Garry Sobers, The Bowler?

[smash84]

He'd be foolish not to bowl his spinners later, yes. Bowlers are allowed to bowl more than one spell, you know. And if he was handicapped by having to open the bowling with the new ball, it stands to reason that he wasn't a much better pace bowler than the average he maintained doing so. Opening the bowling on spin friendly surfaces is something new ball bowlers are conventionally expected to do the world over, without complaint.

Yeah this

 

[Teja.]

He'd be foolish not to bowl his spinners later, yes. Bowlers are allowed to bowl more than one spell, you know. And if he was handicapped by having to open the bowling with the new ball, it stands to reason that he wasn't a much better pace bowler than the average he maintained doing so. Opening the bowling on spin friendly surfaces is something new ball bowlers are conventionally expected to do the world over, without complaint.

Yeah, This. The Joe in fine posting form today, it must be said.

 

[honestbharani]

By making him seem like an idiot? I'll be blunt, you're posting generic BS that is irrelevant to, and absolutely fails to address the issue of why bowling a less effective style wrt the wicket supposedly helps the team more than bowling the style that is more likely to fetch you wickets. Maybe, just maybe you might want to consider that he had more sense than to handicap himself by bowling an unsuitable style, and doesn't require this irrational excuse being spouted here that clearly only serves to diminish his greatness rather than celebrate it.

No, I am not even saying that is the reason I rate him as a bowler. If you read my posts, which you don't seem to have the time to, then you will realize I rate him high for the number of times he has run through line ups or at least taken 5 wickets etc.


And secondly, you are the one posting geriatric BS that goes against what has been mentioned about him elsewhere. If you think he was stupid for bowling that way, then that is one thing. If you think it never happened, you need to show why it didn't. As I mentioned earlier, and as always you have conveniently overlooked what doesn't suit you in your attempt to retort at me, the point is that it seems to have happened. If it didn't or did, it is not something that is affecting my rating of hm as a bowler, as that is NOT something I factor in... But if other people do, as they have a right to, I don't think it is something to be laughed at coz this is something supported by men who did see him bowl than people whose only knowledge stems from statsguru.

 

[Fusion]

Cut out the insults guys. You can make your points just fine without attacking each other.

 

[honestbharani]

He'd be foolish not to bowl his spinners later, yes. Bowlers are allowed to bowl more than one spell, you know. And if he was handicapped by having to open the bowling with the new ball, it stands to reason that he wasn't a much better pace bowler than the average he maintained doing so. Opening the bowling on spin friendly surfaces is something new ball bowlers are conventionally expected to do the world over, without complaint.

Except he didn't do a bad job of it.. You are acting as though he averaged 50 with the ball, which he didn't. And yes, if he was the Watson of his team, it would stand to reason that he would get lesser spells than the specialist bowlers in his team. And if the team already had their no. of specialist bowlers and were lacking the seam option, it would stand to reason that he would do that duty.


And for those talking about mandatory seam and spin overs, variations are still needed in cricket and that is why spinners still play on what are seamingly fast bowling friendly tracks and fast bowlers still play in what are spinner friendly tracks. And the other point is, it seems to be a general consensus that Sobers was a much better seamer than spinner. If that is the case, it stands to reason that even on a spinning track, if he did not perhaps bowl as well as his specialist spinners and hence the returns were paltry and just about the same as he did when bowling seam up.


You guys are acting as though you have seen him first hand. Maybe it was stupid from his personal standpoint but as long as he and his captain felt it served a purprose to their team, they were justified in taking that stance. And honestly, cricket just has so many layers that to harp on something being right so adamantly having been outside of it all just smacks of "know it all"... There are a lot of conveivable reasons why it might have been so and hence it just comes down to personal judgement. Apparently by these accounts, this did happen. Maybe it was right and maybe it was not so right but that is beyond the discussion. If it DID happen, how does it affect your rating of Sobers would be the more valid point of discussion.

 

[G.I.Joe]

No, I am not even saying that is the reason I rate him as a bowler. If you read my posts, which you don't seem to have the time to, then you will realize I rate him high for the number of times he has run through line ups or at least taken 5 wickets etc.

It's perfectly fine to rate him for those aspects. Those are valid reasons to rate him as a bowler, unlike the claims that are being debated presently.

And secondly, you are the one posting geriatric BS that goes against what has been mentioned about him elsewhere. If you think he was stupid for bowling that way, then that is one thing. If you think it never happened, you need to show why it didn't. As I mentioned earlier, and as always you have conveniently overlooked what doesn't suit you in your attempt to retort at me, the point is that it seems to have happened.

I've reasoned why it isn't a mitigating factor even if it did happen. I'm open to being proven otherwise if there's a flaw in my thought process.

