Garry Sobers vs Imran Khan

[kyear2]

Sobers seems to have played a lot more than those bowlers as well which is why he has close to their number of wickets. His averages are terrible btw, but still at least you say that his bowling is marginally better than Imran's batting (the numbers don't bear that out IMO) but some posters acting on here like his bowling is so much superior than Imran's batting is ridiculous.

Absolutely no one has said that. You create your own grievances and then complain about them.

Was trying to find the exact quote, but I said to @subshakerz that the difference between Sobers batting and Imran's bowling is no where near what it is for the primary skills, but that it's quite close.

I don't think either were above test standard far less world class.

 

[h_hurricane]

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.

Bradman is not going to take any catches if you station him in deep square leg with Chris Martin batting.

Also cool stat- Bradman only took 0.5 catches less than Sobers per match. That too without the advantage of standing in slips.

 

[subshakerz]

Absolutely no one has said that. You create your own grievances and then complain about them.

Forgive us. I don't know where we could have got that impression.

I would strenuously argue that Sobers bowling was better than Imran's batting. Not to add more impactful.

 

[subshakerz]

@kyear2 this is Imran's batting peak which is 63 out of 88 test.

Averages 46 and scores all of his tons in this period.

Averages 50 in Australia, 50 in England, 58 in India and 140 in NZ. Was MOS twice based on just batting.

Give whatever excuses you want on not outs or output, but put your hand on heart and tell me that you sincerely consider Sobers overall a better bowler than Imran the bat.

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

@kyear2 awaiting your response to this.

 

[Coronis]

A third player will then average 80 and take 35 wickets @15

Don't forget Sobers as a batsman is closer to Imran than he is to Bradman. Also don't forget that a series featuring all 3 of them (or any 2) will never happen. Can we get back to talking about what they actually did?

iirc he was no slouch a fielder at point

 

[h_hurricane]

Equivalent Batting average =1200/Equivalent bowling average. Works well if you consider that ATG batsmen average above 50 and ATG bowlers average below 24.

Sobers' bowling is the rough equivalent of a 35 averaging batsman. Imran's batting is a rough equivalent of a 32 averaging bowler.

 

[kyear2]

Fun fact: Bradman averaged more after the war than before the war. At age 38-39

I liked that you give Headley credit for playing England B teams but not Bradman for playing England A teams.

Some notable bowlers he faced…

Verity, Bedser, Larwood, Tate, Bowes, Voce, Farnes, Laker

Unfortunately he wasn’t able to face guys like Martindale or Cowie.

Some of the quality 30’s English bowlers are often forgotten due to it being regarded as a batting era and the clear superiority of O’Reilly.



He didn’t. He called you boi.



iirc As soon as Bradman retired test cricket conveniently changed so his era doesn’t count.



iirc A lot of people don’t put Magic Johnson in their starting 5’s now in favour of Steph Curry. Do people think he’s better than Magic? I don’t think so.

Also iirc aren’t usually two top 5 players not making an all time starting 5?

I also don't rate Headley anywhere close to Bradman. Not close, and he faced the A team when he toured.

I want you to seriously compare the level of bowlers you named to the ones I did. Not to mention that the pitches of the era were dead flat everywhere.

Not only didn't he face them, would have still faced them in Australia.

And yes, there was the clear superiority of O'Reilly for a reason. He was the only close to great bowler of the era.

Yes the pitches did change almost immediately and that's not a secret. England also got a chance to recover from the conflict. And no one says the era doesn't count. The man is the GOAT of the game.

I'm glad you used the Magic example. There are 3 players what most and I think we place in the pantheon, His Airness, King James and The Captain, Larry may be 4th but it does get murky after the top 3, and there's only 5 starters.
The top 3 makes it no argument or fuss, we then decide how to make up the rest of the squad around that. But the big 3 makes it. That's my point.

And not sure about your rankings, but Duncan is in my top 5 and he makes my staying lineup. Steph definely over Magic for the shooting and Lebron can play point forward.

 

[kyear2]

A third player will then average 80 and take 35 wickets @15

Don't forget Sobers as a batsman is closer to Imran than he is to Bradman. Also don't forget that a series featuring all 3 of them (or any 2) will never happen. Can we get back to talking about what they actually did?

Those were numbers from a series Sobers played.

 

[kyear2]

Bradman is not going to take any catches if you station him in deep square leg with Chris Martin batting.

Also cool stat- Bradman only took 0.5 catches less than Sobers per match. That too without the advantage of standing in slips.

One took 32 catches from 52 matches.

The other took 109 from 93. The crazy part was that he was in the slips way less than the guys with the higher per match averages, because he was bowling twice the amount of overs that Kallis was and nothing comparable to what Hammond, Waugh, Simpson, Chappell, Hooper were bowling

And I've always said this, he wouldn't have been seen as the greatest all rounder ever, but he and more importantly the team would have been better served with him playing as the 5th bowler, bowling way less and focusing on his batting and spending more time at 2nd.

But we hardly had the team to allow that to be his luxury. Some would have rated him lower, but he would have been a better player, and more valuable.

 

[kyear2]

Forgive us. I don't know where we could have got that impression.

Quote the other one.

Where I specifically said it was close.

