• 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.

Greater Test All-rounder: Peak Sobers vs Peak Imran

Which was a greater all-rounder peak?

  • Sobers

    Votes: 15 57.7%

  • Imran

    Votes: 11 42.3%
  • Total voters
    26
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year
Amazed this thread hasn't happened before.

Anyway, I took the Imran 35 match peak from the Waqar thread, and I tried to find Sobers' best 35 match all-round peak as well to compare to. For Sobers, I have eyeballed the range as best I could, but if someone has some better algo result, let me know.

stats.espncricinfo.com

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

stats.espncricinfo.com stats.espncricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

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

stats.espncricinfo.com stats.espncricinfo.com

Sobers' with >67 batting, <30 bowling is of course phenomenal, but am I the only one who finds Imran >37 batting, <16 bowling(!?) to be an inherently much more valuable cricketer?

What do you guys think?
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
I'll have to look at the exact stats, and I could clearly be misremembering. But recall someone posting that Sobers had a stretch where he was averaging over 70 and 27 with the ball. Along with being what he was at 2nd slip to pacers and close in to spinners, that beats Bradman. IMHO of course, and those numbers are correct.
 
N

number11

State Vice-Captain
A bowling ave of 16, with 184 wkts is insane.
Overall, Sobers is the greater player but 36/16 wins more tests than 67/30.
Bowlers win tests, you need 20 wickets.
However you slice this, these are the 2 greatest cricketers of alltime.
 
P

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
Tried for Bradman and funnily enough I would need to exclude the 1st matches of 1930,1948 where he made ton in England which would reduce his average by 2 points.

For 18 Year Period!!

stats.espncricinfo.com

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

stats.espncricinfo.com stats.espncricinfo.com

Gets interesting thinking Bradman actually mayn’t have reached his Statistical peak at all due to WW2. He averaged 115 in last tour of England pre WW2, the highest ever. To go with the 1939–40 season which was Bradman's most productive ever for SA: 1,448 runs at an average of 144.8.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
I agree that bowlers are more valuable, and in comps I do use it as a tie breaker, because as you've pointed out, bowlers win matches, though it must be said that Sobers won matches with the ball as well. But when you factor in the fact that Sobers was possibly the greatest fielder ever and Imran..... wasn't, that makes the difference for me.
 
P

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
kyear2 said:
I'll have to look at the exact stats, and I could clearly be misremembering. But recall someone posting that Sobers had a stretch where he was averaging over 70 and 27 with the ball.
Click to expand...
The best one for Sobers is definitely 63 with the bat and 28 with the ball. Pretty much what @shortpitched713 posted though with better bowling numbers and worse batting numbers and 2 less matches than his current criteria. Incredible record though!

stats.espncricinfo.com

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

stats.espncricinfo.com stats.espncricinfo.com
 
Adorable Asshole

Adorable Asshole

International Regular
kyear2 said:
I agree that bowlers are more valuable, and in comps I do use it as a tie breaker, because as you've pointed out, bowlers win matches, though it must be said that Sobers won matches with the ball as well. But when you factor in the fact that Sobers was possibly the greatest fielder ever and Imran..... wasn't, that makes the difference for me.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty bold claim. From what I have seen he was a great fielder but calling him the greatest fielder is a stretch since we don't really have much footage of his fielding and unlike bowling and batting there are not much stats for fielding.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Adorable Asshole said:
That's a pretty bold claim. From what I have seen he was a great fielder but calling him the greatest fielder is a stretch since we don't really have much footage of his fielding and unlike bowling and fielding there are not much stats for it.
Click to expand...
There is a tremendous amount of footage, you just have to look for it.

And with regards to stats, that's part of the problem with CWs and it's love affair with statguru vs what constitutes cricket. He is in that elite tier of slip fielders who not only caught almost everything, but the premium tier above them that turned half chances into dismissals, as one article phrased it, he was the equal Hammond. Vs spin he was arguably without equal, be it either around the corner at leg slip or at short leg. He stood so very close and just caught everything. The video is there, just have to go looking for it. But if you want to say close catcher rather than fielder, you can, but then again that's where most of the value in test match fielding is.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year
Adorable Asshole said:
But Imran is ahead in primary skill.

That said probably Sobers because of fielding.
Click to expand...
Was he like a vacuum cleaner that sucked up all the balls... pause...

But honestly, fielding is something that a good team can make a difference, and individual fielder can't force the ball to be hit to them, so I think it's not that big of a thing.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
shortpitched713 said:
Was he like a vacuum cleaner that sucked up all the balls... pause...

But honestly, fielding is something that a good team can make a difference, and individual fielder can't force the ball to be hit to them, so I think it's not that big of a thing.
Click to expand...
I don't even understand what you're trying to say here.

But for the second part, it's incomprehensible that anyone who's ever watched a game of cricket would say that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top