Celebrating Sir Garry Sobers - The Bowler

[honestbharani]

Unfortunately, my cricket history is not great, but I offer a couple of points.
- Sobers must have been extraordinarily talented to bowl all different styles of bowling to Test standard, but...
- Does this not mean that he always bowled something which the pitch supported, and for this reason, wouldn't his bowling average be seen as 'lower' than a bowler who had one art of Sobers' ability.

Sobers played as a batting allrounder in the initial part of his career. Of this, there is very little doubt. He was always the 4th or 5th bowling option and was mostly required to do the stock bowler's work.. After that, he took up fast medium and started taking his bowling that bit more seriously when they were short on that type of bowling and became good at it.


Then, when the other pace bowlers came in once again, he started being the stock bowler again.


Honestly, one has read so much about Sobers bowling seam up into the wind, bowling quick, flattish SLA and stuff just to keep the batsmen tight while the bowlers from the other end attacked that I would be extremely shocked if it was anything less than the absolute fact...


It is not like Sobers got the new ball when the pitch was lively and was asked to bowl chinamen or fingerspin when it was turning square. He was a back up to the 4 specialists they picked, not vice versa. If he was in my team and I had the likes of Kumble and Saqlain (at his peak) on a turner, I would only ask him to bowl medium pace with the new ball and also bowl against the wind giving control over the batsmen while my specialists attack from the other end...


That and the fact that he was such a good batsman that he almost always had batted for a reasonable time and therefore could get tired bowling half of what most specialist bowlers would have bowled..

 

[Top_Cat]

Unfortunately, my cricket history is not great, but I offer a couple of points.
- Sobers must have been extraordinarily talented to bowl all different styles of bowling to Test standard, but...
- Does this not mean that he always bowled something which the pitch supported, and for this reason, wouldn't his bowling average be seen as 'lower' than a bowler who had one art of Sobers' ability.

It's one thing to be presented with a pitch which favours specific types of bowlers, another thing entirely to be in a position to take full advantage of it. If Sobers worked in the nets on his finger-spin, wrist-spin and pace bowling, considering the changes in technique, line/length and philosophy to be able to bowl any of them at Test standard, it seems reasonable to assume that the small advantage Sobers gets from being able to bowl any type is offset by his lack of specialisation. This is exacerbated by his concentration on his batting, leaving even less tim eto work on his bowling. If being 'good at everything, great at nothing' makes him a lesser bowler overall in the eyes of some, so be it. Others don't see it that way.

Myself, if I was his coach or captain, I'd have been encouraging him to pick a discipline and stick with it. It seems unlikely to me that someone with the extraordinary skills required to bowl all types of bowling to an adequate Test standard (still a high standard overall) wouldn't excell if he picked one.

 

[Ikki]

Sobers played as a batting allrounder in the initial part of his career. Of this, there is very little doubt. He was always the 4th or 5th bowling option and was mostly required to do the stock bowler's work.. After that, he took up fast medium and started taking his bowling that bit more seriously when they were short on that type of bowling and became good at it.


Then, when the other pace bowlers came in once again, he started being the stock bowler again.


Honestly, one has read so much about Sobers bowling seam up into the wind, bowling quick, flattish SLA and stuff just to keep the batsmen tight while the bowlers from the other end attacked that I would be extremely shocked if it was anything less than the absolute fact...


It is not like Sobers got the new ball when the pitch was lively and was asked to bowl chinamen or fingerspin when it was turning square. He was a back up to the 4 specialists they picked, not vice versa. If he was in my team and I had the likes of Kumble and Saqlain (at his peak) on a turner, I would only ask him to bowl medium pace with the new ball and also bowl against the wind giving control over the batsmen while my specialists attack from the other end...


That and the fact that he was such a good batsman that he almost always had batted for a reasonable time and therefore could get tired bowling half of what most specialist bowlers would have bowled..

HB, you are just ... off the mark. Wrong from the very start.

Sobers' peak coincides with when he was 4th/5th best bowler. When he was bowling with Gibbs, Griffith and Hall. And those are figures where they ALL played - 22 tests of his 30 test peak. Where you regard a combo of those players, it runs longer.

 

[Ikki]

It is a shame that it sunk into that from people so keen to rate a player that they won't listen to what is a valid point. Did not see it soundly replied to either, but what are you going to do, eH?

