Grand Final - Greatest All-rounder of All Time

[Ikki]

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com


obviously, in some games where they dont have ball by ball info they have used the no. of minutes and bowling rate to arrive at a figure. still, this is the closest we we will ever get to know about overall strike rate of past players. I trust this table because it is from cricinfo.

Thanks mate. Look at Viv with an SR of almost 70. Amazing. Even Bradman's is impressive for his time. Boycott at 35 LOL.

Are you sure that they used no. of minutes and bowling rate or is the figure there only for matches where they did count their SR? I can't actually find an explanation.

 

[slippyslip]

If we're taking batting scoring rates into account why arent more people voting for Kapil Dev as greatest all rounder?

Again its double standards. When a stat helps Sobers its a vital thing. When a stat doesnt support Sober its not important.

 

[zaremba]

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com


obviously, in some games where they dont have ball by ball info they have used the no. of minutes and bowling rate to arrive at a figure. still, this is the closest we we will ever get to know about overall strike rate of past players. I trust this table because it is from cricinfo.

Brilliant set of stats. Thanks for posting them, bagapath. Some of the most interesting points, for me:

• Kallis and Barrington scoring faster than Hammond and Compton

• 8 out of the slowest 10 being English

• The incredible scoring rates of Bradman, Kapil Dev, Viv Richards and Graeme Smith

 

[zaremba]

If we're taking batting scoring rates into account why arent more people voting for Kapil Dev as greatest all rounder?

Again its double standards. When a stat helps Sobers its a vital thing. When a stat doesnt support Sober its not important.

Perhaps because some people only want to support those who come from their own country. Such as an Aussie fan who chooses to vote only for Keith Miller, and not to cast a second vote for anyone else.

 

[bagapath]

If we're taking batting scoring rates into account why arent more people voting for Kapil Dev as greatest all rounder?

Again its double standards. When a stat helps Sobers its a vital thing. When a stat doesnt support Sober its not important.

kapil's batting average is too low for any such comparison with sobers. kallis is even mentioned in the same breath as sobers because he averages over 50, very much like the great man himself. had sobers been averaging less than kallis then kallis would naturally have the edge. but unfortunately, sobers scores more than kallis in every innings and he does it faster, too.

 

[bagapath]

Are you sure that they used no. of minutes and bowling rate or is the figure there only for matches where they did count their SR? I can't actually find an explanation.

I am sure they did that. Every time they used minutes and bowling rate to determine a a player's SR, they added a "*" next to the figure to denote that the number was not arrived at directly. the explanation was given about three years ago when they tried to add the SR info to their database for the first time. you will notice that sachin's SR comes with a " * " too since for some of his earlier games they could not find ball by ball stats.

 

[JBH001]

If we're taking batting scoring rates into account why arent more people voting for Kapil Dev as greatest all rounder?

Again its double standards. When a stat helps Sobers its a vital thing. When a stat doesnt support Sober its not important.

Nonsense, this ant-Sobers mania you seem to have is a little odd. The SR mainly comes into play given equivalent, or roughly equivalent, players. Also, it seems to me that a good part of the esteem for Sobers comes from that 6 year period of 1962 - 1968 where he really was a superlative all-rounder in every sense of the word.

And yes, Kapil's SR is phenomenal! Along with 8 hundreds and 27 fifties in more than 180 innings and over 5000 runs. Yet it often goes missing in discussion, as does Kapil himself, usually eclipsed by Botham and Imran. I am definitely going to revise my opinion of his batting upwards.

 

[bagapath]

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...alval5=wickets;template=results;type=allround

this list more relevant to this thread and quite interesting, actually.

 

[Ikki]

• The incredible scoring rate of Graeme Smith

61? Hardly incredible IMO. Especially when he has Sehwag and Hayden for company.

Agree with JBH. Kapil's SR is very impressive. It probably shows that for every 100 or 50 he really benefitted his team, even if he let go of some consistent run scoring, ending up with a 31 run career average.

 

[honestbharani]

If we're taking batting scoring rates into account why arent more people voting for Kapil Dev as greatest all rounder?

Again its double standards. When a stat helps Sobers its a vital thing. When a stat doesnt support Sober its not important.

yes.. there is no difference between a batting average of 29 and a batting average of 59.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Haha, people missing slippyslips point completely. He obviously questions why the differentiating factors used in the Sobers-Kallis debate doesn't apply to Kapil-Botham-Imran etc.

 

[zaremba]

61? Hardly incredible IMO. Especially when he has Sehwag and Hayden for company.

