The greatest cricketers from the subcontinent - how would you rank them?

[Xix2565]

In a real test match, five quality bowlers is more than enough. In fact four is enough but five allows you to rotate and keep the bowlers fresh.

Doesn't make 6 bowling options useless though. And it's not like teams have managed enough with 5 bowlers before so really, what is the issue beyond personal sensibilities based on conventions?

 

[subshakerz]

Sachin played against 9 teams 2 of which were minnows so that point is moot. And I have no doubt that had Marshall played against RSA, SL, Bangladesh or Zimbabwe at any point in history he'd conquer them as well. Is this even up for debate.

Averaging over 40 is fine and all but doesn't remotely compare to a sub 23 average against all teams. Marshall was basically Richard Hadlee level vs all teams. Every challenge that came his way he demolished.

At some point being outstanding/atg level consistency has to outweigh being merely good/great vs all teams no matter the length. Marshall imo, has that over Sachin.

Marshall still has that outlier in NZ though, and averaged 24 in India and 23 in Australia, not sub-23 everywhere. So his record is amazing but not quite as superlative as you are stating. He really excelled in five countries. Likely would have done as well in RSA and SL too but who knows, he could have a boggie team. Even McGrath and Hadlee dont have spotless records.

It's not like Tendulkar doing 40 plus in eight countries, including at home, over a much longer time. His record is as spotless as you can get.

 

[subshakerz]

Doesn't make 6 bowling options useless though. And it's not like teams have managed enough with 5 bowlers before so really, what is the issue beyond personal sensibilities based on conventions?

Its not useless but in most test match situations unnecessary, especially if you have to draw away from batting resources.

SC ATG XI will have five ATG levels bats, keeper, and then five ATG level bowlers with Imran as captain at no.7.

 

[Migara]

Dhoni/Chandimal stick out like a sore thumb in that side.

u fortunately, they are the best keeper bats in Asia. If pure keepers are needed, PJ, Engineer and Latif are options.

 

[Xix2565]

Its not useless but in most test match situations unnecessary, especially if you have to draw away from batting resources.

SC ATG XI will have five ATG levels bats, keeper, and then five ATG level bowlers with Imran as captain at no.7.

That's just your opinion though? Like I'm not seeing why beefing up the bowling is so unnecessary.

 

[subshakerz]

That's just your opinion though? Like I'm not seeing why beefing up the bowling is so unnecessary.

Who would be your six bowlers in the XI?

 

[Xix2565]

I guess going by the team sheet debated here Imran/Shakib/Murali/Wasim/Waqar/Kapil. Personal list would probably be a bit different but that's just my Indian bias leaking through a bit.

 

[Coronis]

Marshall still has that outlier in NZ though, and averaged 24 in India and 23 in Australia, not sub-23 everywhere. So his record is amazing but not quite as superlative as you are stating. He really excelled in five countries. Likely would have done as well in RSA and SL too but who knows, he could have a boggie team. Even McGrath and Hadlee dont have spotless records.

It's not like Tendulkar doing 40 plus in eight countries, including at home, over a much longer time. His record is as spotless as you can get.

Not that I really give a **** about this argument but is 40+ really comparable to 23-? There are a number of fast bowlers who are considered ATG’s who average over 23…. how many batsmen are (post WW1 obviously) ATGs who average under 40 or hell under 45?

That's just your opinion though? Like I'm not seeing why beefing up the bowling is so unnecessary.

Because you’re weakening the batting more than you’re strengthening the bowling at that point.

 

[Slifer]

Marshall still has that outlier in NZ though, and averaged 24 in India and 23 in Australia, not sub-23 everywhere. So his record is amazing but not quite as superlative as you are stating. He really excelled in five countries. Likely would have done as well in RSA and SL too but who knows, he could have a boggie team. Even McGrath and Hadlee dont have spotless records.

It's not like Tendulkar doing 40 plus in eight countries, including at home, over a much longer time. His record is as spotless as you can get.

An outlier? What 3 tests at 32? That's pretty desperate. Fwiw, since we're trolling, Sachin averages 36 at home vs RSA ??. I never said Marshall averaged sub 23 in all countries, I said he averaged sub 23 vs all countries and even if so, going at under 25 in all countries is still miles better than what Sachin accomplished consistency wise.

Using 50 as yardstick, Sachin averaged 50 vs 6 of 9 teams but two were unquestionably minnows; Marshall never faced any minnows. Of the 10 countries he played in Sachin averaged 50 + in 5 (including Bangladesh).

Sachin's record is not spotless. He lacks monster series (500 runs ) and a great series vs a great attack.

 

[smash84]

yeah, 40+ is definitely not comparable to sub 23. Sub 23 is a very rare feat. Possibly avging at least 50, if not a little more

 

[Slifer]

yeah, 40+ is definitely not comparable to sub 23. Sub 23 is a very rare feat. Possibly avging at least 50, if not a little more

Getting back on topic itself pretty clear who the top 3 are:

Imran
Murali/Sachin
The rest

 

[subshakerz]

An outlier? What 3 tests at 32? That's pretty desperate. Fwiw, since we're trolling, Sachin averages 36 at home vs RSA ??. I never said Marshall averaged sub 23 in all countries, I said he averaged sub 23 vs all countries and even if so, going at under 25 in all countries is still miles better than what Sachin accomplished consistency wise.

