The Myths & The Truth

[Black_Warrior]

Sobers is a batting allrounder. His bowling average of 28 is very very good.

Yes,averaged 65 or more with the bat but 28+ as a bowler with pretty ordinary strike rate as well in that period,as far as I remember.

Thats like saying Imran is an ordinary all rounder because his batting average is 37 and not 52.

Different standards for bowling and batting all rounders..

Sir Garfield Sobers is one of the greatest cricketers to have ever played the game. No argument. Period.

 

[Ikki]

That's not Sobers' bowling average. That's his average in his peak between 62-68, I believe.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

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.

Firstly, well done on quoting only the first part of my post


You are the one going solely on records and jumping to conclusions,not me.

For the last time, the fact that Imran had a brilliant average at home in no way means that the Pak pitches were great for fast bowling.That he tailored his bowling to suit the conditions is irrelevant.If you have watched any videos of him or Waqar especially,you would know how hard they had to work for their wickets.The fact remains that Pak pitches were a fast bowlers' nightmare. When Hadlee's record was broken by Dev,Hadlee acknowledged that he didn't have to work as hard for his wickets as Dev did.

And you talk about Imran's away average like it was bad or something - 25 is still an ATG average FFS! Most people do better at home simply because they are more used to their conditions and because away for Imran is home for others - meaning the others would be expected to do well.

My second point is not irrelevant.The fact that Imran,Waqar and Wasim adjusted well enough to foreign pitches to do well goes to show what they could have done had their bowled half their careers on those pitches. It is a lot harder for non-SC'al fast bowlers to adjust to the SC conditions simpy because the conditions there are much tougher and take a lot more getting used to (a certain DK Lillee comes to mind).Even now if you look at stats of bowlers like Amir,Asif and even Zaheer in say, England and compare it to a Broad's or Johnson's in India/Pak/SL, you'll know what I'm talking about.

Your argument is simplistic in that it involves averages at face value (as I showed in the second part of my post that you didn't quote). It is a bit like using Ponting's stats and saying Indian pitches are the hardest to bat on, or that Ind bowlers are the best, or that Ponting would have averaged 20 even if he had grown up on those pitches etc - in other words, an argument that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[Furball]

Firstly, well done on quoting only the first part of my post


You are the one going solely on records and jumping to conclusions,not me.

For the last time, the fact that Imran had a brilliant average at home in no way means that the Pak pitches were great for fast bowling.That he tailored his bowling to suit the conditions is irrelevant.If you have watched any videos of him or Waqar especially,you would know how hard they had to work for their wickets.The fact remains that Pak pitches were a fast bowlers' nightmare. When Hadlee's record was broken by Dev,Hadlee acknowledged that he didn't have to work as hard for his wickets as Dev did.

Ah, Kapil Dev - another one who bowled much better at home than he did in either England or New Zealand.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Kapil did have better bowling and batting support at home than away tbh.

 

[vcs]

I think that applies to Imran as well (had better support at home than away).

 

[G.I.Joe]

I think that applies to Imran as well (had better support at home than away).

Let me rephrase that to "Kapil had bowling support at home, and none at all away"

 

[Ikki]

Apples and oranges. The Indian support were largely spinners IIRC where the pitches did suit them. Furthermore, it's pretty thin arguing that the difference between Dev's home and away record comes down to support.

Dev (AVG, SR):
Home: 26.49, 55.7
Away: 32.85, 72.2

Seems like a hell of a lot more than support that was wrong.

 

[G.I.Joe]

ok. Carry on.

 

[Teja.]

Haha, The likes of Ravi Shastri and Madan Lal was the 'support' Kapil got for most of his career. It's not like they were test standard spinners or anything. Keeping my distance from the stats war btw.

 

[Sanz]

Apples and oranges. The Indian support were largely spinners IIRC where the pitches did suit them. Furthermore, it's pretty thin arguing that the difference between Dev's home and away record comes down to support.

Dev (AVG, SR):
Home: 26.49, 55.7
Away: 32.85, 72.2

Seems like a hell of a lot more than support that was wrong.

Please name some of Kapil's contemporary Indian bowlers ? Spinners, Fast bowlers, Medium pacers, Chuckers, All count.

 

[fredfertang]

Chetan Sharma and Roger Binny were both decent seamers and Bedi's successors, Dilip Doshi and Maninder Singh were good bowlers

 

[Burgey]

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.

