Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Noone cares about the WTC Final.
-
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.
Who is Asia's sixth greatest cricketer?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
I wouldn't pick Kapil or Cairns at 7.
6 bats, Watling, 4 seamers
They have to. It's not a choice.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yes it is. You're not my real dad.
PlayerComparisons
International Debutant
He already won 2 series in Australia though (batting average of 43 and bowling average of 21)
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Hadlee wouldn't make an Indian AT 11 either
That'll be cheating.
Btw, Hadlee is the only better NZ cricketer than the names in this poll.
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Either he was joking, or seriously ignorant.
Even if Kapil Averaged 5 with bat, he can get in to NZ AT 11, because there is no better bowler in NZ except Hadlee.
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Sunil1z
International Regular
@Pap Finn Keighl
You need to calm down . He was trolling. You don’t need to make 3 posts in response of 1 post .
You need to calm down . He was trolling. You don’t need to make 3 posts in response of 1 post .
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
What about Chris Harris?
Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
I give it to Dev, just ahead of Sanga and a fair gap to the next (Kohli?)
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
????
Cowie
Jamieson
Bond
& Wagner
are all better
Boult and Nash are similar
Southee and Doull are slightly worse
Last edited:
capt_Luffy
International Regular
Nah. Kapil is better than Wagner, and Bond and Jamieson haven't played enough to really have a case imo. Cowie is an interesting case, but overall include Kapil's batting and saying he doesn't makes into NZ AT team is a head scratcher.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Bond ahead of Kapil has to be some kind of a joke. Removing minnows (BD and Zim), he has taken 63 wickets at a little over 26. And that includes wickets in the 2002 series against India where every one was taking easy wickets. Hardly a sample size to compare with any established bowler at the highest level.
Jamieson needs to play more to be in conversation.
Wagner has a good case. Kapil still easily makes NZ's AT XI objectively.
Jamieson needs to play more to be in conversation.
Wagner has a good case. Kapil still easily makes NZ's AT XI objectively.
That's good but so did Ashwin, Pujara, Rahane, Bumrah, Rohit, Pant. He needs to do a bit more overseas. Given that his peak as all rounder started since 2018 and in a one off test match, all rounders play a major role in impacting the game, he should make a difference in atleast one final.
BazBall21
International Vice-Captain
I find Kapil Dev difficult to rate. Good player in both disciplines, at times very good, but not elite in either.
Better longevity than Botham, but nowhere near as good a peak. His batting was always dangerous but wildly inconsistent throughout his career. The destructive upsides made him more valuable than his average; but he did still only average 31.
His bowling briefly peaked in the early 80s (performances v strong Pak/WI sides), lost a yard of pace after an injury, then was a similar stable level for the rest of his career. Deserves a lot of credit for sustaining solid figures throughout such a long career of toil, but the longevity didn't really deteriorate them so it's not as though he's a victim of playing for very long like Gordon Greenidge for instance.
His value is tough to quantify. I like the balance he offers of being a very dangerous player in his weaker suit, but I'd take Shaun Pollock or Jacques Kallis etc over him; players who weren't as good as him in their weaker suits, but a lot better in the stronger suits.
His level is probably closer to Pollock than Stokes and Cairns though, who both have similar cases of being strong in their second suit but a fair distance from outstanding in their stronger suit.
Better longevity than Botham, but nowhere near as good a peak. His batting was always dangerous but wildly inconsistent throughout his career. The destructive upsides made him more valuable than his average; but he did still only average 31.
His bowling briefly peaked in the early 80s (performances v strong Pak/WI sides), lost a yard of pace after an injury, then was a similar stable level for the rest of his career. Deserves a lot of credit for sustaining solid figures throughout such a long career of toil, but the longevity didn't really deteriorate them so it's not as though he's a victim of playing for very long like Gordon Greenidge for instance.
His value is tough to quantify. I like the balance he offers of being a very dangerous player in his weaker suit, but I'd take Shaun Pollock or Jacques Kallis etc over him; players who weren't as good as him in their weaker suits, but a lot better in the stronger suits.
His level is probably closer to Pollock than Stokes and Cairns though, who both have similar cases of being strong in their second suit but a fair distance from outstanding in their stronger suit.
Last edited: