Kapil Dev vs Vinoo Mankad

[ret]

comparing the two great Indian all-rounders, who played a major part in different eras

giving some stats and figures from the perfect all-rounder thread, along with Millar's to serve as an anchor

runs and wkts per test
Kapil 40 & 3.3
Vinoo 48 & 3.6
Millar 54 & 3.0

effectiveness
Kapil = 96.1
Vinoo = 109.2
Millar = 105

though Mankad has played less tests than Kapil, I guess thats due to India playing less games in his era, if someone can confirm this.

both the all-rounders share something in common, i.e. running the non-striker out for backing up. Mankad did that too an Australian and the term 'Mankaded' was invented. Kapil 'Mankaded' Peter Kirsten in an ODI

Mankad is also known to have batted at every position, also being involved in that 400+ runs opening partnership .... Kapil got the award for wisdon Indian cricketer of the century in 2002 though sometimes one wonders if Kapil really did justice to his talent, especially with the bat

overall, both of them are pretty equal in my book and you can't go wrong with picking either of them.

 

[Richard]

Probably know more about Ashok than Vinoo Mankad myself TBH.

Often hope I'll find more in due course, as I'm sure I shall.

 

[fredfertang]

Mankad achieved what he did in a much weaker Indian team than Kapil which heightens his value in my book

Kapil was (and is) more memorable because of his flamboyant character and of course is not so far back in history

On overall achievement I'd say Mankad by a narrow but still comfortable margin, certainly in tests anyway and of course dear old Vinoo predates ODI's by 20+ years so we dont know how effective he'd have been in that form of the game

 

[ret]

i m tilting towards Mankad

on EI, Mankad [EI = 109] was slightly more effective than someone like Millar [105], while Kapil is behind at 96

 

[Sanz]

Okay We have just discovered through some made up stats that :-

a. Mankad is a better allrounder than Kapil Dev.
b. Mankad was more effective than Miller.

 

[Sanz]

Kapil was (and is) more memorable because of his flamboyant character and of course is not so far back in history

Ofcourse his 431 wickets and 5000 runs were gifted to him because of his flamboyance. His role in reviving Indian Cricket is also because of his flamboyance.

 

[fredfertang]

Ofcourse his 431 wickets and 5000 runs were gifted to him because of his flamboyance. His role in reviving Indian Cricket is also because of his flamboyance.

I disagree with you there - Kapil was a fine player who got his 431 wickets and 5000 runs through a combination of skill and hard work

 

[ret]

Ofcourse his 431 wickets and 5000 runs were gifted to him because of his flamboyance. His role in reviving Indian Cricket is also because of his flamboyance.

whats wrong with what fredfertang said?

Originally Posted by fredfertang
Kapil was (and is) more memorable because of his flamboyant character and of course is not so far back in history

did he say that Kapil's wkts and runs were 'solely' due to his flamboyance? He only said that Kapil is more memorable than someone like Mankad and gave two reasons as to why he thinks so

saying more memorable due to flamboyance and having played not so far back in history doesn't translate into him downgrading Kapil's performances on field like you twisted it around

dude, don't make a fool out of yourself

 

[Anil]

kapil - the best allrounder india has produced, mankad a distant second...as a test batsman, mankad possibly accomplished more but overall kapil is way better, don't care what the stats say...

 

[SJS]

It is easy to present stats in many different ways to "prove" many different things.

Both are great allrounders but just keep in mind Kapil bowled fast medium and Mankad bowled orthodox spin - on the sub-continental wickets

Alternatively forget the all rounder stuff, just lek at the bowling and see how many great fast and fast medium bowlers India has produced and how many spinners.

You dont have to compare their bowling stats to see who was the greater bowler. Just look at the fact that Kapil was the greatest bowler of his type the country produced by such a HUGE margin.

Stats dont tell everything.

 

[ret]

Probably know more about Ashok than Vinoo Mankad myself TBH.

Often hope I'll find more in due course, as I'm sure I shall.

http://www.cricketnetwork.co.uk/main/s119/st50725.htm

Mulvantrai Mankad, known affectionately and universally as “Vinoo” is not just the first but the quickest Indian player to have achieved the all-rounder's double in terms of matches played: taking only 23 Tests spread out over five years due to the much fewer Tests India played in his time.

In fact Mankad’s record for the all rounder’s double was also the world record for a very long time, and among his peers, including greats such as Keith Miller, Richie Benaud, Alan Davidson and Sir Garfield Sobers, none was quicker to the double than Vinoo.

Only decades later in the late 1970s was Mankad’s world record broken by the young Ian Botham, who in a turbo-charged start to his career managed to reach the double in only 21 matches.

 

[ret]

More on Mankad

Mankad scored 116 in the third Test at Melbourne, taking on all the fire and brimstone of Lindwall and Miller to become the first Indian centurion against Australia. Mankad repeated that feat with his 111 in the fifth Test also at Melbourne, which further stamped his class against top class pace bowling

against England at home he came into his own, especially with the ball. Mankad spun his way to 34 wickets at just over 16 runs each, and India under Vijay Hazare achieved her first Test triumph ever at Madras, in India’s twenty-fifth Test match. Mankad contributed heavily to this win as he skittled the Englishmen with figures of 8 for 55 in the first innings and 12 for 108 in the match.

