Shakib Al Hasan vs The Great All Rounders

[Shri]

That's exactly why he's being compared to Kapil " I won only 24 test matches out of 131" Dev . Kapil is also the guy who gets condescending pity votes when discussing the best all rounders of the 80's, because of his win in the tallest short man competition that is India's best "fast" bowler . That and playing in the supposed "Golden Era" of the Eighties is why he's rated. You know it's true.

Good.

 

[rtramdas]

Shakib has faced Herath, Murali, Zaheer, Ntini, Steyn, Anderson, Ashwin, Swann, Morkel, Boult, Broad, Vaas, Kumble, Philander, Chuckmal etc. and he averages 10 runs more than Kapil.

Of these bowlers how many avg; <25 ? Only Murali,Steyn & Philander. Isn't it? Ashwin has yet to play a lot in difficult countries & i am sure his avg: will difenitely go a lot outside 25 in the end. Kapil faced bowlers not only with <25 avg: , there were several of these in low 20:s like
Ambrose,Hadlee, Marshall,Garner,Schultz too. What not Kapil faced likes of Morrison,Chatfield,Mushtaq Ahmed,Iqbal qasim, Sarfaraz Nawaz,Qadir, Patterson, Dilley,Fraser,Mcdermott,merv Hughes,alderman, Lawson, Dymock,Craig Mathews etc etc too who are a second tier group & comparable to the names you mentioned. Now a bowl avg: of 25 is equivalent to 50 bat avg: . That means if a bowler avg:s 24 , he is equivalent of a batsmen who avg:s 52( for a batsman his difference in avg: need to increase by twice when compared to that of a bowler).
You base this factor when analysing the quality of bowlers Kapil faced & then his bat avg: .

 

[rtramdas]

Cool. A context less list of a bunch of players whose careers coincided with Kapil. Not given is how many matches Kapil actually played against them and what he did in them. These sepia toned memories always leave the impression that Kapil smashed his runs against the likes of Lillee and Holding instead of the likes of Greg Mathews and Eddie Hemmings. Players of the later quality are the ones who filled most of the teams of that era and ones against whom Kapil mostly played.

i suppose you didn't watch Kapil's career. I have went a lot thru Kapil's scorecards.He played each and every one of these bowlers. Kapil has several brilliant knocks against several of these bowers faced .And he has failed against some of these too.

 

[indiaholic]

Of these bowlers how many avg; <25 ? Only Murali,Steyn & Philander. Isn't it? Ashwin has yet to play a lot in difficult countries & i am sure his avg: will difenitely go a lot outside 25 in the end. Kapil faced bowlers not only with <25 avg: , there were several of these in low 20:s like
Ambrose,Hadlee, Marshall,Garner,Schultz too. What not Kapil faced likes of Morrison,Chatfield,Mushtaq Ahmed,Iqbal qasim, Sarfaraz Nawaz,Qadir, Patterson, Dilley,Fraser,Mcdermott,merv Hughes,alderman, Lawson, Dymock,Craig Mathews etc etc too who are a second tier group & comparable to the names you mentioned. Now a bowl avg: of 25 is equivalent to 50 bat avg: . That means if a bowler avg:s 24 , he is equivalent of a batsmen who avg:s 52( for a batsman his difference in avg: need to increase by twice when compared to that of a bowler).
You base this factor when analysing the quality of bowlers Kapil faced & then his bat avg: .

I agree that Kapil faced bowlers who were probably vastly better than what Shakib faced. But Shakib also averages substantially more than Kapil. This makes me think that they can be compared. Not saying that Shakib is better.

 

[rtramdas]

I agree that Kapil faced bowlers who were probably vastly better than what Shakib faced. But Shakib also averages substantially more than Kapil. This makes me think that they can be compared. Not saying that Shakib is better.

definitely ..Shakib has always been a quality all rounder.. now that he is adding longevity to it he makes his claims even more stronger to get compared with other legendary all rounders.
Avg:ing substantially doesn't mean 'being better by' that much.It depends on contexts too. For example take Amla & Lara. Amla avg:s over 51 in one dayers where as Lara only some 40+. 40/51 = 78.43. If i say Lara was only 78.43% a one day player when compared to Amla , then that is as senseless as it can get.This is because the contexts they played in( this includes several factors) varies so differently.

