Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Oops, so you did. Shows how good we are at reading!
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
What makes a good #7 in ODIs?
- Thread starter trundler
- Start date
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
When Imran was better bowler, Kapil was significantly better batsman.
When Imran became better batsman, Kapil's bowling was easily Better. ( Kapil's batting was no more effective by then.. Though )
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Klusner's batting was not that superior, his average was boosted by huge number of not outs. Especially compared to Kapil's peak 9 years ( entire length of Klusner career )
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Klusener blows Kapil away on RPI too. No one got quick fire cameos as consistently as Klusener. Klusener >>> Kapil as a finisher.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Not outs are a good thing in ODIs if you are a finisher.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Both are wrong.
Let us compare their peaks.
Imran was a quality bowler until 1989, averaging 32 with the bat and 23 with the ball.
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Kapil was a quality bowler until 91, averaging only 25 with the bat, and 25 with the ball.
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
So Imran clearly was better than Kapil in his peak, regardless of batting SR.
In the last 3 years of each of their careers though, Imran's bowling fell away but his batting improved, where Kapil got much worse with both bat and ball.
Kenneth Viljoen
International Regular
I've never understood the stigma behind not outs, surely it can't be a bad thing if the opposition can't get you out .
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Better RPI in easier era vs Better SR in tougher era
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Easier With a better batting line up and slower scoring.
Migara
International Coach
Attachments
Last edited:
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Thats because he averaged 47 in 1989.Both are wrong.
Let us compare their peaks.
Imran was a quality bowler until 1989, averaging 32 with the bat and 23 with the ball.
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Kapil was a quality bowler until 91, averaging only 25 with the bat, and 25 with the ball.
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
So Imran clearly was better than Kapil in his peak, regardless of batting SR.
In the last 3 years of each of their careers though, Imran's bowling fell away but his batting improved, where Kapil got much worse with both bat and ball.
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Its not a bad thing, yet no one rate Klusner a better batsman than Ponting despite superior Avg-Sr in tougher era.
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Yet there was specialist batsmen with 30 or below avg in 80s.
Migara
International Coach
Still there are today. Since turn of the millenium there are 893 instances as such batting 1 - 7. Even if we say 25% of them would be pinch hitters, still there is a massive number of top order players who average less than 30.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Why doesn't that count? He was still bowling well that year.
And even without that, he was still comfortably averaging more than Kapil in his peak.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not only is Kapil vs Imran a boring debate that's been done to death, it's also irrelevant to this thread.
The overall discussion about strike rate vs reliability is more interesting. Plus the relative importance of bowling and batting. I don't want Maxwell bowling or Afridi batting from my #7.
The overall discussion about strike rate vs reliability is more interesting. Plus the relative importance of bowling and batting. I don't want Maxwell bowling or Afridi batting from my #7.
Nintendo
Cricketer Of The Year
I think it depends on the lineup. If you have a side with green/stoinis + marsh and part time overs from head and marnus you can afford to have a #7 like maxwell who's bowling is much less of a factor. If I've got bowling in the top 6 i'de rather who's gonna turn those 30 odd balls the #7 faces into 40-45 runs like maxwell tends to rather than somoene like marco jansen who SA use at the moment who may give you a genuine 5th bowling option.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Kapil is definitely a better #7 than Imran for ODIs.
srbhkshk
International Captain
Yeah, it's a different question as to whether Imran is a better ODI player and he might very well be the better player for every position from 1 to 6 and 9-11, no way in hell is he a better #7 or #8 though.