Unfortunately, this is what happens when you talk about Sobers. I am trying to get my opinion off as politely as I can so people can put the heat of the argument away and maybe pay attention.

 

[Manee]

It's one thing to be presented with a pitch which favours specific types of bowlers, another thing entirely to be in a position to take full advantage of it. If Sobers worked in the nets on his finger-spin, wrist-spin and pace bowling, considering the changes in technique, line/length and philosophy to be able to bowl any of them at Test standard, it seems reasonable to assume that the small advantage Sobers gets from being able to bowl any type is offset by his lack of specialisation. This is exacerbated by his concentration on his batting, leaving even less tim eto work on his bowling. If being 'good at everything, great at nothing' makes him a lesser bowler overall in the eyes of some, so be it. Others don't see it that way.

Myself, if I was his coach or captain, I'd have been encouraging him to pick a discipline and stick with it. It seems unlikely to me that someone with the extraordinary skills required to bowl all types of bowling to an adequate Test standard (still a high standard overall) wouldn't excell if he picked one.

You have stated that he is 'good at everything' but I think that this rating of 'good' is rather too generous, considering my aforementioned point. A 'good' bowler should be able to take advantage of conditions. I do see your point though.

 

[Richard]

I knew this would come up and I do not disagree with the sentiment. What I dislike is manipulating statistics (using Statsguru)

The stupid thing is that if you do manipulate stats using StatsGuru (or anything else you may have at your disposal) you can realise that Sobers was far better, not worse, than you would if you just take the stat you're spoon-fed by his CricInfo player page, ie his Test career bowling-average.

 

[zaremba]

Sanz and SJS I commend you on an excellent thread and a great collection of excerpts about Sobers' bowling.

As for statistics (in particular the number 34.03) Im afraid that you just won't ever manage avoid those questions when discussing Sobers. I am sorely tempted to offer my own views but shall resist the temptation because I feel that this isn't really meant to be the focus of the thread.

Wonderful stuff.

 

[Top_Cat]

You have stated that he is 'good at everything' but I think that this rating of 'good' is rather too generous, considering my aforementioned point. A 'good' bowler should be able to take advantage of conditions. I do see your point though.

Yeah it's just a turn of phrase. Whether all of his bowling types were Test standard is probably another matter entirely.

You're right though; for Sobers to be rated by history as a great bowler, he should have stuck to one. But then, maybe he was just having too much fun bowling googlies, off-spinners and then slipping in the quick one to make the batsman **** themselves. Last I checked, cricket is still a fun game.

 

[JBH001]

Agree with that. If I had that kind of talent I would rather bowl all sorts as well and enjoy a good muck around at the higest level.

 

[SJS]

Sanz and SJS I commend you on an excellent thread and a great collection of excerpts about Sobers' bowling.

As for statistics (in particular the number 34.03) Im afraid that you just won't ever manage avoid those questions when discussing Sobers. I am sorely tempted to offer my own views but shall resist the temptation because I feel that this isn't really meant to be the focus of the thread.

Wonderful stuff.

I have no intention to do that my dear - get into arguments with them that is. Its just not worth my time.

I do feel sorry for those who obviously love the game and are yet depriving themselves of the great joy of understanding about its history and historical characters through more than mere numbers. I can understand that many do not have access to cricket's rich literature hence my efforts to spend so much time (that I have been "accused" of having far too much of) to share some of it. Still one can only take a horse to the water .....

 

[Sanz]

Wisden Almanack - 1955

The M.C.C team in the West Indies, 1953–54

"....In dismissing Laker in the Third Test, Valentine became the youngest player, at 23, to reach a Test aggregate of 100 wickets, but his bowling fell some way below its previous standard. When injured, he was replaced by Sobers, a 17-year-old left-arm-slow bowler and useful batsman, who showed distinct promise......"

 

[Sanz]

The Cricketer in 1976 - Sobers' first Test

".....How else did Sobers come into the picture? Well, he took the first England wicket when Bailey - who opened the batting as well as the bowling - was caught behind. Sobers made an excellent impression. He is a slim young man who runs lightly up to the wicket and the arm almost touches the ear as it comes over. On what might serve as a model action for a slow left-hand bowler, he builds changes of flight and spin in the classical manner. It will be surprising if we do not come to know his name well in the years ahead....."

