Imran v Hadlee v Miller

[Jack1]

It surprises me so many pick Hobbs and Hutton here. Sutcliffe averaged over 60 his entire test career

 

[kyear2]

And was still the no. 2 opener. Batted horrendously slowly and played his entire career in the old one laws and used it to his advantage.

Hobbs is known as the master and in my opinion Hutton was the best opener ever. He played in the modern post war era. He faced much better bowlers than Hobbs and Sutcliffe and had a good technique that would translate to today's game.

 

[Migara]

If you make such a statement, you should substantiate it with facts and figures.

There is a player search option in Cricinfo. It's only few clicks away

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

No way Cairns is better than Shakib.

 

[Red]

How the **** did Warne and Lara pull as much as they did though

Warne was pure will. If you want ***** that badly, and chase after it enough, it will keep happening. He would have had a huge failure rate though.

Warne is a proper bogan alpha. He would have massive appeal to glam bogan women.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Since the age of 35, From the start of the 2011 season, as an all-rounder Darren Stevens figures are mightily impressive.

6792 runs@35.74 H.S. 237, 13 cent, 37 fifties
423 wickets@22.72, Best 8-75, 5 wkts innings 26, 10 wkts match 1.

Makes you wonder what he could have done if he bowled in his younger days. Probably deserved a few one day games, considering the likes of Paul Franks, Alex Louden, Scott Borthwick, Stuart Meaker & Stephen Parry all got games.

And i saw his 8-75 v Leic At Canterbury in August 2017 out of a total of 350. Pure class.

One other all-rounder who i forgot to mention in my previous post who is forgotten is Maurice Tate.
Good enough to score 1198 runs@25.48 with a century and 155 wickets@26.16. Batted very low in the order for England, but for his county Sussex, usually batted in the top 4, over 20000 runs,sometimes even opening with Ted Bowley. Over 2500 first-class wickets as well.

Stevens is the living embodiment of everything wrong with the English game

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's true.

Still think Steyn is a must over Imran and tbh I am playing Sobers just as a batsman.
So not quite as all in on the all rounder wagon lol.

Steyn is well behind a few, Marshall and McGrath at least. Then the likes of Hadlee, Imran, Wasim, Davidson etc are at least just about as good but much better with the bat. Steyn would be pushing for a 2nd XI ATG place maybe.

 

[kyear2]

Steyn is well behind a few, Marshall and McGrath at least. Then the likes of Hadlee, Imran, Wasim, Davidson etc are at least just about as good but much better with the bat. Steyn would be pushing for a 2nd XI ATG place maybe.

We can agree to disagree, he is firmly in my top 5. Imran, Davidson, Imran and Akram I don't think make my top 10.

And I think my XI has more than enough batting. Hadlee, Marshall and Warne are more than sufficient

 

[Red]

My bowling attack would still be:

Wasim
Warne
Marshall
McGrath

 

[kyear2]

My bowling attack would still be:

Wasim
Warne
Marshall
McGrath

And it still works

 

[TheJediBrah]

Stevens is the living embodiment of everything wrong with the English game

this but less emphatically. Definitely for the best that he wasn't pushed to be a Test cricketer, probably would have been brutal.

 

[Fanboy375]

Imran has too many not outs to boost his average.I think he is 2nd best bowling all rounder after Miller.Hadlee is close 3rd

 

[Fanboy375]

 

[trundler]

Imran has too many not outs to boost his average.I think he is 2nd best bowling all rounder after Miller.Hadlee is close 3rd

Miller is a better batsman but only takes 3 wickets per match and so is a worse bowler.

 

[Fanboy375]

Miller is a better batsman but only takes 3 wickets per match and so is a worse bowler.

I heard Jarrod said Miller batted very aggressively

 

[Coronis]

I heard Jarrod said Miller batted very aggressively

Had a SR of 43. iirc tho Harvey’s was around 50 and he was one of the more aggressive top order bats post-Bradman.

 

[Van_Sri]

Hadlee > Imran > Miller

 

[subshakerz]

Hadlee > Imran > Miller

As bowlers only

 

[subshakerz]

Imran has too many not outs to boost his average.I think he is 2nd best bowling all rounder after Miller.Hadlee is close 3rd

Even without not outs he averages 30 runs per wicket in output. This was standard for lower order bats of the 80s decade, whereas middle order bats were 31-32.

Hadlee by comparison is 23 runs a wickets without NO.

 

[kyear2]

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.

The only thing that article showed is that Gilchrist is quite possibly the 2nd greatest all rounder ever, and that in terms of performing with both bat and ball over a career, Imran is closer to Kallis than he is to Miller far less Sobers.



Note the article that you introduced.

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.

Yeah, Imran's batting isn't only overstated, but overrated. It's a problem that Kallis's bowling production went down as his career progressed into its later years, but not that inversely, Imran's batting improved in his later years as his bowling also wasn't quite the same. His latter career numbers, not outs and down hill skiing boosts his numbers to where they are and even his rpi of 30 is boosted by the former and the latter.

Minnows are brought up for Kallis, but not that all but one of Imran's hundreds came in draws, and even the match they won wasn't nearly a match winning effort. Yes a couple were clutch match saving efforts, but when your knock is the 4th century in an innings, there might be some slight stat padding at work.

And as for the argument that he was a top 6 specialists batsman, that's a little rich as during his bowling peak, he hardly batted at 6, and even over the course of his career the significant majority of his batting was done at no. 7, and he batted at no. 8 more than he batted at no. 6.

Conversely Kallis was first change more often than he was 3rd. Like Imran the vast majority of his career he spent as the 4th bowler (equivalent to the no. 7 bat), but played more as the 3rd option than he did as the 5th. The inverse of Imran.

Similarly though, in a normal cricket team the ideal spot for Imran would be an at or just below test standard no. 7 (let's say just below Knott level), and Kallis a similarly rated 4th bowler. Push both down a slot and they're above replacement level.

In an ATG scenario Imran is a useful no. 8 and Kallis a useful 5th bowler. Kallis though also being able to add to his value by being an AT Great at the critical 2nd slip spot where there would be no depreciation of skill or output.

But for Imran's batting and Kallis's batting, they're basically the same.