Marshall Vs Sobers

[sayon basak]

Wait, isn't Sobers the main rival to Imran as greatest ever all-rounder?

Shakib is a good shout.

 

[Prince EWS]

Shakib is a good shout.

The answer is Jadeja.

 

[sayon basak]

The answer is Jadeja.

Not bringing god into this.

 

[subshakerz]

He's not a lock for most ATG teams, not even ours and he's rated here (again 3rd) higher than anywhere else. He made neither the Cricinfo nor Wisden teams. The 3rd best player ever would be as much a lock as the top 2. His peer rating as a bowler was not that high, I feel like I know why, but you would disagree.

He's my 8th rated bowler, I don't see how you can be the 8th best bowler, yet the 3rd best player. That's a serious jump and a couple tiers. In his own era, he was 3rd best.

The same arguments used to elevate him to third, accumulative stats, should also be sufficient to push Kallis to the top 5, which no one does. It's the ultimate inconsistency.

I'm not of the belief that just because you're an all rounder that it automatically makes you a top 5 player, you primary skill, imo opinion has to put you there.

I'm not asking for your arguments, I know them, I know you have Imran as a top 5 bowler. I'm asking you if you can understand mine, or even makes sense.
Or for reasons yet to be made known to me, that I just hate your hero.

The issue is we don't for the large part have a problem with your ratings. Several others here have a similar lower rating maybe for Imran.

The issue is we have a sense you aren't willing to give Imran his due and subject him and his record to such an intense level of scrutiny that you don't for other players.

Only recently have you given his batting and captaincy somewhat it's due. You refuse to do that for his WI and WSC records though and for most of us it is easy to see why.

For example, you bring up the 1988 WI lineup he faced faced. Have you ever done that for Marshall to point out a weakened lineup he has faced in say Australia? Not really. It's a double standard.

But it's ok. And I know it's just a matter of time before you accept that Imran's away record is better than you originally gave it credit for, and you begin to place him in your top 5-6 like me too. You want to escape this inevitable conclusion but I can tell you see his case is solid.

Once you do that, we are left with the conundrum as to why shouldn't Imran be no.3 after Sobers and that is a tougher question.

 

[Coronis]

The issue is we don't for the large part have a problem with your ratings. Several others here have a similar lower rating maybe for Imran.

The issue is we have a sense you aren't willing to give Imran his due and subject him and his record to such an intense level of scrutiny that you don't for other players.

Only recently have you given his batting and captaincy somewhat it's due. You refuse to do that for his WI and WSC records though and for most of us it is easy to see why.

For example, you bring up the 1988 WI lineup he faced faced. Have you ever done that for Marshall to point out a weakened lineup he has faced? Not really. It's a double standard.

But it's ok. And I know it's just a matter of time before you accept that Imran's away record is better than you originally gave it credit for, and you begin to place him in your top 5-6 like me too. You want to escape this inevitable conclusion but I can tell you see his case is solid.

Once you do that, we are left with the conundrum as to why shouldn't Imran be no.3 after Sobers and that is a tougher question.

Because of Kallis

 

[kyear2]

Hello. Is it me you’re looking for?

Lol, true.

 

[subshakerz]

Because of Kallis

I think I now have Kallis in my top 20. That's improvement.

 

[Coronis]

I think I now have Kallis in my top 20. That's improvement.

As a cricketer or batsman?

 

[subshakerz]

As a cricketer or batsman?

Cricketer he is already there. As a bat. I used to rate Dravid ahead of him but I now think he has slightly better credentials.

 

[subshakerz]

@kyear2 please answer the below

Ok simple question then. Can you tell me ATG pacers who over their career faced (overall) poorer quality batting lineups than Marshall?

 

[kyear2]

The issue is we don't for the large part have a problem with your ratings. Several others here have a similar lower rating maybe for Imran.

The issue is we have a sense you aren't willing to give Imran his due and subject him and his record to such an intense level of scrutiny that you don't for other players.

Only recently have you given his batting and captaincy somewhat it's due. You refuse to do that for his WI and WSC records though and for most of us it is easy to see why.

For example, you bring up the 1988 WI lineup he faced faced. Have you ever done that for Marshall to point out a weakened lineup he has faced in say Australia? Not really. It's a double standard.

But it's ok. And I know it's just a matter of time before you accept that Imran's away record is better than you originally gave it credit for, and you begin to place him in your top 5-6 like me too. You want to escape this inevitable conclusion but I can tell you see his case is solid.

Once you do that, we are left with the conundrum as to why shouldn't Imran be no.3 after Sobers and that is a tougher question.

You didn't remotely answer the question, lol... But.

I gave his record scrutiny the same way I'm doing now for Wasim, it didn't correlate to his peer ratings. It should have been higher, then you read little throwaway lines in articles and notice a trend for his home and away performances.

