The Myths & The Truth

[JBH001]

Errr, it was an extract from a book by Fred Trueman and Trevor Bailey. Two English test cricketers, neither easy to impress either, who were first contemporaries and then later observors of Sobers' career.

 

[Furball]

Its fair to give credit to Shane Warne for bowling on ono-friendly Australin conditions(many of his worshippers here do,even if you don't) but not Imran.What else double standards are?.BTW,I give full credit to both of them for bowling in non friendly conditions.Warne averages worse than his career average in matches where McGrath was not there.Support does matter a bit & it makes sense IMO.

It's not double standards when both Warne and McGrath did better away from Australia than they did at home. Nor is it double standards to point out that if bowling in Pakistan was so unhelpful, you'd expect Imran to have done better away from Pakistan, when in actual fact the opposite was true. So Imran doesn't get credit for having a good home record from me I'm afraid.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

If bowling on Pakistani pitches is so hard, why is Imran's away record significantly worse than his home record?

How does Imran having a good record in Pak equate to the pitches being great for fast bowling?He presumably played a lot of cricket there and found a way to counter the conditions.That should not detract from the fact that he had to work harder for his wickets than say,an Aus bowler or SA bowler.

Another way of looking at it would be to compare the records of Pak bowlers in Aus/SA/Eng vis-a-vis Aus/Eng/SA bowlers' records in Pak/sub-continent.That would give us a fairer idea of which pitches were harder to bowl on and harder to adjust to.

I mentioned this in the all-rounders thread-records can be misleading,very misleading.To repeat what I said there : Sehwag in Aus averages much more than he does in Bang.Using your line of argument,that means Bang pitches are harder to bat on than the Aus ones.Or Dravid has a significantly better away average than the home one-does that mean Ind pitches are worse than what he gets away?


Here's what Holding had to say yesterday :

I think they (Pakistan) have a pretty good pace attack right now. Aamer, Asif and Gul are three good fast bowlers, but they’re more effective in the conditions here in England than they would be under the conditions back home in Pakistan,” Cricistan.com quoted Holding, as saying.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Stop trying to give Imran credit for something he doesn't deserve credit for.

A bit unlikely when it's the sole reason for Mr Singhs existence.

 

[Ikki]

Stats along with variables are the best of rating players from the past rather than non-sense of some fanboys of a player.Simple stats can't always be right but with variables they can.

The thing is...damn near everyone rates Sobers as an all-rounder. As one of the best or, usually, the best. So it's not that everybody is a blind fanboy. Obviously, he did things on the pitch that were incredible.

Personally, I think when you look back at his record it is less flattering to him. I've raised this issue before when Sanz, I think it was, opened up a thread about Sobers with actual articles and reviews on his performances. The thing that struck me was how often his average and wickets per test stat were praised. His average isn't that bad and in his peak is actually very good.

IMO his wickets per test stat would probably garner less attention/praise these days if a bowler these days got those stats. I think that has to do with the game being faster (in terms of both SR of bowlers and batsmen) and the general trend towards result-based cricket - yes, I know a draw is a result too but I am talking about win/loss.

 

[andyc]

Let's try and keep this civil, guys. No need for any personal shots.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Let's try and keep this civil, guys. No need for any personal shots.

This whole thread is just a personal shot at Garry Sobers, and one which one person perpetuates at regular intervals. There's no purpose to it other than trying to prove that Imram Khan is the Supreme Being. The whole comparison is a nonsense. Apart from dumping the term "allrounder" on them they have nothing in common in terms of their role in their respective teams or their respective careers.

 

[Ikki]

Its fair to give credit to Shane Warne for bowling on ono-friendly Australin conditions(many of his worshippers here do,even if you don't) but not Imran.What else double standards are?.BTW,I give full credit to both of them for bowling in non friendly conditions.Warne averages worse than his career average in matches where McGrath was not there.Support does matter a bit & it makes sense IMO.

Because Warne does better away from home than at home. Even though he has comfortably the best spin bowling stats during his career at home, he does even better away. That's quite significant.

On the other hand Imran's home and away record are like night and day. If you want to praise him for bowling well in what you think were unhelpful conditions, then you have to equally criticise him for being so poor (by his home standards) everywhere else. Can't have it both ways.

Here's what Holding had to say yesterday :

Probably because not only are the pitches more lively in England the overcast conditions make it ideal for swing.

 

[Burgey]

I think that's why I rate bowling all-rounder > batting all-rounder. Sure he is a fine 5th option but I don't really think that's much of a compliment to him personally.



Their SRs are a world apart. You can consider Sobers' SR when we know he was primarily a pacer and it was still a shade off Zaheer's and Sobers was that good only for a handful of years really. If you take into account his SR only includes the fact that he was a spinner it still doesn't impress because even his diluted SR - which favours him in this respect - is below the SR of the average spinner during his career.

Nothing wrong with being the 5th bowling option in am all time XI though, especially when your batting alone would see you as one of the first 3 or 4 picked.

