Celebrating Sir Garry Sobers - The Bowler

[Sanz]

Well, in his prime he did hold his place solely as a bowler in a West Indian team that was the best in the world for about a five year stretch between 1962 and 1967. Hall, Griffith, Gibbs and Sobers were the main bowlers in the team. Sobers was good enough to keep players like the Jamaican fast bowler Lester King and the Guyanese slow left arm spinner Edwin Mohammed out of the team. Either of these players would be an automatic choice for today's West Indian team.

Not only that, but Sobers would have been picked solely as a bowler for any Test team in the mid-60's. There is a simple way to determine this. Ask any Test captain from that era. Most of them are still around. They said so at the time, and as far as I know none has changed his mind on this issue.

Incidentally, today is Sir Garry's 72nd birthday. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

Great Post as usual. Happy Birthday Sir Garry.

 

[honestbharani]

With age reflex and stamina changes, not technique (if not deliberately changed)...And to take benefit of that change in reflex, the bowler has to be very quick...

you are talking about what is supposed to happen (at least in your opinion) and I am talking about what did happen.



Basically.. yours is theory and mine is reality.. I don't know if his technique changed or whatever changed.. He was still smashing the ball around quite a bit and managed to defend a fair few balls too. The main thing was, according to my friend, he never got beaten or played a false stroke..

 

[Top_Cat]

Well, in his prime he did hold his place solely as a bowler in a West Indian team that was the best in the world for about a five year stretch between 1962 and 1967. Hall, Griffith, Gibbs and Sobers were the main bowlers in the team. Sobers was good enough to keep players like the Jamaican fast bowler Lester King and the Guyanese slow left arm spinner Edwin Mohammed out of the team. Either of these players would be an automatic choice for today's West Indian team.

Not only that, but Sobers would have been picked solely as a bowler for any Test team in the mid-60's. There is a simple way to determine this. Ask any Test captain from that era. Most of them are still around. They said so at the time, and as far as I know none has changed his mind on this issue.

Yeah, exactly. Sobers was one of the better bowlers going around at the time, as acknowledged by his peers. If he was around now, I'd hazard a guess a champion player like him would make it his business to ensure he was up there with the best again and it's possible he'd average less with the ball because of it. Also possible that if he was to contribute more with the ball, he'd probably average less with the bat too, though.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

And TBF, I hope he'll realise he made a slightly hasty statement with some sound basis and row back upon it, as he's done before.

The statement I made included 'if given as many overs as Sobers bowled per match' which was just attempt to prove someone wrong who said only a fine or good bowler can take 235 wickets,a mediocre bowler can't.Moreover,I intentionally didn't mention average & RPO.So,it was confined to in what possible conditions can someone take 235 wickets.It could be giving runs @ 2 per over to 6 or possibly more runs over.

 

[Ikki]

Well, in his prime he did hold his place solely as a bowler in a West Indian team that was the best in the world for about a five year stretch between 1962 and 1967. Hall, Griffith, Gibbs and Sobers were the main bowlers in the team. Sobers was good enough to keep players like the Jamaican fast bowler Lester King and the Guyanese slow left arm spinner Edwin Mohammed out of the team. Either of these players would be an automatic choice for today's West Indian team.

Not only that, but Sobers would have been picked solely as a bowler for any Test team in the mid-60's. There is a simple way to determine this. Ask any Test captain from that era. Most of them are still around. They said so at the time, and as far as I know none has changed his mind on this issue.

Incidentally, today is Sir Garry's 72nd birthday. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

There was a good 4-5 years where that WIndies attack was a genuinely strong attack and compares to the best of most attacks across many eras.

Sobers' figures during that run:

Also, King's non-participation would have to do with more Griffith and Hall. Sobers and Lester were not competing for the same spot. Edwin Mohamed also, evidently, never played more than 12 FC matches, let alone challenging Sobers for a spot as a spinner.

 

[weldone]

you are talking about what is supposed to happen (at least in your opinion) and I am talking about what did happen.



Basically.. yours is theory and mine is reality.. I don't know if his technique changed or whatever changed.. He was still smashing the ball around quite a bit and managed to defend a fair few balls too. The main thing was, according to my friend, he never got beaten or played a false stroke..

That's exactly what I said...He'll face difficulty to face a 85 mph delivery possibly...But with age your ability against anything slower than that generally doesn't decrease...So, he'll be able to play against your friend...Now tell me, are my theory and your reality yielding different results?

 

[Richard]

Australia:
Clark
Lee
Johnson
Casson

S.Africa:
Steyn
Ntini
Morkel
Kallis

Sri Lanka:
Murali
Mendis
Vaas
Malinga (when fit)

India:
Sharma
Khan
Kumble
Harbhajan

England:
Sidebottom
Panesar
Anderson
Broad

----

Don't see him able to replace anyone there. Those like Broad or Casson are in there own sides purely off potential, so to argue they'd replace them is pretty ridiculous. If it came to it, a Hoggard or Harmison would be better. Most of these teams have better alternatives than to have to bring Sobers in.