Re his batting, I still think it's soft, and it's not a must have. The reason I included him the other day is because all 3 of them have flaws, might as well go with the one who can bat the best. But the other two have at least two overriding factors that are as equally tempting.

The captaincy still doesn't move me tbh.

Let me explain the WI record. To be ATG, for me, it either has to be super low average, or vs super strong opponents. 25 on its face is an average series for an ATG, for that to be seen as ATG it would have to be against Australia either 32, 48, or 2005. West Indies 79.etc... I get your argument via wpm, but you're not saying very good or even great, you're saying ATG performance. Honestly, that's not it. It's like the arguments about ATGs a few weeks ago, if you use the term on everyone, it means nothing. Half those guys just weren't. The 88 series was an ATG series, but overall, for me, that's a no.

Where did I say he had an ATG record in Australia, he doesn't, Marshall had a very good record in Australia, wouldn't say ATG either. England and India. Australia very good... And I only brought up the strength because you keep referencing it. Or wasn't what it previously was and you know that. It's not to say it was weak, but to say it propels his record there to ATG, the lineup would have to be as well, averaging 25.

Re WSC, of course he gets credit. I never said it didn't. You still have to answer though why his test record there was so poor. In Australia and India his record is poor (ATG standard of course). He's the only one who even in in his peak, averaged 5 more away than home. Consistent throughout his career. That coupled with the very open rumors and suggestions points to one thing, you refuse, I guess understandably, to acknowledge that.

No, I don't think his away record is top 5 elite acceptable. I just don't, neither would you if it were someone else. You crucify Lara repeatedly for less, and while I point it out, and the exaggerations you place on it (he would die facing the peak WI team), some are valid. You've never accepted anything about Imran being valid. And for being top 5, nah. I've watched Ambrose's, entire career, he was more destructive, especially away and for me, just better. Steyn is just better as well, and the polls (vs Steyn and Ambrose) have been definitively not in Imran's favor.

Re being a top 3 player. I sincerely believe that if you're not top tier elite for batting (I have 5 names) or bowling (3 names) how can you be top tier overall. I don't see how the 8th best bowler can jump to 3rd overall. Take away the names you would agree as well. Also how can you use the accumulative calculations for Imran and not Kallis, especially since Kallis is statistically not far anywhere from Sobers. But that's also why you spend so much time trying to diminish him.

The players traditionally floated for 3rd best have been.

Hobbs
Richards
Warne
Tendulkar

Tell me now any of those have a definitively better argument than Marshall and how is it crazy that in a sport where bowlers are the match winners, that a pacer, the top rated pacer at that, be top 3.

Pretty sure Marshall has beaten each of those head to head in polls the last few months. Well, would have to check on a Warne comparison.

So you tell me why Marshall doesn't have a case to be no. 3.

I do agree that Imran is top 10, but how can you be top 3 and not even close to a established member of an all time team, far less a lock. That part doest make sense to me.

The logic is there, the name is where the confusion sets in.

I don't hate, not have an agenda against the man, k ow nothing about Pakistan politics, nor which side he represents or what he stands for.
Are there players I dislike, especially for reasons off the field, yeah. It's not him, but well deserved. A proper dick he is.

 

[kyear2]

I think I now have Kallis in my top 20. That's improvement.

Now that is bias, lol

 

[kyear2]

@kyear2 please answer the below

The reason this is a stupid question is that Imran played in the same era, and all focus on his career is based on the same time Marshall played. Marshall was better than him in every country he played in. You will say the WI, the country in which he had the best record in and against.

I've also given you the extensive list of batsmen that Marshall played against, and it's as good as any team today outside of potentially Australia and India. And I'm not convinced how either batting line up would holdup in old Sabina or Kensington vs Marshall and co either.

The batsmen from the 80's weren't worse than the enough scorers of the 2000's. Guys like Hayden struggled in the 90's before given a new leash on life by flat ass pitches a f the retirement of ever great laver bar McGrath. And when the faced him, after facing the dross around him, it almost seemed that they forgot how to bat.

So no, Marshall didn't face appreciably worst lineups that even the product being out up today. Is England tough, Australia outside of Smith? Australia vs India will show a lot in December. Bowlers impact scores slightly more than batsmen do, conditions contribute even more so. But the greats, as Pigeon showed, persevere though the unhelpful patches.

 

[Coronis]

tbf none of the Aussies would have faced McGrath that much. iirc he was one of the first of the new wave of players not playing lots of domestic cricket.

124 tests
65 other FC
23 of those were for “Australia” teams.

So only 42 domestic FC matches, 26 for NSW, 14 for Worcestershire and 2 for Middlesex. He also only played 55 List A matches vs 250 ODIs.

