Richard Hadlee vs Imran Khan

[shortpitched713]

Don't understand what having more of them has anything to do with value.
Harder to maintain a high bowling load while batting in the top order.

Plus, if you're calling Hadlee and Miller bowling all rounders, then no reason Simpson can't be seen as a batting one.

How am I mythologizing his role?

He was a top 5 batsman, and literally the most versatile bowler ever, not to add a top tier slip catcher. He filled every role from opening the bowling to bowling grunt overs into the wind with defensive fields.

The bowling parts are mythologized. He overbowled himself, and he was best as a support bowler (as evidenced by his high strike rate, and low economy rate). He was bog mediocre as a slow left arm orthodox bowler, and shoulder issues prevented him from bowling his preferred slow bowling wrist spin style for a big chunk (probably a third of career).

His best bowling style, which he used a very large majority of the time was seam up medium fast off a very short run. He was most definitely talented (and I'd hazard quicker and more incisive in the earlier prime part of bowling career), but there are natural limitations to this style.

He did have match-winning hauls of course, and this is to be expected from someone who bowled with his level of frequency and volume. His main role though, was as an eat up overs guy, giving rest to more incisive bowlers like Hall, Griffith, etc, and he did this job manfully to his credit, but in an era where over rates weren't particularly essential either.

This is a more nuanced, and realistic profile of an actual bowler that existed, which is far from the "most versatile bowler ever existed" whitewashing that you, and a lot of would be trivia buffs might do, without digging more in depth.

 

[kyear2]

None of them are better than Imran really.

Then we seriously disagree.

 

[subshakerz]

Then we seriously disagree.

I think we can agree between Steyn/Imran/Ambrose it is close and you can make cases for all three, assuming you are willing to look at Imran's bowling will full context. Lillee has too many record gaps.

 

[kyear2]

I think we can agree between Steyn/Imran/Ambrose it is close and you can make cases for all three, assuming you are willing to look at Imran's bowling will full context. Lillee has too many record gaps.

For me Ambrose and Steyn is a toss up, but both easily ahead of Imran for me. Easily.

The only context you want to use is when it comes to Imran's away record, but fine.

Re Lillee, for someone like you who relies so much on peer rating, it's shouldn't be close. Guys like Viv rates Lillee on par with only Marshall and ahead of everyone else from the era.

 

[shortpitched713]

Plus, if you're calling Hadlee and Miller bowling all rounders, then no reason Simpson can't be seen as a batting one.

Bob Simpson averaged over 42 with the ball. That generally doesn't classify. Conversely, I'm not calling Wasim Akram an all-rounder.

 

[kyear2]

Bob Simpson averaged over 42 with the ball. That generally doesn't classify. Conversely, I'm not calling Wasim Akram an all-rounder.

27 isn't much better either tbh.

 

[kyear2]

Bob Simpson averaged over 42 with the ball. That generally doesn't classify. Conversely, I'm not calling Wasim Akram an all-rounder.

Just noticed you're the one Imran vote, you just have to be the contrarian, lol

 

[subshakerz]

For me Ambrose and Steyn is a toss up, but both easily ahead of Imran for me. Easily.

'Easily' is simply wrong. Thats your bias.

The only context you want to use is when it comes to Imran's away record, but fine.

Only with you really because you don't like to look at context. You never bring up Imran in WSC for example. You are the only poster here who doesn't give him credit for his WI record.

Re Lillee, for someone like you who relies so much on peer rating, it's shouldn't be close. Guys like Viv rates Lillee on par with only Marshall and ahead of everyone else from the era.

Record plus peer rating plus playing style is how I rate. I am quite consistent. Lillees rating is why he is in the top ten in the first place.

 

[kyear2]

'Easily' is simply wrong. Thats your bias.


Only with you really because you don't like to look at context. You never bring up Imran in WSC for example. You are the only poster here who doesn't give him credit for his WI record.


Record plus peer rating plus playing style is how I rate. I am quite consistent. Lillees rating is why he is in the top ten in the first place.

My bias?



One of the two votes were yours btw.

 

[subshakerz]

My bias?

View attachment 40810View attachment 40811View attachment 40812

One of the two votes were yours btw.