Using 50 as yardstick, Sachin averaged 50 vs 6 of 9 teams but two were unquestionably minnows; Marshall never faced any minnows. Of the 10 countries he played in Sachin averaged 50 + in 5 (including Bangladesh).

Sachin's record is not spotless. He lacks monster series (500 runs ) and a great series vs a great attack.

Sorry, I didnt mean to say NZ record was a blemish. It is just that Marshall hadnt proven himself yet there by the end of his career due to lack of opportunities. So its an outlier similar to Hadlee in Pakistan.

I would agree that Marshall's overall averages vs his opposition are no doubt better than Sachin's.

But I think Sachin's had a much longer career and played more countries so to me his averaging 40 plus against all and everywhere is more impressive.

Sachin also lacked monster/great series which is a mark against him but to me he balances that out with other achievements.

 

[Slifer]

Sorry, I didnt mean to say NZ record was a blemish. It is just that Marshall hadnt proven himself yet there by the end of his career due to lack of opportunities. So its an outlier similar to Hadlee in Pakistan.

I would agree that Marshall's overall averages vs his opposition are no doubt better than Sachin's.

But I think Sachin's had a much longer career and played more countries so to me his averaging 40 plus against all and everywhere is more impressive.

But then, you could pretty much use this longevity argument against any other cricketer since no one has played near as many tests as Sachin. I honestly think for modern times for bowlers 200 + wickets and for batsmen 8000 + runs are sufficient to judge most careers. I say modern times (ie post Packer) because teams play more tests now generally.

 

[Migara]

Not that I really give a **** about this argument but is 40+ really comparable to 23-? There are a number of fast bowlers who are considered ATG’s who average over 23…. how many batsmen are (post WW1 obviously) ATGs who average under 40 or hell under 45?

Averaging 23 with ball is much difficult than averaging 40 with the bat

 

[Migara]

Out of batsmen who scored at least 500 runs only 125 have averages north of 45. 85 bowlers have average below 23. Given that the sizable abount of sub 23 bowlers are pre WW2, the numbers of 1.75 batsmen to 1 bowler matches (125 / 85 = 1.47). It is fair to assume that batting average of 45 and bowling average of 23 are statistically similar.

 

[h_hurricane]

I disagree that Sachin is inferior as a batsman to Mcgrath/Hadlee/Marshall as bowler. It is far more difficult to maintain top notch performance across the globe as a batsman than as a bowler. Just the inherent nature of the game that batsmen get an unplayable ball, or make a mistake and they get out. Bowlers can bowl a poor spell but come back into their rhythm later and have their stats look alright. Every great batsman seems to have a bogey opposition or a bogey touring country. Sobers/Richards/Lara/Sachin everyone. Do we have any batsman who averages 45+ across all conditions, with the possible exception of Bradman, who is an outlier ? Using this analogy, are we saying top tier batsmen are all inferior to top tier bowlers ? I wouldn't think so.

On the other hand, ATG batsmen have an advantage of making hay while the sun shines in favorable conditions which is why they get their overall averages to 50+. ATG bowlers tend to look more consistent in their stats. Just the way the game is. I wouldn't put one group over other. Apples to oranges.

 

[_00_deathscar]

That's just your opinion though?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Everyone should be forced to post Gladys Knight’s opinion occasionally for a bit of variety.

 

[Slifer]

I disagree that Sachin is inferior as a batsman to Mcgrath/Hadlee/Marshall as bowler. It is far more difficult to maintain top notch performance across the globe as a batsman than as a bowler. Just the inherent nature of the game that batsmen get an unplayable ball, or make a mistake and they get out. Bowlers can bowl a poor spell but come back into their rhythm later and have their stats look alright. Every great batsman seems to have a bogey opposition or a bogey touring country. Sobers/Richards/Lara/Sachin everyone. Do we have any batsman who averages 45+ across all conditions, with the possible exception of Bradman, who is an outlier ? Using this analogy, are we saying top tier batsmen are all inferior to top tier bowlers ? I wouldn't think so.

On the other hand, ATG batsmen have an advantage of making hay while the sun shines in favorable conditions which is why they get their overall averages to 50+. ATG bowlers tend to look more consistent in their stats. Just the way the game is. I wouldn't put one group over other. Apples to oranges.

The bolded is untrue. There isn't a single bowler from Sachin's time who averages sub 25 vs all teams or sub 30 in all countries. Therefore, it is just as difficult for bowlers to be consistent across teams and countries. It takes one mistake to get a batsman out but if the majority of a teams batsmen are adept at playing a particular type of bowling those mistakes a moot: see Warne vs India.

Also, rules have been created to lessen the advantage the ball used to have over bats: flat wicket, over rates, bouncer restrictions, more protection ,smaller boundaries, better bats etc.

I'll say this and I'll probably get crucified for it but IMO, the most important player that India has acquired in the last 50 years or so is not Sunil, Dev, or even Sachin. It's Jasprit Bumrah. He has single-handedly made the Indian attack potent outside Asia and the team much more capable of winning anywhere than previous Indian teams.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Yeah, Pant might make a best of SC team in time

Or Rizwan