 

[kyear2]

@kyear2 awaiting your response to this.

I'm awaiting your response to where I made my arguments for Sobers and McGrath.

Plus another one where I said that I was actively awaiting your response. (Can't recall for what though).

 

[ankitj]

Those were numbers from a series Sobers played.

What's the point of quoting numbers from one series? But I'm glad you are now talking about what these players actually did.

Imran played multiple series where his bowling average was 15 or below. So there's that. Once you start looking at their actual performances the notion that Imran is not close to Sobers starts looking ridiculous.

 

[Coronis]

I also don't rate Headley anywhere close to Bradman. Not close, and he faced the A team when he toured.

I want you to seriously compare the level of bowlers you named to the ones I did. Not to mention that the pitches of the era were dead flat everywhere.

Not only didn't he face them, would have still faced them in Australia.

And yes, there was the clear superiority of O'Reilly for a reason. He was the only close to great bowler of the era.

Yes the pitches did change almost immediately and that's not a secret. England also got a chance to recover from the conflict. And no one says the era doesn't count. The man is the GOAT of the game.

I'm glad you used the Magic example. There are 3 players what most and I think we place in the pantheon, His Airness, King James and The Captain, Larry may be 4th but it does get murky after the top 3, and there's only 5 starters.
The top 3 makes it no argument or fuss, we then decide how to make up the rest of the squad around that. But the big 3 makes it. That's my point.

And not sure about your rankings, but Duncan is in my top 5 and he makes my staying lineup. Steph definely over Magic for the shooting and Lebron can play point forward.

I never said they were better bowlers did I? You asked “Bradman faced who?” I listed a bunch of quality bowlers but yeah that doesn’t cut it.

Are we also forgetting that the majority of Sobers career was in a very batting friendly era (the 60’s) and that he didn’t really get going as a batsman until then?

Ah so your point is an arbitrary number. And yeah, even you’ve got to know that ranking Duncan a top 5 player of all time makes you a massive outlier. On the other hand I’m not surprised considering your dismissal of earlier eras in cricket that you don’t rate Russell or Wilt highly.

 

[ankitj]

Equivalent Batting average =1200/Equivalent bowling average.

This formula shows Sobers is better in primary skill while Imran is slightly better in secondary skill. Checks out

 

[kyear2]

What's the point of quoting numbers from one series? But I'm glad you are now talking about what these players actually did.

Imran played multiple series where his bowling average was 15 or below. So there's that. Once you start looking at their actual performances the notion that Imran is not close to Sobers starts looking ridiculous.

It's really doesn't.

And the less said about those home series the better.

I have looked into their performances, pretty sure more than most have. And I'm not even suggesting that Imran wasn't a great player, and top 10 all time. He's not by my personal estimation top 3 or close to it. I've given my reasons earlier in the thread.

Sobers was an exceptional batsman, playing some of the greatest innings in history and an exceptional catcher at slip and at short leg / leg slip for the spinners. He also bore an exceptional work load for a weak bowling unit, no doubt at the expense of his batting.

He was the stop bowler, bowling the dirty overs to defensive fields with the old ball.

And for those posters talking about variety that had no value. It allows for that 2nd spinner on turners, or sometimes what actually happened, he would open with pace then come back on with the other spinners, bowling spin as well.
And no he wasn't useless when blowing the back of the hand stuff, though his off spin was definitely his weakest link. It's likely what he bowled the most mid innings.

The flexibility it provided the team was immeasurable and unprecedented. Yeah that counts for something.

 

[Johan]

thinking a very versatile 35 averaging batter can outvalue a 32 averaging bowler specialised in one quality.

 

[kyear2]

thinking a very versatile 35 averaging batter can outvalue a 32 averaging bowler specialised in one quality.

How much runs is the 35 averaging bat actually producing?

 

[peterhrt]

One aspect of Sobers' bowling was his ability to take early wickets with the new ball. He had a very nasty inswinger. On 27 occasions in Tests he dismissed top order batsmen for under 20 with the new ball. A third of these were ducks.

Boycott 0, 0, 12, 0
Edrich 0, 12, 15
Stewart 0, Bolus 15, Cowdrey 0, Parfitt 4, D'Oliveira 0, Sharpe 15, Amiss 6, Hayes 12

Simpson 12, 7, 5
Redpath 0, 18
O'Neill 11

Abid Ali 10, 3
Wadekar 17
Viswanath 0

Turner 2
Dowling 8

For the Rest of the World there were 7 further instances of cheap dismissals with the new ball:

Luckhurst 1, D'Oliveira 0, Sharpe 4, Knott 2, Snow 2

Francis 2, Woodcock 16

 

[sayon basak]

He had a good 5-6(?) years in his 20 year career so I am not sure how else to put it.

I also wonder how many of those matches in that 6 year period came against India?

Sobers played 33 matches from 1961 to 1968; taking 125 wickets @27.93. played 8 tests against India in this period, taking 37 wickets @22.24.
So excluding India, he played 25 tests in that span, taking 88 wickets @30.33.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm awaiting your response to where I made my arguments for Sobers and McGrath.

Plus another one where I said that I was actively awaiting your response. (Can't recall for what though).

I already replied those.

Please respond to mine on Imrans batting peak.