And a lot of bowling SRs in that era were high, even Dvo's doesn't seem to sit well with his average. Was a different game in many ways.

And those who said earlier Sobers gave you the equivalent of Dravid's fielding are selling him massively short, and I'm not sledging Dravid in saying that. Sobers was a freakish fielder, would say more akin to Ponting in his prime than Dravid.

I should stress though, I'm basing this on things I've read and footage, not having seen him field at his peak.

 

[Ikki]

I just don't think you give him a bowl TBH. In fact, he doesn't make my all-time XI as an all-rounder, but purely a batsman. The way I see it, the only time he'll get a bowl is if someone is injured or it's a throw-the-kitchen-sink move - so if anything he'd be a 6th option.

My personal all-time XI has Miller and Imran as my all-rounders, with Warne as the spinner and you can take your pick at 2 more specialist pacers from Lillee, Hadlee, Marshall or McGrath.

 

[Furball]

How does Imran having a good record in Pak equate to the pitches being great for fast bowling?He presumably played a lot of cricket there and found a way to counter the conditions.That should not detract from the fact that he had to work harder for his wickets than say,an Aus bowler or SA bowler.

Another way of looking at it would be to compare the records of Pak bowlers in Aus/SA/Eng vis-a-vis Aus/Eng/SA bowlers' records in Pak/sub-continent.That would give us a fairer idea of which pitches were harder to bowl on and harder to adjust to.

No, it simply means that Imran was equipped to take wickets in Pakistan. As were Waqar and Wasim. Bowling in Pakistan wasn't hard for them, and they didn't have to work harder for their wickets. That's absolute crap.

Your second point is crap as well. All that does is point to the bowlers who had the tools to bowl in the varying conditions. Some countries suit certain bowlers better than they will suit others - for example, James Anderson has an excellent record in England, Dale Steyn does not. Steyn and McGrath have excellent records in India, Waqar did not. That doesn't tell us anything about pitch conditions or how "easy" it was for fast bowlers, merely that Steyn and McGrath were better equipped for bowling in India than Waqar was.

The only really "fair" way to do that would be to look at how ALL fast bowlers have done in ALL conditions. Funnily enough, when you do that, the country over the last decade that has been hardest to bowl in is Australia. Most Australian bowlers have excellent records in Australia (as you'd expect, seeing as they're in home conditions), yet very few foreign bowlers seem to adapt well to Australian tracks. Non subcontinental bowlers have generally found bowling in the subcontinent a lot easier than bowling in Australia.

 

[Furball]

Because Warne does better away from home than at home. Even though he has comfortably the best spin bowling stats during his career at home, he does even better away. That's quite significant.

Interestingly enough, so does McGrath.

 

[Uppercut]

Imran after 30 Tests had a bowling average of 30, Batting average of 25.83

Sobers after 30 test had a bowling average of 49.83 and Batting average of 59.90

So Statistically, by the 30th Test, Sobers was arguably the World's best batsman who could bowl spin, fast and field at any position, In comparison Imran could not claim any of that status based on mere statistics.

I could probably bowl spin and fast and average 50 tbf.

This actually misrepresents Sobers's early career- he started off rather poorly with the bat. Once he got going, though...

 

[Top_Cat]

I could probably bowl spin and fast and average 50 tbf.

This actually misrepresents Sobers's early career- he started off rather poorly with the bat. Once he got going, though...

And to think, all it took was a gimme triple against an already injury-hit minnow.

 

[weldone]

I could probably bowl spin and fast and average 50 tbf.

At test level? Or, at college level?

At test level, you'd have to take 1 wicket in every 2 or 3 overs to average 50 (because you will concede that many runs in 2 or 3 overs max. against test class batsman - without considering the wide and no balls that you'll bowl)...Whether it'll be 2 overs or 3 overs will depend on how good a bowler you are...

 

[Jarquis]

Why would he bowl wides and no balls? I don't bowl wides and no balls when I play for my league side, and last time I checked my run up is my run up, 22 yards is 22 yards and the off stump is where the off stump is.
Think you're way off the mark.

 

[honestbharani]

Why would he bowl wides and no balls? I don't bowl wides and no balls when I play for my league side, and last time I checked my run up is my run up, 22 yards is 22 yards and the off stump is where the off stump is.
Think you're way off the mark.

coz maybe UC DOES bowl wides and no balls in the leagues he does play in?

 

[Jarquis]

coz maybe UC DOES bowl wides and no balls in the leagues he does play in?

Haha, touche
You know the point I was making.

 

[weldone]

Why would he bowl wides and no balls? I don't bowl wides and no balls when I play for my league side, and last time I checked my run up is my run up, 22 yards is 22 yards and the off stump is where the off stump is.
Think you're way off the mark.

coz maybe UC DOES bowl wides and no balls in the leagues he does play in?

This

And in that case, you might take 4 overs to concede 50 runs at test level, btw... (I'm assuming that you're not a first-class cricketer, and don't hope to be one in the near future).

 

[Jarquis]

Haha, nope. Played some age group minor county stuff but that's it.