The Best Allrounder All Time?

[Neil Pickup]

But his bowling wasn't in the same class as Botham or Kapil Dev's.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Sobers was a far better bat than Botham and Kapil combined.

 

[Anon2]

Finally, somebody who agrees!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Would Sobers have been in the team if he couldn't bat? No.

Would Sobers have been in the team if he couldn't bowl? Yes.

Would Botham have been in the team if he couldn't bat? Yes.

Would Botham have been in the team if he couldn't bowl? Yes.

I think that's conclusive.

 

[Top_Cat]

Would Sobers have been in the team if he couldn't bat? No.

Gary Sobers was originally picked as a spinner who batted at number 8. 1956 was when he made his debut I think.

Would Botham have been in the team if he couldn't bat? Yes.

To me, that's open to debate. I think IT Botham has always been picked as a batting allrounder. Having seen both of them bowl, I'd say that Sobers was the superior bowler. Botham was certainly a very good bowler but bowled more of the rubbish stuff than Sobers and as I said, it was debatable whether he'd have held his place in the side as a bowler alone. Possibly early on that would have been the case but in the middle and late stages of his carerr, he wasn't able to bowl the same long spells with the ball and the team relied upon him less as the years and injuries wore on. Gary Sobers was a front-line bowler until the end.

Both were awesome batsmen and fielders, though.

 

[Neil Pickup]

We're talking about at their peaks. At his (albeit brief) peak Botham was better than Sobers at his peak.

Over a sustained period, Sobers was better. But at his peak, 'twas Ian.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

At his peak Sober's was literally unstoppable. You just could not get him out cheaply in domestic or international cricket. He would then proceed to pick up key wickets for WI.

 

[marc71178]

Considering Botham's peak was against teams completely weakened by the opening of Packer's WSC, it's no wonder you think he was awesome.

Sobers had to do it against proper teams.

 

[Neil Pickup]

This is according to the PWC Rankings http://www.cricketrankings.com - they take into account the strength of opposition too.

 

[Top_Cat]

We're talking about at their peaks. At his (albeit brief) peak Botham was better than Sobers at his peak.

If you mean as an allrounder, well although it is debatable, I'd say you MAY be right. Too hard to tell.

But as batsmen, Sobers was clearly superior!

Considering Botham's peak was against teams completely weakened by the opening of Packer's WSC, it's no wonder you think he was awesome.

Sobers had to do it against proper teams.

That's not completely true. Sobers certainly did his thang against the better teams but Botham's best performances he saved for teams like India and the WI (as well as Australia!) when they were all at their peak. In fact, I think Botham only played against Australia once in their weakened state when England schtonkered us 5-1. Other than that, he bowled well against all teams at full-strength.

Look, there's no doubting that Botham was an awesome bowler early on in his career. How many times did he take 8 wickets in an innings? His batting improved as time went on and his fielding was superb most times.

Sobers wasn't initially the premier batsman in the side (as I said he was picked as a spin bowler) but he exploded with his 365 against India, his first Test hundred. His bowling started off okay and got better as time went on.

To me, they're two totally different players and both hard competitors. I just rate Sobers as SLIGHTLY edging Botham because he was more likely to make you pay for your mistakes with the bat, despite Botham's ability to wreck you with the ball (early on at least). At their peak, they were both awesome players to watch.

 

[Neil Pickup]

We're talking about at their peaks. At his (albeit brief) peak Botham was better than Sobers at his peak.

If you mean as an allrounder, well although it is debatable, I'd say you MAY be right. Too hard to tell.

But as batsmen, Sobers was clearly superior!

Of course Sobers was a superior batsman... but that's not the issue here!

 

[marc71178]

Botham's peak in terms of figures was in the late 70's - that was when he was at his most consistent, and I have no doubt that it helped playing against weaker sides - India certainly were not as strong as they are now IMO.

True PWC does show him to be the best though, and I have great faith in their system, so will have to call it a draw (as I never admit defeat! )

 

[Anon2]

Late 70s and early 80s. Remember Headingley '81!

 

[anthonysw]

Garfield Sobers for me!
But Adam Gilchrist could take that spot soon.


:O

 

[Neil Pickup]

Marc - no, you've lost. That's 3-0 to me now isn't it?

And Gilchrist? All rounder? Go away.. 8D

 

[Top_Cat]

Actually the greatest allrounder ever has to be:

TIM ZOEHRER!!!!!

Who else could bat like him, keep as well as he did (superior to Heals in fact) and then bowl leggies which turned as much as Warnie's???

Good to see you here by the way, Tony.

 

[marc71178]

Paul, he only got consistently good figures in the late 70's, after that he never dominated to the same extent. If you remember, he failed for a long while from early 1980 to Headingley when he was captain.


And Neil, what are you talking about 3-0?!


[Edited on 5/30/02 by marc71178]

 

[lord_of_darkness]

okay i never ever heard of this guy ?? and hes great ? hmm

 

[Neil Pickup]

Marc... the 3-0

1) Fulton
2) Public Schools
3) Botham

Good enough for me 8D

 

[marc71178]

Fulton never got picked for England, so that one you can't claim.

I thought the public schools petered out in a draw.

I accept Botham - 1-1?