 

[Sanz]

England v Rest Of The World, 1970 -

First Test Match
Wisden Almanack

".....The match was a personal triumph for the World XI captain, Gary Sobers, who not only wielded his collection of star players into a team straightaway, bnt set a remarkable personal example. He first destroyed the England batting with his best bowling in Test cricket and followed with a memorable innings of 183. This was the third occasion that the West Indies captain had made a century and taken five wickets in an innings in a Test Match. No other player had done it more than once.

England's experimental batting side, with Cowdrey and Boycott requesting not to be considered because of lack of form and Edrich forced out by a hand injury, made a sorry showing on the first morning. The cloudy, humid conditions were ideal for scam and swing bowling and Sobers made the most of them after Illingworth had won the toss. With the aid of Procter and McKenzie he had England down to 44 for seven by the first interval. Jones and Luckhurst, two of three newcomers in the England side, were quickly swept aside. Jones, given an overdue chance after years of inconsistent scoring in county cricket, seemed overcome by the occasion. After edging the first ball of the match from McKenzie over the slips he played a rash stroke to Procter's fast delivery and lost his wicket.
This was the start of a decline not arrested until Illingworth and Underwood came together for the eighth wicket. Sobers, varying pace and swing shrewdly, took wickets in his third, sixth, eighth, ninth and twelfth over. After 49 balls his figures were four for 9, his final return six for 21. Much of the England batting was spiritless. Illingworth showed that Sobers was not unplayable with the first of the rescuing innings he was to play in the series. He dealt so firmly with the bowling that there were ten 4's in his 63, which helped England to a total of 127, made in three and a half hours....."

 

[Burgey]

Imagine how great it would've been as a WI selector when Sobers was playing, knowing he could do a decent enough job as a new ball swing bowler, finger spinner and wrist spinner!!! You'd have someone who could do a job for the team in virtually all conditions.

 

[Top_Cat]

Imagine how great it would've been as a WI selector when Sobers was playing, knowing he could do a decent enough job as a new ball swing bowler, finger spinner and wrist spinner!!! You'd have someone who could do a job for the team in virtually all conditions.

Dunno if it was all that great; there was the other slight issue of picking the rest of the team......

 

[Arjun]

Sobers' bowling is something which I have often been curious about. The findings posted here are quite interesting. I'll go through them once more, because there's a lot to take out of this.

 

[honestbharani]

HB, you are just ... off the mark. Wrong from the very start.

Sobers' peak coincides with when he was 4th/5th best bowler. When he was bowling with Gibbs, Griffith and Hall. And those are figures where they ALL played - 22 tests of his 30 test peak. Where you regard a combo of those players, it runs longer.

I am not sure about the stats but from what I have read and heard, he averaged less in his first 30 tests as he played more as a batsman than as a bowler and then for a period, he regarded himself as one of the specialist bowlers and bowled a lot and did well as a bowler for quite a few years and then again dropped back to being a stock bowler/main batsman towards the end due to general fatigue and some injuries like his knee etc.. This is what I have heard..

 

[Athlai]

If Sobers was as great as he's being made out in this thread, (which I am perfectly happy to believe and intend this question out of pure honest ignorance) how come he has such a mediocre average? Great bowlers tend to have great figures which Sobers doesn't seem to have, what caused this statistical hiccup?

 

[SJS]

If Sobers was as great as he's being made out in this thread, (which I am perfectly happy to believe and intend this question out of pure honest ignorance) how come he has such a mediocre average? Great bowlers tend to have great figures which Sobers doesn't seem to have, what caused this statistical hiccup?

No one has even hinted, as far as I can read, that Sobers was a great bowler.

Read again.

He was a great batsman. One of the five greatest of all time and a very good bowler.

 

[Athlai]

No one has even hinted, as far as I can read, that Sobers was a great bowler.

Read again.

He was a great batsman. One of the five greatest of all time and a very good bowler.

When I said great I didn't mean all time, or anything of the sorts, just very good particularly for his time (even called the best quick of his time in one of those articles). 34 still doesn't coincide with the very good bowler analysis. Sorry about the word mix up.