Why does an AT XI even need an all rounder though? The WI in the 80s ,d the Aussie team 95-07 didn't have a world class all rounder, and they dominated.

If you've got four all time bowlers, 6 all time batsmen and an all time keeper-batsman, why do you automatically need an all rounder?

If Sobers plays in an AT team as a batsman (and imo he would), it's a bonus to have him roll the arm over.

If Imran bats six or seven in an AT it's a bloody joke. There are 50 better batsmen than him. If he bats at 8 or 9 he's not there to score runs, but for his bowling. He certianly has a better case being there as a bowler than a batsman. Personally I wouldn't have him (cue BPS getting antsy ) but it's arguable.

 

[Pothas]

Why does an AT XI even need an all rounder though? The WI in the 80s ,d the Aussie team 95-07 didn't have a world class all rounder, and they dominated.

If you've got four all time bowlers, 6 all time batsmen and an all time keeper-batsman, why do you automatically need an all rounder?

If Sobers plays in an AT team as a batsman (and imo he would), it's a bonus to have him roll the arm over.

If Imran bats six or seven in an AT it's a bloody joke. There are 50 better batsmen than him. If he bats at 8 or 9 he's not there to score runs, but for his bowling. He certianly has a better case being there as a bowler than a batsman. Personally I wouldn't have him (cue BPS getting antsy ) but it's arguable.

Yeah agree with this, ideally you would have Sobers, Imran and Miller in my AT side (think I had them all in my top 5 for the greatest cricketers thing) but you cannot cram them all in without making the team weaker.

Sobers at 6 being the 5th bowler seems very much the obvious thing to do, I normally go with Imran at 8 but as you say could easily go with Hadlee or someone else in that spot.

 

[Furball]

Let me rephrase that to "Kapil had bowling support at home, and none at all away"

Doesn't explain his excellent record in Australia and West Indies though.

Ironically, if we're talking about subcontinental bowlers having to work harder, Dev had an atrocious record in England and New Zealand.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah the bowling support thing is wildly over-done. If bowling well without support is such an important factor for rating a bloke, Richard Hadlee is the unquestioned greatest bowler who ever lived. At least Murali had Vaas!

Turning it on its head, does anyone honestly reckon Malcolm Marshall's numbers would have suffered without the support he had? In a similar vein (and this is going to hurt because I love the man) but Waqar's bowling in OZ is pretty damn average considering the support he had even when he was bowling quick and tearing it up against everyone else.

Quality bowlers find a way to bowl well no matter where they are or who's at the other end, tbh.

 

[Anil]

Haha, The likes of Ravi Shastri and Madan Lal was the 'support' Kapil got for most of his career. It's not like they were test standard spinners or anything. Keeping my distance from the stats war btw.

madan lal was not a spinner, he was a "fast" bowler...

 

[Teja.]

madan lal was not a spinner, he was a "fast" bowler...

Yeah, Error noted. He was still not test standard though.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Sobers is a batting allrounder. His bowling average of 28 is very very good.


Thats like saying Imran is an ordinary all rounder because his batting average is 37 and not 52.

Different standards for bowling and batting all rounders..

Sir Garfield Sobers is one of the greatest cricketers to have ever played the game. No argument. Period.

Career average of Sobers is 34+.

 

[Sanz]

Yeah the bowling support thing is wildly over-done. If bowling well without support is such an important factor for rating a bloke, Richard Hadlee is the unquestioned greatest bowler who ever lived. At least Murali had Vaas!

Actually it does when the bowler is used as a stock bowler as well as the strike bowler and it does affect your body in a big way when you bowl 30 overs in a day in 40 Degrees for 15 years, which was Kapil did. Not to forget that Hadlee played in 86 tests over a period of 17 years, Kapil (and Botham ) did in half the time. So as much respect I have for Hadlee, I believe that his average would have suffered, to what extent, I don't know but it would be different. But would it make him a lesser bowler, Never

Turning it on its head, does anyone honestly reckon Malcolm Marshall's numbers would have suffered without the support he had?.

Absolutely, without the support he would have been required to bowl a lot more and Intresting that you bring Marshall's name up, Marshall, Kapil and Botham all made their debute within a year of one another and by the end of 1986, Marshall had played only 48 Tests, Kapil had played 82 and Botham 88. Not ot forget their batting load, it definately made them a lesser bowler than they actually were.