If it didn't or did, it is not something that is affecting my rating of hm as a bowler, as that is NOT something I factor in... But if other people do, as they have a right to, I don't think it is something to be laughed at coz this is something supported by men who did see him bowl than people whose only knowledge stems from statsguru.

I fail to see the relevance of statsguru to this discussion. It has been apparent for quite a while that its a claim you like to make of anyone who disagrees with your views, but ironically the debate here has been structured on the lines of common sense and reasoning, not plain statistics. Don't let that stop you in your long ongoing efforts at condescension though.

 

[honestbharani]

It's perfectly fine to rate him for those aspects. Those are valid reasons to rate him as a bowler, unlike the claims that are being debated presently.




I've reasoned why it isn't a mitigating factor even if it did happen. I'm open to being proven otherwise if there's a flaw in my thought process.



I fail to see the relevance of statsguru to this discussion. It has been apparent for quite a while that its a claim you like to make of anyone who disagrees with your views, but ironically the debate here has been structured on the lines of common sense and reasoning, not plain statistics. Don't let that stop you in your long ongoing efforts at condescension though.

sorry abt my tone in that post. It was uncalled for and I apologize. But I hope you understand that was towards certain others than yourself.


And secondly, it is not about it being a mitigating circumstance in terms of performance overall. AS you said, individually it does affect him the wrong way. But as it is not his primary suit and because it is JUST POSSIBLE that it meant more to his team, he might have done that. Whether or not it happened is a seperate point.

 

[Ikki]

Or by being able to bowl spin on pace friendly wickets he allowed the West Indies to pick up an extra pace bowler who would do a better job than he would have in such friendly conditions.

The thing is, if you read that black magic thread, Sobers already played with spinners like Gibbs, Valentina and other all-rounders, which in those days were a bit more common. It's a really flimsy argument that doesn't seem to be based on reality.

 

[honestbharani]

we ll have to search up for some quotes or articles now.. Unfortunately, I access CW at work and opening more sites and esp. google searches would just be inviting trouble.. Can someone else do the honours?

 

[Sanz]

He'd be foolish not to bowl his spinners later, yes. Bowlers are allowed to bowl more than one spell, you know. And if he was handicapped by having to open the bowling with the new ball, it stands to reason that he wasn't a much better pace bowler than the average he maintained doing so. Opening the bowling on spin friendly surfaces is something new ball bowlers are conventionally expected to do the world over, without complaint.

That's the point though. He was good enough to average 33 or 34 as a pacer, 33-34 as Spinner or any other style he bowled.

He may not be a better pure pacer than the most or the better spinner than the most, but he had the all round bowling skills than almost everyone else who has played the Cricket at that level. He was the allrounder in truest sense, a player who could bat, bowl spin, pace and also field better than the most.

That is why he is rated so high.

 

[aussie]

I wonder if there's been some sort of misinterpretation here.

When it was a seamers track, the WI could pick 4 specialist seamers with Sobers doing the filling in as a spinner if required.
Likewise when it turned, they could pick 2 specialist seamers plus Sobers and 2 specialist spinners.

Well TBF. During Sobers time WI never had a 4-specialist seam attack. He between 1963-68 when WI were the best team in the world, was part of a 4-man bowling attack of Hall/Sobers/Griffith/Gibbs.

So given the conditions & circumstances during a match he switched between bowling his medium pace & spin.

 

[Sanz]

A Hypothetical Question :-

Would you guys rate Kallis a better bowler if he could bowl Leg Spin and Off Spin as well he bowls his pacers ?

 

[zaremba]

A Hypothetical Question :-

Would you guys rate Kallis a better bowler if he could bowl Leg Spin and Off Spin as well he bowls his pacers ?

Good question. The answer has to be yes. I think. Certainly he would offer more to his team, and you'd also marvel more at his versatility.

 

[Teja.]

I've just read the articles about Sobers' bowling that Sanz posted(Fine work btw), and it says something completely contradictory to what hb said, i.e. depending on how the pitch was, Sobers' could use his versatility to adjust to the situation and bowl a style of bowling most suitable for the pitch. For instance, If there was seam on the pitch, He could bowl pace and move it in, When he toured India and Pakistan, he started bowling chinamen and googlies etc.

I think that is a far better exhibition of his genius than bowling the wrong style for the pitch too.

 

[vic_orthdox]

There's just so many arbitrary classifications used by everyone in this thread, with regards to pitches, bowling types, and plain ignorance of match contexts, which is going to be the main determinant of what Sobers bowled. It's made to sound in here as though, "Oh, pitch looks a bit dry, better play Sobers as a pace bowler/spinner then."

If you've used three pace bowlers, and they haven't gotten a breakthrough, some days you'd use Sobers as a spinner, because they haven't looked threatening and you want to change things up. Another day, you might use him as a pace bowler, because you think that your quicks haven't actually bowled that well.