 

[subshakerz]

Now that is bias, lol

Why is it bias? You're kidding yourself if you don't think guys like Border, Waugh and Sanga don't have good cases to be ahead of him.

 

[subshakerz]

The reason this is a stupid question is that Imran played in the same era, and all focus on his career is based on the same time Marshall played. Marshall was better than him in every country he played in. You will say the WI, the country in which he had the best record in and against.

Dude we are being polite, don't just throw around stupid like that.

No Imran debuted earlier and hence faced a stronger Aussie lineup including the Chappells. He also faced the WI, like Hadlee. Also Imran faced the stronger Indian lineups more often than Marshall. Hence both faced stronger lineups overall.

Including WSC and given the batting sides they faced, I would easily take Imran's record in Aus over Marshall. Marshall had one great and one moderate series against the worse Aussie team ever. Please don't throw around Imran's raw average here without context.

I've also given you the extensive list of batsmen that Marshall played against, and it's as good as any team today outside of potentially Australia and India. And I'm not convinced how either batting line up would holdup in old Sabina or Kensington vs Marshall and co either.

A single good bat doesn't make it a good lineup, anymore than Crowe made NZ a good batting side. You know this.

The batsmen from the 80's weren't worse than the enough scorers of the 2000's. Guys like Hayden struggled in the 90's before given a new leash on life by flat ass pitches a f the retirement of ever great laver bar McGrath. And when the faced him, after facing the dross around him, it almost seemed that they forgot how to bat.

Look at the sides that McGrath faced and there are several strong lineups there.

So no, Marshall didn't face appreciably worst lineups that even the product being out up today.

Thanks for admitting he played worse. You just want to disagree about the degree, that's fine.

 

[subshakerz]

You didn't remotely answer the question, lol... But.

To clarify, we don't find your stance accords with your reasoning.

I gave his record scrutiny the same way I'm doing now for Wasim, it didn't correlate to his peer ratings. It should have been higher, then you read little throwaway lines in articles and notice a trend for his home and away performances.

Again, you downplay Imran's rating though. Generally considered the best of four ARs both during and after career, top 10 cricketer in lists and in many ATG XIs.

Re his batting, I still think it's soft, and it's not a must have. The reason I included him the other day is because all 3 of them have flaws, might as well go with the one who can bat the best. But the other two have at least two overriding factors that are as equally tempting.

Congrats that's our logic.

The captaincy still doesn't move me tbh.

You have admitted captaincy accounts for around 15/20 percent of results. So not giving him credit for that is just you being stubborn.

Let me explain the WI record. To be ATG, for me, it either has to be super low average, or vs super strong opponents. 25 on its face is an average series for an ATG, for that to be seen as ATG it would have to be against Australia either 32, 48, or 2005. West Indies 79.etc... I get your argument via wpm, but you're not saying very good or even great, you're saying ATG performance. Honestly, that's not it. It's like the arguments about ATGs a few weeks ago, if you use the term on everyone, it means nothing. Half those guys just weren't. The 88 series was an ATG series, but overall, for me, that's a no.

Where did I say he had an ATG record in Australia, he doesn't, Marshall had a very good record in Australia, wouldn't say ATG either. England and India. Australia very good... And I only brought up the strength because you keep referencing it. Or wasn't what it previously was and you know that. It's not to say it was weak, but to say it propels his record there to ATG, the lineup would have to be as well, averaging 25.

The thing is even being very good against the best team ever means a lot more than very good against a normal team. That is the part you don't seem to correlate.

Re WSC, of course he gets credit. I never said it didn't. You still have to answer though why his test record there was so poor. In Australia and India his record is poor (ATG standard of course). He's the only one who even in in his peak, averaged 5 more away than home. Consistent throughout his career. That coupled with the very open rumors and suggestions points to one thing, you refuse, I guess understandably, to acknowledge that.

Dude, go through your old posts. You never bring up WSC at all with Imran in Australia. So what credit are you talking about? How can someone assess him in Australia honestly without doing that.

Any no, he isn't poor otherwise. You just haven't bothered to go through his series by series performances to see what his actual prime bowling record is. You still include two tests in 84/85 where he is wasn't even playing as a bowler because he was injured and late career in 90 where he was done as a bowler. Just a round average is misleading, you know this.

No, I don't think his away record is top 5 elite acceptable. I just don't, neither would you if it were someone else. You crucify Lara repeatedly for less, and while I point it out, and the exaggerations you place on it (he would die facing the peak WI team), some are valid. You've never accepted anything about Imran being valid. And for being top 5, nah. I've watched Ambrose's, entire career, he was more destructive, especially away and for me, just better. Steyn is just better as well, and the polls (vs Steyn and Ambrose) have been definitively not in Imran's favor.