Yes because you don't consider it close. Votes don't tell you that they perceive this huge gulf between them. They can see a small but clear difference and vote in that.

Of course you know this already. It's real desperate to appeal to vote counts to make this point when you can't defend your own view.

 

[kyear2]

'Easily' is simply wrong. Thats your bias.


Only with you really because you don't like to look at context. You never bring up Imran in WSC for example. You are the only poster here who doesn't give him credit for his WI record.


Record plus peer rating plus playing style is how I rate. I am quite consistent. Lillees rating is why he is in the top ten in the first place.

He averaged 25 in the Caribbean, it was a very good performance, not the ATG one you propagate it to be.

You pretend that I have him rated in the 20's.

For me he's easily behind Steyn and Ambrose as pacers, Warne and Murali as bowlers overall, general consensus for the forum as well.

For you to say that's my bias after spending two threads the past few days trying to down grade Kallis, once said that it's your responsibility is bring Ambrose down a peg or two, and constantly harping on Lara in every possible post, and recently adding Hadlee to your hit list to lower our perception of him, is hypocritical and rich.

What do all those players except for Lara have in common btw?
You think no one noticed your agendas?

 

[kyear2]

Yes because you don't consider it close. Votes don't tell you that they perceive this huge gulf between them. They can see a small but clear difference and vote in that.

Of course you know this already. It's real desperate to appeal to vote counts to make this point when you can't defend your own view.

What's the point of polls again?

None of those were remotely close. I'm not saying there was a gulf. Easily is saying that it's not a conundrum for me to rate them over him. It's a clear choice, for me at least, and this votes backs that up.

That's not batsmen vs bowlers, all rounders vs specialists, it bowlers vs bowlers.

 

[kyear2]

Yes because you don't consider it close. Votes don't tell you that they perceive this huge gulf between them. They can see a small but clear difference and vote in that.

Of course you know this already. It's real desperate to appeal to vote counts to make this point when you can't defend your own view.

I've made it plenty of times, you ignore it. I could being them up again, but that agitates the forum and you know this.

But it is pretty clear tbh.

 

[subshakerz]

What's the point of polls again?

None of those were remotely close. I'm not saying there was a gulf. Easily is saying that it's not a conundrum for me to rate them over him. It's a clear choice, for me at least, and this votes backs that up.

You do suggest a gulf if you place Warne and Murali ahead of him as well. You're so shifty, man.

 

[kyear2]

You do suggest a gulf if you place Warne and Murali ahead of him as well. You're so shifty, man.

Vast majority of the forum rates Murali and Warne over him. You require the votes for those as well?

My rankings are always public, and Imran is 8th over all.

 

[Bolo.]

You do suggest a gulf if you place Warne and Murali ahead of him as well. You're so shifty, man.

He does suggest a gulf. But where the spinners go is not evidence of it. They have to go somewhere, and if it's not on top, they will always fall between somewhat comparable bowlers.

 

[subshakerz]

He averaged 25 in the Caribbean, it was a very good performance, not the ATG one you propagate it to be.

Dude, if there was a bowler aside from Imran who was taking 6 wickets a test @45 SR in the best opposition's backyard, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

We know what you consider ATG. You were classifying Ambrose taking 13 wickets in 4 tests in SA as ATG based on your reductive blind average approach until you were called out.

For you to say that's my bias after spending two threads the past few days trying to down grade Kallis, once said that it's your responsibility is bring Ambrose down a peg or two, and constantly harping on Lara in every possible post, and recently adding Hadlee to your hit list to lower our perception of him, is hypocritical and rich.

There is no agenda any bit as much as I had an anti-India bias (which you yourself called out) for going after Ashwin. I literally rate Hadlee ahead of Imran in this very poll, based on peer rating that I use.

 

[subshakerz]

He does suggest a gulf. But where the spinners go is not evidence of it. They have to go somewhere, and if it's not on top, they will always fall between somewhat comparable bowlers.

Fair enough I can grant that.

 

[OverratedSanity]

He averaged 25 in the Caribbean, it was a very good performance, not the ATG one you propagate it to be.

Look at those numbers (not just average) in WI again and be honest.

 

[smash84]

Look at those numbers (not just average) in WI again and be honest.

Of course it isn't ATG. 13 wickets in 4 tests is where its at.