Kapil Dev vs Ryan Harris

[subshakerz]

More believable than Harris being a better bowler than Kapil ?

Was Kapil a better bowler than Shoaib, Asif, Bishop and Colin Croft?

 

[sunilz]

According to peer analysis Tendulkar is definitely better cricketer than Imran ?
ESPN legends of cricket, CMJ list , Benedict list, David Gower

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Based on peer rating, Imran isn’t a top tier bowler. I’ve never seen a player mention him when it comes to the great bowlers of the 70s and 80s.

 

[sunilz]

Was Kapil a better bowler than Shoaib, Asif, Bishop and Colin Croft?

He was definitely better than Asif . Other 3 no.

 

[cnerd123]

We don't know how Harris would have done if he debuted earlier. Maybe he would have failed, maybe he would have stepped up to the plate. Better to judge him by his actual career as an international bowler.

just can't get over how stupid this argument is. Imagine applying this to a player like Adam Voges to justify how he's better than someone with 4 times as many Test runs but at a lower average.

Ryan Harris doesn't even have as many first-class wickets as Dev has Test wickets. His entire professional career was just 13 years compared to Dev's 28 years. Absolutely absurd.

 

[h_hurricane]

Harris' was a completely worldclass bowler for his entire career bowling consistent, quality, tireless spells in different conditions. He was rated very highly by his opposition and peers of his time. It is just that his career was brief.

We don't know how Harris would have done if he debuted earlier. Maybe he would have failed, maybe he would have stepped up to the plate. Better to judge him by his actual career as an international bowler.

Kapil had his good years but was never seen in the same light as Lillee, Imran, Hadlee, etc. or even as Garner, Holding, etc. even during his peak from 78 to 83.

I don't mind those putting Kapil ahead by default for having a full career, but I think those who recognize that Harris' brief career was enough to establish him in a superior class of bowler should be understood as well. The same way posters who recognize Bumrah and Cummins are simply better bowlers than Kapil despite being early in their careers.

As proven earlier in the thread, the best of Kapil lasted as many tests as the whole career of Harris and was also a bit better. Harris escaped a real dent on his averages by being garbage enough early not to be picked in the team, and several folks have concurred here. How could anyone assume that Harris would have maintained a better record over Kapil over a long long time when people who have seen him early agree that he wasn't good enough for a large period of time.

I agree that Cummins is a better bowler than Kapil. He has a body of work long enough at a very high level to surpass Kapil.

Disagree with Bumrah though. Would like to see more of him to rate him over Kapil. Perhaps another season or two. At this moment, he is building a reputation of not being reliable enough fitness wise to get picked when his team needs him.

 

[cnerd123]

Harris escaped a real dent on his averages by being garbage enough early not to be picked in the team, and several folks have concurred here.

Also got to end his career before the inevitable slump because Australia had enough options to not have to keep wheeling him out there inspite of all his injuries. Dev was a shadow of his best towards the end of his career but kept on playing because India didn't really have anyone better. Also played in an era where no one was really looking after his long term health, just kept expecting him to take the park and find a way regardless of how his body was feeling.

 

[social]

Also got to end his career before the inevitable slump because Australia had enough options to not have to keep wheeling him out there inspite of all his injuries. Dev was a shadow of his best towards the end of his career but kept on playing because India didn't really have anyone better. Also played in an era where no one was really looking after his long term health, just kept expecting him to take the park and find a way regardless of how his body was feeling.

Now it’s getting ridiculous

Harris needed a cartilage replacement in his late 20s and opted against it as it would would have finished his career

He bowled on 1 healthy leg for virtually his entire test career

It’s not actually a fair comparison

Better is Harris v Bond

 

[Prince EWS]

Harris' was a completely worldclass bowler for his entire career bowling consistent, quality, tireless spells in different conditions. He was rated very highly by his opposition and peers of his time.

lol no he ****ing wasn't, that was my point

A player's career doesn't just start the moment they debut in Tests and end the moment they retire from Tests.

For a lot of his career Harris would've averaged 55+ in Test cricket, so he rightly wasn't selected. At the same age Kapil was successfully leading an attack on dead wickets. If you count that part of Kapil's career but don't count that part of Harris' you are literally punishing Kapil for being better.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'm so bored of players who weren't as good but had longer careers v players who were better but had shorter careers arguments

I can't be the only one, it's the same argument over and over. Boring.

 

[trundler]

lol no he ****ing wasn't, that was my point

A player's career doesn't just start the moment they debut in Tests and end the moment they retire from Tests.

For a lot of his career Harris would've averaged 55+ in Test cricket, so he rightly wasn't selected. At the same age Kapil was successfully leading an attack on dead wickets. If you count that part of Kapil's career but don't count that part of Harris' you are literally punishing Kapil for being better.

Harris is basically a glorified Lakmal that didn't play when he was meh.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Say Kapil was a 7/10 bowler for a long career
Harris was a 4/10 bowler for a while, then briefly a 9.5/10 bowler

Kapil was a 7/10 bowler for way longer than Harris was a 9.5/10 bowler, whatever judgements you want to make on that are valid afaic

 

[honestbharani]

players who weren't as good but had longer careers v players who were better

subtle

 

[honestbharani]

Say Kapil was a 7/10 bowler for a long career
Harris was a 4/10 bowler for a while, then briefly a 9.5/10 bowler

Kapil was a 7/10 bowler for way longer than Harris was a 9.5/10 bowler, whatever judgements you want to make on that are valid afaic

I am not sure I entirely agree but that is a decent way to put it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I am not sure I entirely agree but that is a decent way to put it.

The numbers I used are subjective of course

 

[honestbharani]

The numbers I used are subjective of course

Yeah. I agree with the gist of your post. Numbers obviously may vary based on the person who is rating them.

 

[subshakerz]

He was definitely better than Asif . Other 3 no.

Why not Croft whose record is pretty much the same as Harris?

 

[subshakerz]

lol no he ****ing wasn't, that was my point

A player's career doesn't just start the moment they debut in Tests and end the moment they retire from Tests.

For a lot of his career Harris would've averaged 55+ in Test cricket, so he rightly wasn't selected. At the same age Kapil was successfully leading an attack on dead wickets. If you count that part of Kapil's career but don't count that part of Harris' you are literally punishing Kapil for being better.

Except isn't this exercise to rate them as international bowlers, not firstclass players?

I guess we differ on how much weight we put to firstclass record.

 

[subshakerz]

I agree that Cummins is a better bowler than Kapil. He has a body of work long enough at a very high level to surpass Kapil.

Disagree with Bumrah though. Would like to see more of him to rate him over Kapil. Perhaps another season or two. At this moment, he is building a reputation of not being reliable enough fitness wise to get picked when his team needs him.

Ok so where is the line where a bowler who clearly seems worldclass can play enough to be rated ahead of someone good who played 130 odd tests?

Cummins at 43 tests is fine, but Bumrah and Harris at 30 and 27 tests are not? At least admit its a personal arbitrary judgment call.

 

[subshakerz]

just can't get over how stupid this argument is. Imagine applying this to a player like Adam Voges to justify how he's better than someone with 4 times as many Test runs but at a lower average.

Ryan Harris doesn't even have as many first-class wickets as Dev has Test wickets. His entire professional career was just 13 years compared to Dev's 28 years. Absolutely absurd.

Voges played one year pretty much. Harris played international cricket for five years. Five years should be enough to determine what class a bowler belongs to.

Kapil, like Anderson, can play decades more than others but that won't make him break into the worldclass category.