The fact that he's in Sehwag's and Hayden's company is precisely what is so impressive. Until I saw this list I never realised that he scored at such a rate. Faster than Botham, Lara, Hayden, Gayle, Slater, Gibbs.

 

[honestbharani]

Haha, people missing slippyslips point completely. He obviously questions why the differentiating factors used in the Sobers-Kallis debate doesn't apply to Kapil-Botham-Imran etc.

I never said abt that debate though.. And anyways, you need to compare the averages too. If it is comparable averages, then the strike rate might matter.. I never really tried to rate the 3 of them much though.. Botham was awesome in both disciplines for a time then sorta tapered off a bit in both. Kapil was never extremely dependable but very much a match winner or a game changer with the bat while he was always consistent without being TOO threatening with the ball.. Hadlee is an awesome bowler who was a decent bat... Imran is well ahead of these guys. So I am not sure why this debate should apply there either..

 

[zaremba]

Haha, people missing slippyslips point completely. He obviously questions why the differentiating factors used in the Sobers-Kallis debate doesn't apply to Kapil-Botham-Imran etc.

I think we see the point that slippy is trying to make. It doesn't make it a particularly persuasive one though.

He wonders why more people aren't voting for Kapil. Perhaps because they simply felt that Kapil was not in the top 2 all-rounders of all time (or the top 1 all all-rounder of all time for those who have chosen simply to vote for their home town hero and no-one else). Yes his strike rate is extraordinary, and that's a factor that anyone who was aware of it would take into account when considering his relative worth. And does the fact that more people haven't voted for Kapil mean that they have "double standards"? Of course it doesn't.

 

[Burgey]

Runs don't count double if you score them quickly

Dire.

You mean to tell me a captain won't want a bloke who averages 50 or more at a far faster rate than a bloke averages the same but takes longer? Give Steve Waugh a call.

There's no point piling up bucketloads if it takes so long you don't have time to take 20 wickets.

 

[zaremba]

You mean to tell me a captain won't want a bloke who averages 50 or more at a far faster rate than a bloke averages the same but takes longer? Give Steve Waugh a call.

There's no point piling up bucketloads if it takes so long you don't have time to take 20 wickets.

Basically, of course, you're right, but I think it's a bit more complicated than either you or Uppercut is suggesting.

With an opening batsman, there's a higher premium on simple occupation of the crease than there is for a lower-middle order batsman. I wouldn't necessarily want my opener to bat like Adam Gilchrist, nor my number 7 to bat like Gary Kirsten. Although neither would be disastrous, by any means.

 

[bagapath]

without checking the stats I assume Sobers batted mostly at 4,5,6 and Kallis at 3,4,5. Richards batted at 3,4 and 5. Both the west indians demonstrated countless number of times that it is perfectly suitable to the teams needs to score runs superfast from any important middle order slot.

i dont think kallis is incapable of playing fast like them, afterall he holds the record for most runs in an over, IIRC. it is just that he puts himself above his team most of the time that it is annoying to see him eat up valuable time in scoring very little runs (in that extra time). my respect for his 10000 runs + 250 wickets is tarnished by this selfish trait in him. Kallis could learn from the likes of richards, sobers and gilly and defnitely help his team more by just getting on with it more often than not.

 

[bagapath]

One more day to go:

Gary Sobers
Imran Khan
Keith Miller

is the order right now.

 

[Uppercut]

Dire.

You mean to tell me a captain won't want a bloke who averages 50 or more at a far faster rate than a bloke averages the same but takes longer? Give Steve Waugh a call.

There's no point piling up bucketloads if it takes so long you don't have time to take 20 wickets.

Like I said, you're looking at Sobers scoring his runs about 18% faster. It's a pretty marginal difference, all things considered. If they both score a century, Sobers will save about 40 balls. 40 balls won't make the difference between winning and losing.

If you're comparing with Adam Gilchrist, it's a different story, because he scored almost twice as fast, and did so in a position where getting stranded was a potential issue. But a S/R of 53 against one of 44, it's nothing. Let alone the sole reason one player is an entire class above the other.

 

[honestbharani]

Like I said, you're looking at Sobers scoring his runs about 18% faster. It's a pretty marginal difference, all things considered. If they both score a century, Sobers will save about 40 balls. 40 balls won't make the difference between winning and losing.

If you're comparing with Adam Gilchrist, it's a different story, because he scored almost twice as fast, and did so in a position where getting stranded was a potential issue. But a S/R of 53 against one of 44, it's nothing. Let alone the sole reason one player is an entire class above the other.

And you still continue to ignore the relativity factor...