It'd depend entirely. If it was the Sobers who was bowling well, he'd have a good chance of replacing some of those bowlers - plenty of them in fact. If it was the Sobers bowling poorly early on in his career, he might still replace them on perceived potential. After all, Johnson and Casson have been poor to date too. And Broad execrable.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The statement I made included 'if given as many overs as Sobers bowled per match' which was just attempt to prove someone wrong who said only a fine or good bowler can take 235 wickets,a mediocre bowler can't.Moreover,I intentionally didn't mention average & RPO.So,it was confined to in what possible conditions can someone take 235 wickets.It could be giving runs @ 2 per over to 6 or possibly more runs over.

No doubt if all these wonderful club bowlers bowled all 21,000 deliveries to Imran Khan they'd never take a single wicket.

 

[SJS]

It'd depend entirely. If it was the Sobers who was bowling well, he'd have a good chance of replacing some of those bowlers - plenty of them in fact. If it was the Sobers bowling poorly early on in his career, he might still replace them on perceived potential. After all, Johnson and Casson have been poor to date too. And Broad execrable.

Well to give just two examples

- Vettori has already played 83 Test matches for New zealand, mainly as a specialist bowler and has taken his wickets at 34.4 each.
- Harbhajan Singh in the last five years (since the 2003-04 series against New Zealand series at home) has played 34 Test matches and taken his wickets at 36.5 each and still continues to be the main bowler in the side. Infact, widely considered the best off spinner ion the world barring Murali, since Saqlain Mushtaq, Harbhajan's carrer average is already at 31.3 and if his present for continues, there is no doubt it will plummet further. I hope the Indian selectors do not take the advise of some worthies here.

It is very interesting here to mention how some of the world's best spinners of today are so heavily indebted to home conditions (where helpful to their type of bowling).

Kumble and Harbhajan are prime examples.

If you keep in mind that both Harbhajan and Kumble played about half their matches at home under conditions, generally better suited for spinners and Sobers played most matches in West Indies where conditions were not best for his type of bowling, one can see a very interesting trend.

[B]AT	Bhajji	Sobers	Kumble[/B]
AUS	73.22	40.03	37.73
ENG	34.17	31.58	41.42
IND	26.26	26.75	24.28
WIN	26.08	34.12	31.29

Sobers played most Tests, outside West Indies (44), in England (21) and Australia (10). I have added India since Harbhajan and Kumble come from there. Sobers played 8 Tests in India.

It is so easy to see how the weighted average works for or against a player if he plays more games on a surface which suits him or not.

All of them have good figures in India but while Harbhajan has played over 55% of his matches here (37/67) and Kumble almost 48 (61/128), Sobers played under 9% of his Tests here.

Just take away the home figures of all three and you see the comparison. The home figures are within brackets.

Kumble :

- Average : 35.9 (24.3)
- Strike Rate : 74.6 (58.2)​

Harbhajan :

- Average : 42.7 (26.3)
- Strike Rate : 81.1 (59.3)​

Sobers :

- Average 33.4 (34.1)
- Strike rate : 89.9 (94.3)​

And just see what a huge home advantage Indian spinners have. Not to speak of there being no easy wickets from Zimbabwe and Bangladesh available in the fifties and sixties.

And these are specialist spinners as is Vettori.

One can give other examples over the years. Giles is more recent but there have been others in the past.

It is fanciful to put so much emphasis on Sobers' average per wicket (never forgetting that he was a batsman who bowled) and downplaying his 235 wickets.

 

[Richard]

Have often wondered why Sobers didn't switch to seam earlier, as he was clearly better with seam than spin. He could've bowled seam at Sabina Park and Kensington, and spin at Queen's Park Oval and Bourda.

 

[SJS]

Have often wondered why Sobers didn't switch to seam earlier, as he was clearly better with seam than spin. He could've bowled seam at Sabina Park and Kensington, and spin at Queen's Park Oval and Bourda.

He fully switched to the quicker stuff when he started playing in Australia and with fabulous results. I think he was constrained by his ability to bowl all types of stufff with better than modest proficiency. This coupled with the paucity of good bowling in the West Indies, tempted captains to get him to bowl all kind of stuff everywhere.

If he was not so versatile, or if West Indies had a better attack, I am sure he would have been used as best suited the conditions and what he could do best under them.

It made eminent sense for him to bowl seam up in England, pace in Australia and spin on the sub continent. In that case, he would have made best use of his amazing versatility and coupled it to the local conditions.

 

[Perm]

Australia:
Clark
Lee
Johnson
Casson

S.Africa:
Steyn
Ntini
Morkel
Kallis

Sri Lanka:
Murali
Mendis
Vaas
Malinga (when fit)

India:
Sharma
Khan
Kumble
Harbhajan

England:
Sidebottom
Panesar
Anderson
Broad

----

Don't see him able to replace anyone there. Those like Broad or Casson are in there own sides purely off potential, so to argue they'd replace them is pretty ridiculous. If it came to it, a Hoggard or Harmison would be better. Most of these teams have better alternatives than to have to bring Sobers in.

