Is imran overated as bowler

[subshakerz]

I think we should downplay Imran bowling in home and rate highly of his bowling in away soil because compare to other umpires Pak umpires were extremely biased

Were Indian umpires notably better in the 80s?

Imran at home produced the greatest reverse spells in cricket history in the 80s. Chucking it all to tampering and umpires is just a convenient cope IMO.

 

[shortpitched713]

Man, I sure do wonder why all these superhuman all rounders like Sobers, Imran and Miller dissapeared...

As quality of play slowly increases, specialization becomes the norm.

The next great allrounder will get the kind of hype that Shohei Otani in baseball gets. It will be sick.

 

[Johan]

As quality of play slowly increases, specialization becomes the norm.

The next great allrounder will get the kind of hype that Shohei Otani in baseball gets. It will be sick.

the quality of play has kinda been degrading for 50 years due to limited overs nonsense whatever idiot introduced.

 

[shortpitched713]

No evidence for that whatsoever.

Unless the players who are in Test teams just don't play FC cricket ever (which, they generally still do, prior to getting selected internationally), they're still able to develop skillset, plus build on everything that came before and adapt to the ever building standard and technique set of the current game.

 

[Johan]

The technique set stopped developing about 120 years back, and now it's just being degrarded cuz you got T20 sloggers like Zak Crawley and Rohit Sharma as players, it's really a sad state of affairs.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Crawley is saving Test batting technique.

 

[peterhrt]

The technique set stopped developing about 120 years back, and now it's just being degrarded cuz you got T20 sloggers like Zak Crawley and Rohit Sharma as players, it's really a sad state of affairs.

During the 1990s some historians claimed that, compared with other sports, cricket had not changed significantly since the 1890s. On commentary recently it was suggested that the game had changed more in the 21st century with T20 than during the whole of the 20th century.

 

[Johan]

During the 1990s some historians claimed that, compared with other sports, cricket had not changed significantly since the 1890s. On commentary recently it was suggested that the game had changed more in the 21st century with T20 than during the whole of the 20th century.

I do completely agree with this. too skill oriented a game for the most part, and it's not like just great physicals find success in Cricket ie Vernon Philander was more successful than Chris Tremlett.

 

[shortpitched713]

Imran at home produced the greatest reverse spells in cricket history in the 80s. Chucking it all to tampering and umpires is just a convenient cope IMO.

Everyone tampered to varying degrees before cameras and televised status of every single match. Same story in baseball, people bend and push the rules to varying extents.

I will say the difference is that Imran was dumb enough to admit it, but to me I'm not naive enough to think that in a bat and ball sport that the fielding side which has custody of the ball throughout the game isn't able to "work" it a little more than strictly in the letter of the law.

Hell, I'm sure even now, if you think that players aren't sneaky enough to get a bit of spit on the ball when it's all they've known for years before the ban making it against the letter of the law, then I've got a bridge to sell to you as well.

 

[subshakerz]

Everyone tampered to varying degrees before cameras and televised status of every single match. Same story in baseball, people bend and push the rules to varying extents.

I will say the difference is that Imran was dumb enough to admit it, but to me I'm not naive enough to think that in a bat and ball sport that the fielding side which has custody of the ball throughout the game isn't able to "work" it a little more than strictly in the letter of the law.

Hell, I'm sure even now, if you think that players aren't sneaky enough to get a bit of spit on the ball when it's all they've known for years before the ban making it against the letter of the law, then I've got a bridge to sell to you as well.

The problem is that often here they pretend that Imran was the only one tampering in the 80s and unfairly want to penalise him for it rather than give him credit for his awesome home record.

 

[Coronis]

iirc Hadlee amongst others protested the new ball tampering rules.

Imran and Pakistan bowlers in general do seem to be unfairly maligned for it.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

For us and by us I thought Holder was well on his way: I believe at one point he was averaging around 26 odd with the ball and mid 30s with the bat. Plus he had an atg series at home vs a good English team. Then he fell off a cliff. We do have the likes of Stokes and Jadeja though.