Again, there is no qualitative gap between Steyn/Ambrose and Imran. So you will be forced to acknowledge this.

Re being a top 3 player. I sincerely believe that if you're not top tier elite for batting (I have 5 names) or bowling (3 names) how can you be top tier overall. I don't see how the 8th best bowler can jump to 3rd overall. Take away the names you would agree as well. Also how can you use the accumulative calculations for Imran and not Kallis, especially since Kallis is statistically not far anywhere from Sobers. But that's also why you spend so much time trying to diminish him.

The players traditionally floated for 3rd best have been.

Hobbs
Richards
Warne
Tendulkar

Tell me now any of those have a definitively better argument than Marshall and how is it crazy that in a sport where bowlers are the match winners, that a pacer, the top rated pacer at that, be top 3.

Pretty sure Marshall has beaten each of those head to head in polls the last few months. Well, would have to check on a Warne comparison.

So you tell me why Marshall doesn't have a case to be no. 3.

The funny thing is you don't see your own logic. Marshall is almost never put in the top ten cricketer ever in lists, unlike Imran. Having him as number 3 defies cricket consensus way more than Imran.

Your case is built on suggesting an appreciable gap between Marshall and the other pacers that, upon reflecting, I realise now doesn't exist. McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, and yes Imran, are all his near equals.

 

[kyear2]

Dude we are being polite, don't just throw around stupid like that.

No Imran debuted earlier and hence faced a stronger Aussie lineup including the Chappells. He also faced the WI, like Hadlee. Also Imran faced the stronger Indian lineups more often than Marshall. Hence both faced stronger lineups overall.

Including WSC and given the batting sides they faced, I would easily take Imran's record in Aus over Marshall. Marshall had one great and one moderate series against the worse Aussie team ever. Please don't throw around Imran's raw average here without context.


A single good bat doesn't make it a good lineup, anymore than Crowe made NZ a good batting side. You know this.


Look at the sides that McGrath faced and there are several strong lineups there.


Thanks for admitting he played worse. You just want to disagree about the degree, that's fine.

People say things and just repeats them

The Australian batsmen that Marshall faced in multiple tours

Kepler Wessels
Allan Border
Dean Jones
David Boon
Steve Waugh
Mark Taylor

All of those batsmen averaged over 40 in test cricket in the 80's and 90's, that's worth how much in the 2000's?

We can do this for every team.

Boycott, Gooch, Gower, Smith, Gatting, Lamb etc.

Want to compare that to the English, Pakistani, New Zealand and Sri Lankan batting lineups that Warne faced.

How about the WI, SA, Pakistan, English, SL & NZ teams that Bumrah is currently facing.

Stop with the narrative, the 80's wasn't the mess that the early 70's was.

 

[subshakerz]

People say things and just repeats them

The Australian batsmen that Marshall faced in multiple tours

Kepler Wessels
Allan Border
Dean Jones
David Boon
Steve Waugh
Mark Taylor

All of those batsmen averaged over 40 in test cricket in the 80's and 90's, that's worth how much in the 2000's?

We can do this for every team.

This is disingenuous. He didn't face those collectively and many of those were just starting their careers when Marshall bowled to them majority of the time which is what made it weak lineups until 89 when the resurgence happened.

Boycott, Gooch, Gower, Smith, Gatting, Lamb etc.

You're just throwing the best names of an entire era. I am talking actual in-form strong lineups he faced in most of his series. The 80s were a low point for English batting somewhat.

And this doesn't change the fact that Imran and Hadlee faced those lineups plus strong Aus and WI lineups that Marshall never got to .

Give me an ATG bowler who you think has generally faced worse lineups? You cant.

Look, admitting this is a bit of a blemish is not a big deal. Nobody is perfect.

 

[Slifer]

Marshall was in an exceptional situation. Post-peak his numbers would have suffered worse if he didnt have Ambrose, Bishop and Walsh doing much of the heavy lifting so he would do smash and grabs at a neat average.

Marshall is lucky to not average a couple points higher frankly.

I'm back and I have to read the same old bs. "Marshall is lucky to not average a bit higher? " And Bishop and Ambrose doing the heavy lifting? Are you serious? Marshall didn't do smash and grabs or whatever you want to call it towards the end of his career. He eeked out wickets the same way he always did , through skill and intimidation. Marshall ended his career early simply because of inter island politics, nothing more nothing else.

And I hate the implications from your earlier posts that make it seem as if Marshall had it easy being a part of the WI quartet. He didn't. Being under 6 feet and forcing his way into the team and staying there when there were a multitude of others waiting in the wings wasn't easy. He failed in his initial tour in India in the late 70s. A repeat of that in other early 80s series and he'd have been replaced. By who you ask: Clark, Daniels, Stephenson, etc.