Sobers would be in each side in place of Johnson/Casson, Harris/Kallis, Vaas/Malinga, Sharma/Zaheer/Harhbajan, Anderson/Broad.

 

[Ikki]

It is fanciful to put so much emphasis on Sobers' average per wicket (never forgetting that he was a batsman who bowled) and downplaying his 235 wickets.

Sobers' figures does benefit from having bowled pace, of course. And there is a huge gap between someone like Kumble and someone like Sobers. Not only in average, SR, wickets per match...but more obviously in 4w, 5w, 10 hauls. They're not in the same calibre.

And SJS, what about their performances in Pakistan?

 

[Ikki]

Sobers would be in each side in place of Johnson/Casson, Harris/Kallis, Vaas/Malinga, Sharma/Zaheer/Harhbajan, Anderson/Broad.

Johnson on the face value of stats alone is better than Sobers. Disregarding that he is tipped to be one of the best pacers of the game - something Sobers never could be (of course, he was an all-rounder which would have made it bloody hard).

As I said, guys like Casson and Broad are there on the prospect of performing. If the selectors wanted a ready made bowler both countries could go for someone like Bracken or Hilfenhaus or Hoggard or Harmison...all being much better than Sobers.

As for being better than Vaas/Malinga/Harbhajan/Sharma/Zaheer/Anderson...that's just plain ridiculous.

The distance between these bowlers and Sobers is large. Bring your reasoning so I can at least see where you are coming from.

Harris right now is doing what Sobers did with spin with WIndies and that is not much, however occasionally a good performance pops up. Still, he takes more wickets per match, whilst bowling less, and concedes less (and would be even less given the era) and strikes faster too. His hauls of 4/5/10 wickets are a third of the way near Sobers with only 15 Tests in.

Kallis..it's debatable. But again, that shows that Sobers can't 'walk' into the side.

 

[Ikki]

It'd depend entirely. If it was the Sobers who was bowling well, he'd have a good chance of replacing some of those bowlers - plenty of them in fact. If it was the Sobers bowling poorly early on in his career, he might still replace them on perceived potential. After all, Johnson and Casson have been poor to date too. And Broad execrable.

I take Sobers on his overall, not his peak. To judge him on his peak vs someone on near retirement or debut is pretty irrelevant comparison to me. If you are judging his peak, then judge them against the players at their peak.

Sobers would not walk into any of these sides, in fact it's debatable he'd get a look in them.

ADD: Johnson has not been poor at all. He's been average, but such is the standard in Australia that we need someone who can be world-class. Otherwise in comparison with many others around the world he's not doing too shabbily for a newbie.

 

[Perm]

Sobers would not walk into any of these sides, in fact it's debatable he'd get a look in them.

Sorry, but that's just a ridiculously ignorant comment to make.

 

[Ikki]

Sorry, but that's just a ridiculously ignorant comment to make.

Would he get a look in the Australian one purely as a bowler?

Would he get into the Saffies as a spinner?

Would he get into the Sri Lankans as a pacer?

Remember what you are arguing because Sobers' career has already been played out.

If Sobers' is being judged on his overall, then there is nothing ignorant about it. The Australian test side is no place for a bowler averaging in the mid 30s AND striking at almost 100 balls.

Remember, even those players you said he'd replace, despite their high average have a VERY good SR.

So go ahead, I am waiting to see why he would get into the sides when compared with Vaas/Malinga/Harbhajan/Sharma/Zaheer/Anderson...this should be VERY interesting.

In addendum, I probably should have said "some of them".

 

[Ikki]

An interesting stat: of all bowlers who have taken 200 wickets or more, Sobers has the 2nd worst average (Vettori is worse by 0.4 runs per wicket) and 1st worst SR.

 

[Ikki]

He fully switched to the quicker stuff when he started playing in Australia and with fabulous results. I think he was constrained by his ability to bowl all types of stufff with better than modest proficiency. This coupled with the paucity of good bowling in the West Indies, tempted captains to get him to bowl all kind of stuff everywhere.

If he was not so versatile, or if West Indies had a better attack, I am sure he would have been used as best suited the conditions and what he could do best under them.

It made eminent sense for him to bowl seam up in England, pace in Australia and spin on the sub continent. In that case, he would have made best use of his amazing versatility and coupled it to the local conditions.

Did this happen in Test cricket?

Sobers' only 2 series in Australia:

Fabulous meaning terrible right?

 

[honestbharani]

Did this happen in Test cricket?

Sobers' only 2 series in Australia:

Fabulous meaning terrible right?

fabulous meaning, perhaps, fabulous when he bowled seam but not so great when he bowled spin as the conditions didn't aid that type????????