• 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.

Keith Miller vs Vivian Richards

Who's the better cricketer?

  • Total voters
    35
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
Is it because Imran is a top 5 player and he is the same stats? Is that it, because the context between this two is drastically different.
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
kyear2 said:
Is it because Imran is a top 5 player and he is the same stats? Is that it, because the context between this two is drastically different.
Click to expand...
No. Imran is better because he's better in their stronger suit but Miller is the more well-rounded player. Better bat and fielder.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
The Sean said:
As an aside, I'd love for Viv Richards to log into this thread looking forward to reading all the comments from people extolling his brilliance only to find that he's hardly been mentioned for eight pages.
Click to expand...
Its kinda nice tbh. I get bored seeing the same players get trashed on all the time. I like that we’re getting to spread it around a bit.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Anyway, I'm as big a Miller fan as anyone but I disagree with using his FC average to bolster his reputation as a batsman. Firstly, just about every notable AR takes a big hit statistically in at least one department because juggling both batting and bowling in tests is incredibly tough. You can get by on raw ability a lot farther in FC cricket than tests. This is also why just about every AR starts out as a no rounder. Secondly, Shield pitches had been roads since the 1900s so you'd expect Miller's batting average to take a hit for that reason too. When you look at the FC record of each of Noble, Miller, Davidson, and Benaud, you see one trend which indicates Shield batting averages from those eras are pretty inflated.
 
P

peterhrt

U19 Captain
trundler said:
When you look at the FC record of each of Noble, Miller, Davidson, and Benaud, you see one trend which indicates Shield batting averages from those eras are pretty inflated.
Click to expand...
Also Armstrong, although a third of his runs were in England.

English critics thought Noble was the best Australian batsman on a really bad wicket, after Trumper and Harvey.

Davidson was once unkindly referred to as a duller version of Keith Miler. Without the spark.
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
The Sean said:
As an aside, I'd love for Viv Richards to log into this thread looking forward to reading all the comments from people extolling his brilliance only to find that he's hardly been mentioned for eight pages.
Click to expand...
Imagine if Joel Garner searched his own name only to find page after page full of posts about his batting.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
Prince EWS said:
Imagine if Joel Garner searched his own name only to find page after page full of posts about his batting.
Click to expand...
He’d ****ing love it I bet. So good at bowling and fielding we don’t need to hype them up, are we sure the true GOAT allrounder isn’t Garner?
 
N

number11

State Regular
Counter point to much of this thread.
ATXI: pick Immy and Miller. May weaken the team a little [leaving out Sobers], but the social scene press core would have a field day.
Probably the 2 biggest Alpha chads cricket has ever seen. 😄
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
My top 4 (frontline bowling) all-rounders vying for a spot in an AT (or postwar) XI would be Hadlee, Imran, S Pollock, and Miller. All are vying for a number 8 spot. In actuality I can and do get in 2 of them in my preffered team, as Hadlee doubles as a top of the tree AT fast bowler as well as all-rounder (worst of the lot at batting though). Botham is out, because for me you can't simply look at his bowling peak. As he didn't simply have fitness issues preventing him from fast bowling, in my mind a part of his later career struggles was likely batsmen "figuring him out" as much his own decline compared to the purple period. So the 4 listed, all being better bowlers for mine, are well clear of Botham (Ashwin, the Answer, and Philander of course all the super secret winners of the all-rounder debate, so won't discuss them).

And yes, doing a really good job in your Frontline bowling role, doesn't mean you have to be an ace and a workhorse. Miller is more than good enough to be a 4th option on any AT team, as that would be all that is required of him. He's the best batsman (barring late career Imran), but the worst bowler of the bunch, but certainly could slot in without disrupting balance, for mine.

Whether competing for a top AT XI AR spot beats out competing for a specialist MO bat spot, on the other hand is a different question, and the one being asked in this thread, but I don't think Miller being compared to Viv is ridiculous off the top.

All that being said, Viv still wins for mine. He's probably a first alternate at worst, in a post war XI, for me.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
My argument is simply,

Sobers isn't a top 3 or top 5 player of all time because he was an all rounder. It's because he was a top 4 batsman of all time and a very good change bowler and probably the best ever 4th or 5rh bowler, certainly the most versatile. On top of that he was a top tier slip fielder and has an argument to be the greatest fielder / catcher ever.

Similarly, Imran isn't a top 5 or top 10 player because he was an all rounder. He was (imho) a top 6 fast bowler, a very good lower order batsman and a captain of note who helped make the Pakistan team relevant and a contender.

They both possessed that top end specialists talent to go along with their secondary and tertiary skills.

Kallis was a top 15 batsman, probably the second best non specialists / fifth option bowler, and one of the very best slip fielders who ever lived. And no one here rates him top 5, and very few top ten, and in my, again humble opinion, he has a better claim to that spot than Miller. Because he has that higher end primary skill. At least for me.

For me, to earn one of those spots it just can't be a sum of parts, there has to be that special high end talent in at least one area, that set you apart from your peers and those before and after.

But that just my opinion. The whole era conversation doesn't come into it for me at all, not with Miller
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
Miller and Kallis is a pretty good comparison, actually. Opinions on Kallis's bowling were that he may not even qualify as a proper all-rounder due to being underbowled. And jury is out if he is a top 10-15 bat. So to consider him an upper tier ATG, you would have to combine the two attributes in some way.

Similarly with Miller, he's definitely not an ATG as a bowler alone, but he was still extremely effective in bowling + about the best batting Frontline bowler in history. To me, how much you use the secondary skill for each can definitely put them in a higher bracket than some ATG specialists, if not necessarily all.

I'm not sure how you could ask either of these players to do much more in order to be considered comparable to ATG specialists in quality. If you want Kallis to have a good Frontline bowler average and volume, or you want Miller to be a top 70ish all time bat, then you're just asking for the creation of an impossible player, like a Bradman, which most of us have simply given up in trying to compare to.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
shortpitched713 said:
My top 4 (frontline bowling) all-rounders vying for a spot in an AT (or postwar) XI would be Hadlee, Imran, S Pollock, and Miller. All are vying for a number 8 spot. In actuality I can and do get in 2 of them in my preffered team, as Hadlee doubles as a top of the tree AT fast bowler as well as all-rounder (worst of the lot at batting though). Botham is out, because for me you can't simply look at his bowling peak. As he didn't simply have fitness issues preventing him from fast bowling, in my mind a part of his later career struggles was likely batsmen "figuring him out" as much his own decline compared to the purple period. So the 4 listed, all being better bowlers for mine, are well clear of Botham (Ashwin, the Answer, and Philander of course all the super secret winners of the all-rounder debate, so won't discuss them).

And yes, doing a really good job in your Frontline bowling role, doesn't mean you have to be an ace and a workhorse. Miller is more than good enough to be a 4th option on any AT team, as that would be all that is required of him. He's the best batsman (barring late career Imran), but the worst bowler of the bunch, but certainly could slot in without disrupting balance, for mine.

Whether competing for a top AT XI AR spot beats out competing for a specialist MO bat spot, on the other hand is a different question, and the one being asked in this thread, but I don't think Miller being compared to Viv is ridiculous off the top.

All that being said, Viv still wins for mine. He's probably a first alternate at worst, in a post war XI, for me.
Click to expand...
I can’t call anyone without a test ton an AR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top