• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Cribbage's Standardised Test Averages (UPDATED November 2018 - posts 753-755)

Himannv

International Captain
Stanley Jackson should probably rise I reckon. Tough era he played in and still averages 48 odd.
 

Teja.

Global Moderator
Herbie Taylor's average will sky-rocket, I reckon. Better batsman than Trumper et al. IMHO. Scoring freely on tricky wickets might be the more 'talented' thing to do but toughing it out and scoring more runs is what matters in the end. Averaging 50 and scoring 400+ runs in the series Barnes took 49 in is freakish IMO.
 
Last edited:

weldone

Banned
Ooh, them's fightin' words.

A man who had the reputation as one of the best opening bowlers in the world, and had the stats to back it up, also batted in the top six of a side dubbed "The Invincibles" and held his own?

Combine that with how, even in a discussion pertaining to all-rounders, he is often left out when talking about all-time great cricketers makes rather an under-rated player.
JBH was referring to Miller's bowling alone.

In fact, I too feel the same as JBH on Miller's bowling. Some say that he's comparable to Lindwall (looking at statsguru alone), but there are a number of reasons he should be considered a clear level below Lindwall as a bowler.

Of course, there's no denying the fact that Miller was a fantastic cricketer and probably 'the' most rounded among all great all-rounders.
 

ankitj

International Coach
Of course, there's no denying the fact that Miller was a fantastic cricketer and probably 'the' most rounded among all great all-rounders.
Don't think Miller is under-rated. Got ranked in top 15 ESPN's legends of cricket, and also in CW 50. Think Aubrey Faulkner and Vinoo Mankad are highly under-rated all-rounders.
 

smalishah84

The Tiger King
Don't think Miller is under-rated. Got ranked in top 15 ESPN's legends of cricket, and also in CW 50. Think Aubrey Faulkner and Vinoo Mankad are highly under-rated all-rounders.
I do feel too he is under-rated. His stats are quite similar to Imran I think and he is usually not talked about as much. That might be because Imran led his side very well but Miller's stats do seem to be quite similar to Imran's at first glance. Although I haven't taken a closer look at his stats.

Aubrey Faulkner is one guy who is massively under-rated. This anantha guy who does some analyses and writes articles that sometimes show up on cricinfo ranked Faulkner right up there as the most rounded of all rounders with Keith Miller and Imran Khan following suit IIRC.
 

ankitj

International Coach
Haven't heard too much about Mankad tbh.
Consider these facts

  1. Mankad held the record of completing 1000 runs and 100 wickets in fewest matches until Botham broke it. Manakad still is the second fastest to do that.
  2. Mankad is one of the only 4 cricketers who have scored at least one double hundred and taken at least one 10WM haul. (Ian Botham is another, guess who are other two. Those are surprising names)
  3. Mankad was among the four cricketers (along side Tendulkar, Gavaskar and Kapil) who were unanimous picks in Cricinfo's all time India XI. Goes to show his stature.

I will rank him among the 5 greatest Indian cricketers.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
In fact, I too feel the same as JBH on Miller's bowling. Some say that he's comparable to Lindwall (looking at statsguru alone), but there are a number of reasons he should be considered a clear level below Lindwall as a bowler.
Genuinely interested in knowing what these reasons are.
 

smalishah84

The Tiger King
Consider these facts

  1. Mankad held the record of completing 1000 runs and 100 wickets in fewest matches until Botham broke it. Manakad still is the second fastest to do that.
  2. Mankad is one of the only 4 cricketers who have scored at least one double hundred and taken at least one 10WM haul. (Ian Botham is another, guess who are other two. Those are surprising names)
  3. Mankad was among the four cricketers (along side Tendulkar, Gavaskar and Kapil) who were unanimous picks in Cricinfo's all time India XI. Goes to show his stature.

I will rank him among the 5 greatest Indian cricketers.
Sounds impressive indeed. The point number 2 that you have raised is not that great though. Wasim Akram was one of those guys who did that as well. Can't think of the fourth one. Jason Gillespie???

And why...?

Miller underrated in discussions of ATG IMO. Always gets forgotten in favour of Imran and co
I agree. From what I have read he was more talented batting wise than Imran and that Imran was probably a somewhat better bowler. Not too much to choose between them at first glance.
 

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
I agree. From what I have read he was more talented batting wise than Imran and that Imran was probably a somewhat better bowler. Not too much to choose between them at first glance.
Indeed. They have almost exactly the same stats.
 

ankitj

International Coach
And why...?

Miller underrated in discussions of ATG IMO. Always gets forgotten in favour of Imran and co
I put Miller in top dozen cricketers and regard him the second greatest Aussie after Don. All experts rate him highly too. May be the CWers under-rate him. Not sure.

Sounds impressive indeed. The point number 2 that you have raised is not that great though. Wasim Akram was one of those guys who did that as well. Can't think of the fourth one. Jason Gillespie???
Allan Border :laugh:
 

smalishah84

The Tiger King
I put Miller in top dozen cricketers and regard him the second greatest Aussie after Don. All experts rate him highly too. May be the CWers under-rate him. Not sure.



Allan Border :laugh:
Would never have guessed that tbh :laugh:........at least both are aussies :)
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Indeed. They have almost exactly the same stats.
The difference being Miller performed with both bat and ball throughout his career. Miller was one of the greatest fast bowlers of his time and a genuine middle order bat - #5 for the Invincibles. Imran on the other hand became a better batsman as he bowled less and didn't really have a career with superlative performances with both disciplines. In the end Imran made himself a fine all-round player but didn't carry the burden the likes of Botham or Miller had.

Faulker is a more interesting one. He is a player I don't know much about but looks like he could be the greatest of them all.
 

ankitj

International Coach
The difference being Miller performed with both bat and ball throughout his career. Miller was one of the greatest fast bowlers of his time and a genuine middle order bat - #5 for the Invincibles. Imran on the other hand became a better batsman as he bowled less and didn't really have a career with superlative performances with both disciplines. In the end Imran made himself a fine all-round player but didn't carry the burden the likes of Botham or Miller had.
There's one more difference between Miller and Imran. One played for Australia, other did not :ph34r:

All in good humour!
 

ankitj

International Coach
While we are at the topic of all-rounders, Trevor Goddard is a curious case. Among great all-rounders, only Imran and Miller beat him in both batting and bowling averages.
 

smalishah84

The Tiger King
The difference being Miller performed with both bat and ball throughout his career. Miller was one of the greatest fast bowlers of his time and a genuine middle order bat - #5 for the Invincibles. Imran on the other hand became a better batsman as he bowled less and didn't really have a career with superlative performances with both disciplines. In the end Imran made himself a fine all-round player but didn't carry the burden the likes of Botham or Miller had.

Faulker is a more interesting one. He is a player I don't know much about but looks like he could be the greatest of them all.
Ikki what do you mean he didn't carry the burden? He was the main strike bowler for his team and more than a useful bat. He probably was a better bowler than Miller too.

you might want to check this out.

Stats analysis: Imran Khan | Specials | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Imran was one of the best in the 1980s. In fact just check out his average and SR for 1980-88.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I thought Imran was pretty much the definition of bearing a ****ing huge burden. Captaining Pakistan is a full-time job in itself without having to worry about batting and opening the bowling.
 

Top