 

[Tom Flint]

I think seam bowling all rounders are always rated higher than spinners. Not sure why

 

[akilana]

definitely ..Shakib has always been a quality all rounder.. now that he is adding longevity to it he makes his claims even more stronger to get compared with other legendary all rounders.
Avg:ing substantially doesn't mean 'being better by' that much.It depends on contexts too. For example take Amla & Lara. Amla avg:s over 51 in one dayers where as Lara only some 40+. 40/51 = 78.43. If i say Lara was only 78.43% a one day player when compared to Amla , then that is as senseless as it can get.This is because the contexts they played in( this includes several factors) varies so differently.

so would you say Kohli wasn't a better player than Lara because of the quality of the attack these days being inferior.

 

[DriveClub]

We need more Tec15s to challenge the CW status quo #draintheswamp #makecwgreatagain #mcwga

 

[Burgey]

I think seam bowling all rounders are always rated higher than spinners. Not sure why

Probably seen as being a fair bit more physically demanding. Not necessarily always the case, but I suspect that's a reason.

 

[rtramdas]

so would you say Kohli wasn't a better player than Lara because of the quality of the attack these days being inferior.

i think you mean one dayers only .i am not saying Lara is a better player when compared to Kohli in one dayers just because Lara faced much superior attacks.I only says that mere avg: cannot just be taken as the yardstick.there are several other factors too to be taken into account

 

[Coronis]

I think seam bowling all rounders are always rated higher than spinners. Not sure why

Just like pace bowlers are generally rated higher than spinners (outside Warne/Murali)

 

[a spambot]

I love how people talk about modern batsmen having inflated averages before using the bowling averages of bowlers in the 80s and 90s etc as evidence of their greatness. Hypocrisy at it's worst.

 

[thierry henry]

I think Shakib has done pretty much all he can with the limited opportunities given to him as a Bangladesh player. You can't really fault his output against team X when you're simultaneously saying that he doesn't have a big enough sample size against them due to Bangladesh not getting the big games.

I think there's a distinction between saying he's overrated because he hasn't done as much as people make out that he has (fair enough) versus saying he's overrated because he couldn't have replicated what he has actually done so far if given more opportunities against bigger teams (BS, there just isn't the proof either way).

All we can say for sure is over a relatively sparse test career he has successfully played an almost unique role in test history (basically as a specialist in both disciplines throughout his career) but we simply don't know if he would have been successful doing this if he had to play more often and in tougher circumstances and conditions.

 

[rtramdas]

I love how people talk about modern batsmen having inflated averages before using the bowling averages of bowlers in the 80s and 90s etc as evidence of their greatness. Hypocrisy at it's worst.

The real hypocrites are those who take just avg:s to measure the greatness of players with out taking into account the context these players played in.For them Hashim Amla will simply be a better one day batsman than some one like Desmond Haynes because Amla
avg;s 51+ when compared to Haynes's 40+..Similarly for them Saeed Anwar's 194 vs India & Charles Coventry's 194 vs Bangladesh will be of same qualitybecause both are equal in numerical value.

 

[a spambot]

The real hypocrites are those who take just avg:s to measure the greatness of players with out taking into account the context these players played in.For them Hashim Amla will simply be a better one day batsman than some one like Desmond Haynes because Amla
avg;s 51+ when compared to Haynes's 40+..Similarly for them Saeed Anwar's 194 vs India & Charles Coventry's 194 vs Bangladesh will be of same qualitybecause both are equal in numerical value.

Just out of curiosity, what would you say if I said Stuart Broad is a better bowler than, say, Micheal Holding?

 

[ImpatientLime]

If there's anyone he's got a similar Test record to it's Tony Greig, only Greig's record is better with 8 tons in 58 tests, vs Shakib's 4 in 45 tests & most importantly Greig compiled his record against top opposition, including 34 of his 58 tests vs either Australia or the West indies.

greig is probably the single most underrated all rounder of all time.

bloke was an absolute gun.

 

[Zinzan]

greig is probably the single most underrated all rounder of all time.

bloke was an absolute gun.

What I like most about Greig's record is he averages no lower than 36 with the bat against all nations & no higher than 37 with the ball.

 

[Red]

Just out of curiosity, what would you say if I said Stuart Broad is a better bowler than, say, Micheal Holding?

That you're wrong.

 

[honestbharani]

What I like most about Greig's record is he averages no lower than 36 with the bat against all nations & no higher than 37 with the ball.

Spread this word in the funky draft thread mate...

 

[Zinzan]

Spread this word in the funky draft thread mate...

Hush, they may not catch on.