Who knows, maybe some days he bowled spin because he'd reeled of a ton earlier that day and couldn't be stuffed, or maybe he bowled pace because he felt like hitting someone in the head? There's so many sweeping generalisations over a 20 year career it just seems ridiculous.

I'd include him as an option in my all time Team, not just because of his batting but because it allows me to keep a consistent team wherever I went - an important facet of any successful team IMO, and the fact that he's the fifth bowler means that he won't be doing a great amount of bowling anyway, and if I can unleash him in bursts as a pace bowler, or to play a role as a spinner where that's more appropriate, it brings as much as any number 6 or 7 can reasonably be expected to fulfil with the ball.

 

[Maximus0723]

No bias,

How fast did Sobers bowl as left arm medium pacer?

 

[honestbharani]

I've just read the articles about Sobers' bowling that Sanz posted(Fine work btw), and it says something completely contradictory to what hb said, i.e. depending on how the pitch was, Sobers' could use his versatility to adjust to the situation and bowl a style of bowling most suitable for the pitch. For instance, If there was seam on the pitch, He could bowl pace and move it in, When he toured India and Pakistan, he started bowling chinamen and googlies etc.

I think that is a far better exhibition of his genius than bowling the wrong style for the pitch too.

I didn't say it.. And I don't use it as the reason why I rate him. The point was it was brought up and immediately shot down and I just ventured to throw out reasons why it MIGHT just have been viable from the team perspective.

 

[Sanz]

There's just so many arbitrary classifications used by everyone in this thread, with regards to pitches, bowling types, and plain ignorance of match contexts, which is going to be the main determinant of what Sobers bowled. It's made to sound in here as though, "Oh, pitch looks a bit dry, better play Sobers as a pace bowler/spinner then."

If you've used three pace bowlers, and they haven't gotten a breakthrough, some days you'd use Sobers as a spinner, because they haven't looked threatening and you want to change things up. Another day, you might use him as a pace bowler, because you think that your quicks haven't actually bowled that well.

Who knows, maybe some days he bowled spin because he'd reeled of a ton earlier that day and couldn't be stuffed, or maybe he bowled pace because he felt like hitting someone in the head? There's so many sweeping generalisations over a 20 year career it just seems ridiculous.

Well Said. It is really hard to make any kind of assumption on the kind bowler Sobers was used as in any given spell. For example, in the Kolkata Test match in India in 1996-67, Sobers opened the bowling, but looking at the match report and the success of spinners in that test match it will be fair to conclude that most of the wickets he took in that test match was as a spinner.

This test match also illustrates Sobers' versatility as a bowler, he opened the bowling with Griffith in both the innings and then after the pacers were found ineffective on a crumbling pitch, he bowled spin for most of the test.

 

[smash84]

There's just so many arbitrary classifications used by everyone in this thread, with regards to pitches, bowling types, and plain ignorance of match contexts, which is going to be the main determinant of what Sobers bowled. It's made to sound in here as though, "Oh, pitch looks a bit dry, better play Sobers as a pace bowler/spinner then."

If you've used three pace bowlers, and they haven't gotten a breakthrough, some days you'd use Sobers as a spinner, because they haven't looked threatening and you want to change things up. Another day, you might use him as a pace bowler, because you think that your quicks haven't actually bowled that well.

Who knows, maybe some days he bowled spin because he'd reeled of a ton earlier that day and couldn't be stuffed, or maybe he bowled pace because he felt like hitting someone in the head? There's so many sweeping generalisations over a 20 year career it just seems ridiculous.

I'd include him as an option in my all time Team, not just because of his batting but because it allows me to keep a consistent team wherever I went - an important facet of any successful team IMO, and the fact that he's the fifth bowler means that he won't be doing a great amount of bowling anyway, and if I can unleash him in bursts as a pace bowler, or to play a role as a spinner where that's more appropriate, it brings as much as any number 6 or 7 can reasonably be expected to fulfil with the ball.

Well said but you would have to agree that the argument where people say that he would bowl spin on fast tracks and fast on spin tracks is quite crappy really. I mean it defies common sense (even Afridi can be expected to bowl according to the conditions or the situation). It really seems more like an insult to Garry's genius than a compliment.

 

[smash84]

I've just read the articles about Sobers' bowling that Sanz posted(Fine work btw), and it says something completely contradictory to what hb said, i.e. depending on how the pitch was, Sobers' could use his versatility to adjust to the situation and bowl a style of bowling most suitable for the pitch. For instance, If there was seam on the pitch, He could bowl pace and move it in, When he toured India and Pakistan, he started bowling chinamen and googlies etc.

I think that is a far better exhibition of his genius than bowling the wrong style for the pitch too.

Yeah, this