• 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.

What makes a good #7 in ODIs?

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
Was talking about his batting.


Agreed Imran had two different parts to his career.

So are you going to judge him until 88/89, at which point he averaged the same as Kapil with the bat but was a notably better bowler?

Or do you judge him by the entirety of his career, by which their bowling was close but he was a significantly better bat?

Either way, Imran was just obviously a better ODI allrounder than Kapil.
When Imran was better bowler, Kapil was significantly better batsman.
When Imran became better batsman, Kapil's bowling was easily Better. ( Kapil's batting was no more effective by then.. Though )
 

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
Klusener is a least as much better than Kapil with the bat, than Kapil is better with the ball, probably more.

But no.7 in most strong teams I would prefer a finisher like Klusener who can also bash the ball to a pinch-hitter like Kapil who is a better bowler.
Klusner's batting was not that superior, his average was boosted by huge number of not outs. Especially compared to Kapil's peak 9 years ( entire length of Klusner career )
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Klusner's batting was not that superior, his average was boosted by huge number of not outs. Especially compared to Kapil's peak 9 years ( entire length of Klusner career )
Klusener blows Kapil away on RPI too. No one got quick fire cameos as consistently as Klusener. Klusener >>> Kapil as a finisher.
 

subshakerz

International Coach
When Imran was better bowler, Kapil was significantly better batsman.
When Imran became better batsman, Kapil's bowling was easily Better. ( Kapil's batting was no more effective by then.. Though )
Both are wrong.

Let us compare their peaks.

Imran was a quality bowler until 1989, averaging 32 with the bat and 23 with the ball.

Kapil was a quality bowler until 91, averaging only 25 with the bat, and 25 with the ball.

So Imran clearly was better than Kapil in his peak, regardless of batting SR.

In the last 3 years of each of their careers though, Imran's bowling fell away but his batting improved, where Kapil got much worse with both bat and ball.
 

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
Both are wrong.

Let us compare their peaks.

Imran was a quality bowler until 1989, averaging 32 with the bat and 23 with the ball.

Kapil was a quality bowler until 91, averaging only 25 with the bat, and 25 with the ball.

So Imran clearly was better than Kapil in his peak, regardless of batting SR.

In the last 3 years of each of their careers though, Imran's bowling fell away but his batting improved, where Kapil got much worse with both bat and ball.
Thats because he averaged 47 in 1989.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not only is Kapil vs Imran a boring debate that's been done to death, it's also irrelevant to this thread.

The overall discussion about strike rate vs reliability is more interesting. Plus the relative importance of bowling and batting. I don't want Maxwell bowling or Afridi batting from my #7.
 

Nintendo

Cricketer Of The Year
Not only is Kapil vs Imran a boring debate that's been done to death, it's also irrelevant to this thread.

The overall discussion about strike rate vs reliability is more interesting. Plus the relative importance of bowling and batting. I don't want Maxwell bowling or Afridi batting from my #7.
I think it depends on the lineup. If you have a side with green/stoinis + marsh and part time overs from head and marnus you can afford to have a #7 like maxwell who's bowling is much less of a factor. If I've got bowling in the top 6 i'de rather who's gonna turn those 30 odd balls the #7 faces into 40-45 runs like maxwell tends to rather than somoene like marco jansen who SA use at the moment who may give you a genuine 5th bowling option.
 

Top