Garry Sobers vs Imran Khan

[OverratedSanity]

The team is constituted based on how good you were at test cricket.

Is that the only thing it's based on

or is it also team composition.

 

[subshakerz]

Is that the only thing it's based on

or is it also team composition.

What's the point in calling it a team if you need to build it based on rankings first and roles second.

 

[capt_Luffy]

We just agree then that Kyears rates between laughably foolish and very wrong.

I especially hate the Richards (Barry not Viv) > Gavaskar. Had he seen Barry like peterhrt or Fredfertang, I would had understood. Not when he didn't and one of his primary argument being Barry was World's best from 70-75. But still, forced to choose, I would take it over Sobers>Don.

 

[ankitj]

The argument is that one is the second name of the team sheet for a reason..... The other, if he makes it, is one of the last and it's a discussion. That's based on test cricket.

It's based on theoretical balance of a team that will play 0 test matches. It doesn't matter at all.

 

[ankitj]

I think that question is best aimed at the persons who voted for the lower two options, especially the last one.

The only head to head vote that has existed outside of the community and by historians and past players was the Cricinfo slot for the all-rounders, and it was pretty conclusive.

Can you try your own arguments rather than relying on others'?

 

[kyear2]

Whatever just make up your mind.


Yeah and you neglect to mention that was only 1/3rd of the test Sobers played. So even if Sobers makes it in the 60s, over his entire career, maybe not.

Imran's batting peak was for 2/3rds of his career.

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Nonsense. Imran overall was a test class specialist lower order bat for any team in the 80s.

Please recall you weren't able to rebut that WI in the 80s, the best team in the world, had Gus Logie play as a lower order bat for an entire career, and Imran was surely better than him.


Prove it. I find that hard to believe give how weak Pakistanis batting was in the 80s and the fact that by the last few years of his career Imran was the best bat in the side, and won MOS just for his batting.

I promised myself I wouldn't do this and I've taken the day off to relax, but again, down the rabbit hole we shall go.

So we're counting his teenaged years but disregard Wasim's and Imran's English tour? He was a 16 year old off spinner when he started playing the game. By the end of his career he bowled more overs a match than Imran (tests and first class) while always batting in the top order. Yeah he wore down at the end. Still would have made teams as a bowler and was our second or 3rd option.

1. Logie wasn't a test standard batsman

2. Logie was a better batsman than Imran

3. Logie only played 52 tests because his batting alone wasn't good enough to keep him in the team 100% of the time.

4. If Imran couldn't bowl, he isn't making the WI team ahead of Logie because Logie was one of the great fielders of the era, especially at short leg where he was superb.

None of the two were fully test standard far less world class in their second disciplines. But Sobers though was more versatile and indispensable to his team and won matches with the ball.

Also not trying to say that the gap between Sobers bowling and Imran's batting is nearly as large as the one that exists between their primary skills, here it's quite close.

Also remember your argument that Wasim was better than Kallis because of the gap between their primary skills alone? Both if those guys are borderline top 10 guys. Sobers is arguably the 2nd greatest bat ever. Imran consistently polls out as the 8th best bowler here. Then there's the fielding, guy is a top 5 slip ever, and to boot in the most crucial (non gloved) position if the field.

Sincerely, it's not close in my, Wisden's, Cricinfo's or the cricket fraternity's position.

You're the peer rating guy, is Imran's rating close to Sobers?

 

[kyear2]

I mean it's possible because Bradman and Sobers are well ahead of the next in line. Nobody after those two is a lock per se.

And I rest my case

And yes, Tendulkar, Marshall, Gilchrist and for the majority except for me Hobbs are locks.

 

[kyear2]

Btw, irresponsible of anyone's thoughts on Imran and Sobers, Sobers>Bradman is 10000x crazier than Imran>Sobers. This is but just to state that in that pantheon, 1 and 2 have a crazy difference.

But you acknowledge that there is a two man pantheon.

We can argue the rest another time.

 

[subshakerz]

And I rest my case

And yes, Tendulkar, Marshall, Gilchrist and for the majority except for me Hobbs are locks.

No the rest aren't locks generally. I can find ATG XIs where the rest don't feature. I can't find one where Bradman and Sobers aren't there.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah @kyear2 loses credibility here when he asserts Sobers is potentially better than Bradman.

But then he also considers McGrath a better cricketer than Hadlee, so his rankings are entirely off.

I believe it's arguable.

If you have someone who's arguably the 2nd best batsman ever, the most versatile bowler to have played the game and and top 3 at the most crucial position on the field, yes, there's a discussion to be had.

That's all I'm saying.

Re Pigeon and Paddles, yeah to me it's close. The conditions one faced compared to the other, and the fact that one made his team arguable the greatest ever and definitely top 2 ever, and without him they wouldn't have been, closes the gap of the batting for me. You don't have to agree. But in all sports, and yes team sports, outside of cricket, winning matters. That's why Jordan and Brady are the GOATs. And please mention that they are literally one behind the other, and it varies, and both top 8 players.

 

[smash84]

I think the opposite. A person could argue that Bradman averages 70 in the current era and Sobers is close enough with batting to overtake him. Bad argument, but still.

You do realize that there wasn't even a 10 year gap between Sobers debuting and Bradman retiring right?

