran Khan to me is the best bowling all rounder of all time, but his batting is a tad over rated here.

He played a little over 20 years of cricket but yet scored only 3807 runs (less than 200 runs per year). Something to do with his batting not good enough for a decade or so and blossoming late, but still a striking stat for me.

He played 5 series of 5 tests or more (one of them was a 6 match series) and yet only scored 300+ runs in a series once in his career. Miller and Botham did it 4 times, Kapil did it twice.

 

[subshakerz]

As for Miller vs Imran, I cant see past Imran. Imran was an all-time great bowler with the best bowling peak arguably in history, and on top of that was a decent batsman in number 6/7. Miller was a very good bowler and batsman, but the gulf between Imran's bowling and Miller's is wider than their batting IMO.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Keith Miller's bowling is still underrated af on here

 

[harsh.ag]

As for Miller vs Imran, I cant see past Imran. Imran was an all-time great bowler with the best bowling peak arguably in history, and on top of that was a decent batsman in number 6/7. Miller was a very good bowler and batsman, but the gulf between Imran's bowling and Miller's is wider than their batting IMO.

There are three separate debates for me.

1. Better player? Imran fo sho.
2. Better all rounder? Either makes sense.
3. More allroundery? Miller

 

[trundler]

As for Miller vs Imran, I cant see past Imran. Imran was an all-time great bowler with the best bowling peak arguably in history, and on top of that was a decent batsman in number 6/7. Miller was a very good bowler and batsman, but the gulf between Imran's bowling and Miller's is wider than their batting IMO.

DWTA. Miller was a #5 batsman; Imran wasn't (for most of his career, though people are underrating his batting value given he was a top 10 pacer). Both could open the bowling, however. Even if Miller's average flatters him a bit, it's still ATG tier. Of course it probably would've gone up if he'd bowled more but it's not like he was taking 1 wicket a game. <23 is still epic even if it isn't as epic as it looks with the low WPM.

 

[TheJediBrah]

DWTA. Miller was a #5 batsman; Imran wasn't (for most of his career, though people are underrating his batting value given he was a top 10 pacer). Both could open the bowling, however. Even if Miller's average flatters him a bit, it's still ATG tier. Of course it probably would've gone up if he'd bowled more but it's not like he was taking 1 wicket a game. <23 is still epic even if it isn't as epic as it looks with the low WPM.

Pure speculation and not backed by evidence at all. As someone (Red Hill?) said earlier in the thread, on the occasions when Miller was required to bowl more he stepped up and was good, or better, than ever.

 

[trundler]

On average Miller bowled about 110 balls per innings he bowled in. In 55 matches he bowled in 95 innings. Ray Lindwall bowled 121 balls per innings. That's only 2 fewer. Imran bowled 137 balls per innings he bowled in. Certainly this is then down to team composition and how Miller and Lindwall were used (and also the low SR era they played in). In case it is only a difference of less than 5 six ball overs, which isn't a huge difference in terms of workload. Imran bowled in 142 innings from 88 matches so he played much more as a specialist than Miller ever did.