The problem is that Holder can't take wickets with the Kookaburra.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

The problem is that Holder can't take wickets with the Kookaburra.

Him and Roach. Roach is excellent in the Caribbean with the Dukes but away he goes to hell, for the most part.

 

[kyear2]

the quality of play has kinda been degrading for 50 years due to limited overs nonsense whatever idiot introduced.

At least the last 15

 

[kyear2]

Everyone tampered to varying degrees before cameras and televised status of every single match. Same story in baseball, people bend and push the rules to varying extents.

I will say the difference is that Imran was dumb enough to admit it, but to me I'm not naive enough to think that in a bat and ball sport that the fielding side which has custody of the ball throughout the game isn't able to "work" it a little more than strictly in the letter of the law.

Hell, I'm sure even now, if you think that players aren't sneaky enough to get a bit of spit on the ball when it's all they've known for years before the ban making it against the letter of the law, then I've got a bridge to sell to you as well.

The reason why he admitted it is because everyone knew about it and was talking about it for decades.

There's quite a bit of difference between putting a bit of spit on the ball and what Imran and Pakistan were doing.

And this consistent effort to minimize and normalize it is somewhat revisionist.

 

[subshakerz]

There's quite a bit of difference between putting a bit of spit on the ball and what Imran and Pakistan were doing.

It's not just extra saliva. There is also picking the seam which was rampant and scratching by the way was also done by others.

 

[subshakerz]

The reason why he admitted it is because everyone knew about it and was talking about it for decades.

There's quite a bit of difference between putting a bit of spit on the ball and what Imran and Pakistan were doing.

And this consistent effort to minimize and normalize it is somewhat revisionist.

How come others didn't admit their tampering?

It's not just extra saliva. There is also picking the seam which was rampant and scratching by the way was also done by others.

The problem is your double standard in not calling out others.

 

[shortpitched713]

The reason why he admitted it is because everyone knew about it and was talking about it for decades.

There's quite a bit of difference between putting a bit of spit on the ball and what Imran and Pakistan were doing.

And this consistent effort to minimize and normalize it is somewhat revisionist.

No there is not. Both are completely illegal according to the letter of the law at the respective times in question.

Fact is I'm not the one who normalizes ball tampering, it simply was normalized for those in the know of the game. Actually I might be being a bit rough on Imran for calling him stupid for admitting it. Keith Miller openly admitted to lifting the seam. No one gives half a ****. Honestly it's just sour grapes, unless there is evidence leading to a sanction, which as far as I'm aware didn't happen for Imran. And if it was more than sour grapes, there wouldn't be such universal respect for Imran as a cricketer, because he would be branded as a cheat by his contemporaries who likely could still be bitter. But they're not, because outside of those heat of the moment dramas which are pretty normal in cricket, no one really can give a serious **** to a concept of him being a special cheat that stained the game. It's laughable.

There has to be evidence enough that the referees deem it egregious enough to punish in the moment. Otherwise there really are very rarely sanctions for this sort of thing, unless caught red handed in the act. Why, because the culture of the game was one where everyone was clandestinely doing a bit "extra" with the ball, and calling out one group in a "throw the book" letter of the law type way would have opened up the floodgates on all teams.

Pakistan may have been "better" at it, as they had a more targeted goal, and effect that they were clearly going for in a concerted way that others may not have had the right bowling talent to exploit. But everyone was doing stuff to the ball, because there was simply not the eyes to watch and police players 100% of the time, like there is now.

I actually appreciate the culture change that has come with high quality, close up camera footage all angles of the field, because I appreciate a more transparent game where the techniques and skill is more out in the open, and lesser magnitude is placed on skill at this particular sleight of hand. But still it's clear as day to me that in the days before the ball was never being respected in a way that conformed to the full letter, let alone "spirit" of the laws.

 

[OverratedSanity]

If you ain't cheating you ain't trying. Imran just tried more. WAFG.

 

[Bolo.]

The yes votes clearly show me that Imran was overrated. And the no votes clearly show me that those people are overrating Imran. So by a vote count of 20-0, Imran is overrated. Flawless victory.

Suck eggs Imran.