So why would Bradman average 70 while Sobers would average the same?

 

[akilana]

Sobers easily

 

[kyear2]

McGrath>Hadlee isn't crazy. I don't agree with it, but not crazy. Sobers>Don is

One player averages 135 in a test series

The other averages 100, takes 20 wickets and snares 10 catches.

Which is more valuable.

Again, Don is better, there's a discussion there and not backing down from that.

 

[akilana]

We just agree then that Kyears rates between laughably foolish and very wrong.

many think of you the same way

 

[subshakerz]

I promised myself I wouldn't do this and I've taken the day off to relax, but again, down the rabbit hole we shall go.

So we're counting his teenaged years but disregard Wasim's and Imran's English tour? He was a 16 year old off spinner when he started playing the game. By the end of his career he bowled more overs a match than Imran (tests and first class) while always batting in the top order. Yeah he wore down at the end. Still would have made teams as a bowler and was our second or 3rd option.

The point is the peak period you give for Sobers is a small fraction of his career. Imran's batting peak is the majority.

1. Logie wasn't a test standard batsman

2. Logie was a better batsman than Imran

3. Logie only played 52 tests because his batting alone wasn't good enough to keep him in the team 100% of the time.

4. If Imran couldn't bowl, he isn't making the WI team ahead of Logie because Logie was one of the great fielders of the era, especially at short leg where he was superb.

It's absolute BS to say Logie with 2 tons and a 35 average was better than Imran. You know that and this is just desperation.

Yet Logie played a full career in the best side in the world. Even if we accept that he wasn't test standard, that means that batting standards were so low that Imran surely makes the cut in that era.

Bringing fielding is irrelevant, we are talking batting here.

Also not trying to say that the gap between Sobers bowling and Imran's batting is nearly as large as the one that exists between their primary skills, here it's quite close.

Also remember your argument that Wasim was better than Kallis because of the gap between their primary skills alone? Both if those guys are borderline top 10 guys. Sobers is arguably the 2nd greatest bat ever. Imran consistently polls out as the 8th best bowler here. Then there's the fielding, guy is a top 5 slip ever, and to boot in the most crucial (non gloved) position if the field.

Sincerely, it's not close in my, Wisden's, Cricinfo's or the cricket fraternity's position.

You're the peer rating guy, is Imran's rating close to Sobers?

The rest is irrelevant since I always rated Sobers ahead of Imran.

 

[subshakerz]

You do realize that there wasn't even a 10 year gap between Sobers debuting and Bradman retiring right?

So why would Bradman average 70 while Sobers would average the same?

I called it a bad argument bro.

many think of you the same way

I don't mind nor do I think he does.

 

[subshakerz]

One player averages 135 in a test series

The other averages 100, takes 20 wickets and snares 10 catches.

Which is more valuable.

Again, Don is better, there's a discussion there and not backing down from that.

The latter player doesn't exist.

And stop this weak equivocation as to who you think is better.

 

[smash84]

People calling Imran's batting overrated aren't looking at Sobers' bowling.

His bowling record is outrageously bad against Pakistan and NZ (which is more than a 5th of his career). In fact it is only really good against India which were almost minnowish in the 1960s. Heck, if you take out only this one team India, his average and SR are ridiculously bad. Probably averaging in the 40s and striking at a 100 (that is a worse avg and sr than Steve Waugh)

 

[kyear2]

Is that the only thing it's based on

or is it also team composition.

It's very much both.

But you Subz, Smali and some others thinks his bowling alone is good enough to make such a team and vote accordingly. Most don't share that view.

I have Immy as an ATG, he was spectacular. I also think he was the 8th best bowler ever, closer to the 9th than the 7th, but that's besides the point.

Subz has argued consistently that Wasim and Steyn are both better than Kallis, because the gaps in their primary is too much for his catching and bowling to over come.
I see the gap between his bowling and that of the top 3 guys to be larger than the gap between Wasim's bowling and Kallis's batting. I, and you would very obviously disagree, can't place the 8th best bowler (who I rate along very esteemed guys like Lillee, Donald and Wasim) as the 3rd best player ever. The batting isn't nearly enough to jump, not only the top 3 elite tier bowlers, but Sobers and the rest of the elite tier batsmen.
I know you disagree, but doesn't that make the slightest sense to you? The same holds for Kallis who I don't think I have even top 15.

But back to the original question, yes it's also based on team composition.

But I don't think that there's anyone on this forum who believe that he's a top 3 bowler, also don't think that anyone believes he's in that tier or discussion as the greatest bowler is all time. That alone slightly puts him behind the 8 ball for selection. And a discussion then occurs that wouldn't if he was undisputably the 3rd greatest player to have ever played the game.

I personally don't think there's an inarguable 3rd best player ever and there's a select few in that argument. But that also proves the initial premise of the poll. There's no one close to the top two.

 

[smash84]

The whole concept of even considering Sobers and Imran being remotely on the same level is beyond my comprehension.

Maybe it will help if you take a closer look at Sobers' bowling record. See for yourself.

Garry Sobers batting bowling stats, averages and cricket statistics, 2024

Find out the complete career history of Garry Sobers including highest scores, centuries, half centuries, wickets and more

www.espncricinfo.com