• 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.

Imran Khan vs Barry Richards

Which is better in red ball cricket?

  • Total voters
    18
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
Who comes up with this ****, and why am I tagged 3 times.

Imran easily, top 10 player of all time. I have Barry 19th or 20th.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
PlayerComparisons said:
This is just Imrans bowling vs Barry’s batting, not as overall cricketers
Click to expand...
Ahh, sorry just woke up.

Ahh, really ready to start a **** storm then.

Before I start I'll say that I rate Barry 9th as a batsman, Imran 8th as a bowler.

Been quiet the last couple days because I've been reading a lot. Bought and read Gower's book and reading up on a lot of stuff on the 80's and overall.

Imran is a highly rated cricketer, but a surprising amount of it is based on his captaincy and being an all rounder. Even in his era he was rated below Marshall, Lillee, Hadlee, by a surprisingly high amount Roberts, and by some Holding. Even watching over his legends of cricket bio, no one called him the best or among the very best ever as a bowler, and it focused primarily on being Pakistan's best captain and as a batsman.

Surprisingly even as an all round cricketer (not purely all rounder), I've also seen arguments for Hammond being ahead when factoring in Hammond's catching.

Barry now, his peer rating when he played was that he was up there, even in '76 as the equal of Viv. Overall during his career he was seen as comparable to Sobers and Viv and a worthy bridge between the two.

Now this part is critically important and will be ignored if not mocked by some, but...I don't think anyone here besides HB even answered the question asked and instead leaned on their own perception and bias.

Barry was a higher peer rated batsman than Imran as a bowler and even Subz knows this.

Dickie Bird called him a great captain, Benaud (a bowling all rounder himself) placed two (really 3) all rounder slots in his XI and specially had him in as the 2nd all rounder. Imran wasn't seen as a top 5 or 6 guy as a bowler by most observers and his bowling, while the foundation of consideration, seems to be the 3rd spoke of the wheel. Subz will say because it became underated because of the other stuff, but that's not the case with Kallis or especially Sobers. His peer rating just wasn't that high, even or especially in his era.

So yeah, objectively Barry Richards.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
As a batsman @peterhrt posted recently, that among those in the know, that there have been 4 supreme batsmen of the past 50 (may have been further back to the point of post Bradman) years that stands above the rest, Viv Richards, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara and Barry Richards.

That's the level of peer rating that's being discussed and apparently **** on.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Calling Barry is a great of the game, that part can be justifiable.

But you call him an ATG and start placing him ahead of other ATGs with full career records, that can't be justified no matter what logic @kyear2 wants to claim. In fact, he accepts there is no logic, he is just going to assume that Barry with one series would have had the equivalent of an ATG level record had he played based on selective heresay.

It's not even clear if he was SA's best bat. @kyear2 is taking favoritism to absurd degrees here, and somehow when it is convenient for him certain pundits become his unquestioned authorities somehow.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
Ahh, sorry just woke up.

Ahh, really ready to start a **** storm then.

Before I start I'll say that I rate Barry 9th as a batsman, Imran 8th as a bowler.

Been quiet the last couple days because I've been reading a lot. Bought and read Gower's book and reading up on a lot of stuff on the 80's and overall.

Imran is a highly rated cricketer, but a surprising amount of it is based on his captaincy and being an all rounder. Even in his era he was rated below Marshall, Lillee, Hadlee, by a surprisingly high amount Roberts, and by some Holding. Even watching over his legends of cricket bio, no one called him the best or among the very best ever as a bowler, and it focused primarily on being Pakistan's best captain and as a batsman.

Surprisingly even as an all round cricketer (not purely all rounder), I've also seen arguments for Hammond being ahead when factoring in Hammond's catching.

Barry now, his peer rating when he played was that he was up there, even in '76 as the equal of Viv. Overall during his career he was seen as comparable to Sobers and Viv and a worthy bridge between the two.

Now this part is critically important and will be ignored if not mocked by some, but...I don't think anyone here besides HB even answered the question asked and instead leaned on their own perception and bias.

Barry was a higher peer rated batsman than Imran as a bowler and even Subz knows this.

Dickie Bird called him a great captain, Benaud (a bowling all rounder himself) placed two (really 3) all rounder slots in his XI and specially had him in as the 2nd all rounder. Imran wasn't seen as a top 5 or 6 guy as a bowler by most observers and his bowling, while the foundation of consideration, seems to be the 3rd spoke of the wheel. Subz will say because it became underated because of the other stuff, but that's not the case with Kallis or especially Sobers. His peer rating just wasn't that high, even or especially in his era.

So yeah, objectively Barry Richards.
Click to expand...
I am as big a champion of peer rating as any on the forum, but I never accepted that it can replace an entire international career.

Not to state the obvious, but achieving ATG success is up to talent and temperament but also luck and many factors.

You cant even pretend Barry would have 100 percent achieved that, it's pure speculation, so using peer rating against someone with an actual ATG career is pointless.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Calling Barry is a great of the game, that part can be justifiable.

But you call him an ATG and start placing him ahead of other ATGs with full career records, that can't be justified no matter what logic @kyear2 wants to claim. In fact, he accepts there is no logic, he is just going to assume that Barry with one series would have had the equivalent of an ATG level record had he played based on selective heresay.

It's not even clear if he was SA's best bat. @kyear2 is taking favoritism to absurd degrees here, and somehow when it is convenient for him certain pundits become his unquestioned authorities somehow.
Click to expand...
He pretty clearly wasn't. Graeme Pollock was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top