• 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 Keith Miller

Who do u think was a better allrounder,Imran Khan or Keith Miller?

  • Total voters
    104
Dissector

Dissector

International Debutant
I am going to disappoint Silentstriker and vote for Imran. IMO he played at a time when the general standard of cricket was higher and his bowling record is significantly more impressive.
 
BhupinderSingh

BhupinderSingh

Banned
Lillian Thomson said:
That further confirms what I wrote several pages ago "I think some people voted for Miller because they find the OP's constant hero worship of Imran Khan rather tedious."
Click to expand...
Imran,without any doubt,is one of the greatest cricketers here,almost every person,Wisden,ICC have him in the top 10 cricketers ever,so whats wrong in doing hero worshipping of Imran?Its not like a worst or mediocore cricketer is my Idol.
 
Lillian Thomson

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
BhupinderSingh said:
Imran,without any doubt,is one of the greatest cricketers here,almost every person,Wisden,ICC have him in the top 10 cricketers ever,so whats wrong in doing hero worshipping of Imran?Its not like a worst or mediocore cricketer is my Idol.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with hero worshipping anyone if that's what floats your boat. I just pointed out that it's proven that regular posters find it tedious that you start threads about and mention your "hero" so often.
 
neville cardus

neville cardus

International Debutant
Perm said:
Actually their statistics are remarkably similar.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I had it the wrong way 'round. Imran's allround average is 0.07 points better than Miller's. Still, I'm showing myself to be awfully prone to hyperbole these days; it's definitely a close-run thing.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
archie mac said:
Have I missed something??

Miller was a great bowler every bit as good as Imran, his average is 22 which is pretty good. What did Khan do that was so much better with the ball?
Click to expand...
His peak with the ball was truly incredible. Comparable with the peaks of any bowler of the modern era.
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
archie mac said:
Not in that quote, but he did say so many times:) Benaud also rated him one of the all time greats, and he has watched quite a few:)

And I am not saying Imran is not a great bowler:cool: Just that they can be compared:)
Click to expand...
By the way, Benaud also rated Imran ahead of Miller as an all-rounder, and nobody can say he was biased or uninformed in his decision...
 
neville cardus

neville cardus

International Debutant
archie mac said:
Benaud once said to Miller how upset he was that Bradman retired the year before he (Benaud) started playing FC cricket. Miller; "we all have our lucky breaks, and that was one of yours Rich"
Click to expand...
Priceless. I wish that you'd pull those sparklers out of the jewellery box a touch more frequently. :)
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
KaZoH0lic said:
No, actually, I'd rate their bowling about the same to be honest. So if I were struggling to exclude one, I could do so the other. The reason I didn't mention Miller was to base it on other bowlers BP has definitely heard of.
Click to expand...
Of all the arguments given in favor of Miller, this one seems the biggest stretch. In which possible way other than stats are Imran and Miller in the same league, it just beggers belief.

I mean, you say that we are basing our decision on stats, but suddenly decide that since Miller had an average of 23 and Imran 22 they are in the same tier of bowling? Tell me, are Lillee and Miller in the same bowling tier, after all their averages are around the same? Of course not.


You seem to over inflate Miller's bowling status and diminsh Imran's to suit your argument. Imran could and did run through any batting line up in the world with consistency over the span of a decade. He's won matches against every major country. He is recognized by the vast, vast majority of the cricket community as an all-time great bowler (Holding himself rated him and Lillee the best). This is not a matter of following opinion, its fact.

Miller is not hailed in the same way at all. And his overall bowling figures ,other than his average, no matter which way you try and cut them, pale in front of Imran's. The gap between bowling-wise is wider than you are making it out to be.
 
Ikki

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz said:
Of all the arguments given in favor of Miller, this one seems the biggest stretch. In which possible way other than stats are Imran and Miller in the same league, it just beggers belief.
Click to expand...
Why does it beggar belief?

I mean, you say that we are basing our decision on stats, but suddenly decide that since Miller had an average of 23 and Imran 22 they are in the same tier of bowling? Tell me, are Lillee and Miller in the same bowling tier, after all their averages are around the same? Of course not.
Click to expand...
I didn't say we were basing it on stats at all. But have you seen Miller play? I haven't.

If I were to say that Miller and Lillee aren't in the same tier then I'd say the same about Imran. If we're basing it on stats, Lillee is not even in the same tier as Marshall.

You seem to over inflate Miller's bowling status and diminsh Imran's to suit your argument. Imran could and did run through any batting line up in the world with consistency over the span of a decade. He's won matches against every major country. He is recognized by the vast, vast majority of the cricket community as an all-time great bowler (Holding himself rated him and Lillee the best). This is not a matter of following opinion, its fact.
Click to expand...
No, the fact is that if we're going to compare across eras, let's learn something about that era. Name me, apart from Lindwall (who is pretty much equal), a bowler that was as good as these two? Laker is there, but he was a spinner and is behind Miller and Lindwall...so if the main difference between them is striking the ball 6 runs and in Miller's time his strike-rate was very rare, of course I am going to give it a different value when I compare it with Imran's whose strike-rate in his own era wasn't as rare.

It is a matter of opinion if you're basing something on the opinion of someone else. Still, Miller was also the best bowler in the world for a lot of his career, also winning matches against every side and doing it in style too. When you mention that Imran was successful, so was Miller...it hardly sets them apart.

Miller is not hailed in the same way at all. And his overall bowling figures ,other than his average, no matter which way you try and cut them, pale in front of Imran's. The gap between bowling-wise is wider than you are making it out to be.
Click to expand...
Yes, pundits that come 30-50 years later are going to talk of Miller as they do Imran, who is only a decade gone. You would need newspaper articles, books and plenty of time to go that far back and read about Miller. I leave that to Archie, otherwise trying to compare infamy is also a stretch. If they were of the same era (like Lillee and Imran), then okay, but decades apart? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top