Mankad was also a key contributor in India’s first ever Test series against Pakistan when that newly formed nation toured India in 1952-53. In the very first match, in New Delhi, Mankad scalped 13 Pakistani batsmen including a career best 8-52 in the first innings that sent the visitors reeling to defeat by an innings and 70 runs. Pakistan however got immediate revenge when at Lucknow on a matting wicket, Fazal Mehmood swung and seamed his way to a 12 wicket haul that helped Pakistan down India by an innings and 43 runs. India then bounced back with a win in Bombay, where hometown hero Vinoo Mankad grabbed another five wicket haul, helping India hold on to a series win.

But the one contribution of Vinoo’s which stands out even amongst all these achievements is what has since come to be known as Mankad’s Match. The year was 1952, and the horrors of World War II were slowly fading. England though still devastated by war’s aftermath, was on the mend, and still the strongest cricketing nation. The English side bristled with legendary batsmen, led by Len Hutton and including Dennis Compton, Peter May, and a young Tom Graveney. The side also featured the great Alec Bedser, a young and fiery Fred Trueman, as well as the spin twins Jim Laker and Tony Lock in the bowling department, all backed by the keeping of the immaculate Godfrey Evans. Predictably, the Indians lost to this powerful side 0-3 in a four match series. But at least one Indian stood tall among the ruins. In the second Test at Lords, in a tour de force individual performance, Vinoo Mankad scored 72 and 184 opening the batting, and took 5 for 196 bowling 73 overs in the first innings followed by 24 overs for 35 runs, including 12 maidens, as England chased down a modest 78 for victory in their second innings. But impressive as the cold figures are, a better appreciation can be had through veteran Indian writer B.B. Mama's writing.

Hazare won the toss and India decided to bat first. Mama writes: “Vinoo missed the first five balls of Alec Bedser’s superb opening over, and just managed to survive a lightning fast stumping attempt. (Evans had moved up to the stumps for the last ball.) Such then is the paper thin margin between a memorable passport to greatness and cruel oblivion.”

Mama continues “Only 16 runs accrued in the first half hour. Hutton then made the first bowling change, bringing on leg spinner Roley Jenkins – and Vinoo exploded into action. He lifted the fourth delivery, perfectly pitched on the middle stump straight over the Nursery End sight screen for an effortless six. Jenkins gasped in astonishment at this impudence, and the crowd sensed somehow that this had all the makings of a good fight.”

Vinoo fell for 72 a little after lunch on the first day, and following that India collapsed from 106 for no loss to 235 all out as the young and fiery Freddie Trueman, cut through the Indian line up. The next day Vinoo and Ghulam Ahmed the off spinner bowled with masterly control and uncanny accuracy to Len Hutton and Reg Simpson, who were allowed only 13 runs in the first hour. However England slowly built its innings, and ended up with 537 in reply, including a hurricane 98 before lunch on the third morning by the keeper Evans. Mankad through this onslaught bowled tirelessly to take 5 for 196 off 73 overs with 24 maidens.

Facing a deficit of 302 India battled to 137 for two with Mankad on 86 not out at the end of the third day. Mama writes, “Resuming on the fourth morning Vinoo dismissed with lordly disdain the fearful prospect of an innings defeat with India still trailing by 165 runs. He attacked the bowling with the zest and panache of a conquistador or buccaneer, unleashing a full repertoire of dazzling strokes – drives, sweeps, glances, pulls, hooks, cuts, even swipes and slashes! Lords was ablaze!”

This incredible display of batting power prompted Charles Bray to write in a local London paper: “No wonder he roused the crowd to a pitch of excitement and appreciation which I have rarely seen in any part of the world. I can still see that flashing blade, the speeding ball and the quiet unassuming demeanour of this great player as he thrashed the English attack in a manner that could be likened to Don Bradman at his best.”

Mankad raced to 184 in four hours while the next highest Indian score was Vijay Hazare’s 49, which he scored in a 211 run stand with Mankad. The MCC members, not ones to be easily impressed, gave Vinoo a standing ovation, and even the young Queen Elizabeth had a warm word of commendation during the tea interval.

 

[sanga1337]

Just looking at his stats, Mankad had a strike rate of 90 and bowled a lot more overs than Miller. In fact he averaged 55.63 overs per match which is hell of a lot more than Miller who bowled 31.7 overs per match. So it is really not surprising that Mankad is averaging more wickets per test than Miller. In a way the stats you produced are misleading as it suggests that Mankad was more of a wicket taker than Miller.

 

[pasag]

*Miller

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Kapil Dev>>Vinoo Mankad.

 

[ret]

Just looking at his stats, Mankad had a strike rate of 90 and bowled a lot more overs than Miller. In fact he averaged 55.63 overs per match which is hell of a lot more than Miller who bowled 31.7 overs per match. So it is really not surprising that Mankad is averaging more wickets per test than Miller. In a way the stats you produced are misleading as it suggests that Mankad was more of a wicket taker than Miller.

i have explained how i have taken those figures on a different thread

in short, the runs/wkts per test lays importance on the final out-put .... on a flat-track, a bowler has to bowl more overs to get those wkts, while on say a bowler friendly track, he has to bowl less .... same is the case for a batsman, where he has to bat fewer innings to notch up a big score on a flat track but bats more innings on a bowler friend track. if we are to add SR to it then one has to add the playing conditions as well and so on with finally things getting complicated .... this method assumes that the output in a game depends on conditions, opposition and circumstances