TOP 5 all rounders of all time

[Vijy]

On 6/29/2017 at 10:15 AM, rtmohanlal said:

when analysing players like Miller we should also take into account the other factors ( adversities & advantages) related with them.For instance 

he played only 55 tests in a period of almost 10.5  years.So he lacks longevity & had enough breathing space between matches(not much work density).More over the bowling support unit he belonged to was immensely strong.The bowlers who played along with him all thru his career had a combined bowling avg: of around 26. Keep in mind it was some 37.5 for a player like Kapil.And there were some  8 batsmen during his times who avg:ed over 48.That means batting was not generally difficult either.And to add to these Miller was virtually untested in subcontinent.

From the 'ball count' of list of   available test inns of Miller, he was not an aggressive batsman either.So can't be predicted as to how he could have adapted to 'one day format' where 'econ:'  & 'str: rate' are the keys.No doubting the fact that Miller was an ATG all rounder.

But in rating players these factors do count.Just my cents.

Agreed that the bowling support was very strong. As for batting, one has to remember that are are many who averaged >48 because some of them were Test greats (Bradman, Ponsford, Hutton, etc). I think batting back then was not as easy as you think it was - the pitches were uncovered for the most part.

[rtmohanlal]

4 hours ago, Vijy said:

Agreed that the bowling support was very strong. As for batting, one has to remember that are are many who averaged >48 because some of them were Test greats (Bradman, Ponsford, Hutton, etc). I think batting back then was not as easy as you think it was - the pitches were uncovered for the most part.

Miller played from 1946-1956.. So I excluded Bradman  & Pondsford. Only Hutton from your names is there in those 8 players whose career largely coincided with that of Miller. For instance I excluded players like Sobers whose career started from 1954.Similalrly  some other players too. Keep in mind Miller batted in top 6 for almost all of his career.A ' bowling support of almost 26 avg:' means there were 4 other specialist bowlers who avg:ed 26 each on the avg: who bowled along with him in general.Just imagine as to how strong that bowling unit as a whole was.And to add to that   Miller was virtually untested as a bowler in the subcontinent(out of his comfort zone).On the other hand Kapil had 4 bowlers along with him who avg:ed 37.45 each.And  all the other points  I specified stands too.

 

When I take these  factors as a whole  I just can't place Miller above some one like Kapil whose avg:es were achieved against so much adversities.

Edited July 2, 2017 by rtmohanlal

[gazza]

You can't hold not playing in the SC against Miller, we already covered this, if that's your criteria then you can't compare across era's which makes a discussion like this pointless.

 

its not miller's fault he barely played in the SC, same for Bradman and anyone else who played cricket during those times.

 

also the argument where Kapil had no support, it swings both ways, because he had no support it means he had more opportunity to take wickets whereas it would've been harder for Miller to take as many wickets because he had more competition for wickets. 

 

let's give Kapil the advantage that he bowled mostly in India and conditions weren't great for pace bowling, he still played a whole heck of a lot more matches than Hadlee to take a lot less 4fers/5fers/10fers. Don't even bring up injury because Miller, Imran and Botham all dealt with that to but that's not really being taken into account is it?

 

now as far as having no support in India, and bad conditions, Hadlee played 6 matches in India and took 31 wickets at 22.22 with 2 4fers, 2 5fers and a 10fer, strike rate of 44. So Kapil with home advantage bowling in those conditions should have you would expect be at least equal or similar to that if not better but his stats don't show that, even before 1984 he averaged 27. No need to bring up Pakistan because both Hadlee and Kapil did poorly there though Hadlee only had 3 matches whereas Kapil had 15 to get used to conditions (even before 1984 he played 9 matches averaging 40).

 

As as far as Botham and Kapil, Botham was the better bat (way more centuries in more difficult batting conditions and most of those centuries came at 6/7), Kapil might've done better with the bat against WI but over their careers Botham did better with the bat. As far as batting strike rate I think too much weightage is being given to Kapil's strike rate, if you give extra points to Kapil for that then Botham deserves more to because his was also higher than the norm back then (not as much higher but still higher). bowling wise Kapil over the course of their careers out did Botham due to Botham having such a lengthy decline. 

 

I can understand placing Kapil over Botham, and if you feel so strongly about Imran I can even understand that, but the only thing Kapil has over Miller is sheer numbers but when a player plays more than double the amount of matches than the other then you expect bigger numbers purely because they played more matches. It's not like Kapil had such an amazing SC record so I don't know why it's such a big deal when comparing Miller to Kapil I.e. One barely played in the SC because of the period he played and the other had a solid record but not outstanding (especially when you consider his Pakistan record).

 

botham broke the world world record for most wickets but isn't considered one of the best bowlers ever. Sehwag and Gilchrist have a near 50 batting average at an 80 strike rate but are not considered the best batsman.

Edited July 3, 2017 by gazza

[the don]

Scyld berry placed imran at number 2 in the all time cricketers list . Forget the allrounders botham was at 6 . Kapil usually struggles to make the top 50 . Wonder why . Can you tell us why rtmohanlal ?? Does Imran bribe these british pundits ??

[the don]

Just now, the don said:

Scyld berry placed imran at number 2 in the all time cricketers list . Forget the allrounders. Botham was at 6 even though he is also from England. Kapil on the other hand usually struggles to make the top 50 . Wonder why . Can you tell us why rtmohanlal ?? Does Imran bribe these british pundits ??

 

[rtmohanlal]

2 hours ago, the don said:

Scyld berry placed imran at number 2 in the all time cricketers list . Forget the allrounders botham was at 6 . Kapil usually struggles to make the top 50 . Wonder why . Can you tell us why rtmohanlal ?? Does Imran bribe these british pundits ??

Might be Scyld berry is not aware of Imran's bottle top expertise  about which let alone his contemporaries, even his own country men like Rameez Raja ,Aamer Sohail ,Shoaib Akhtar ,Shahbaz Shereef , Sarfraz Nawaz etc etc  have been well aware of. That might be the reason. 

[the don]

4 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Might be Scyld berry is not aware of Imran's bottle top expertise  about which let alone his contemporaries, even his own country men like Rameez Raja ,Aamer Sohail ,Shoaib Akhtar ,Shahbaz Shereef , Sarfraz Nawaz etc etc  have been well aware of. That might be the reason. 

Lol scyld berry knows imran and botham bette than their own families he has closely followed county and international cricket .

He probably knows that kapil wasnt good enough for the most part .

Edited July 3, 2017 by the don

[rtmohanlal]

13 hours ago, gazza said:

You can't hold not playing in the SC against Miller, we already covered this, if that's your criteria then you can't compare across era's which makes a discussion like this pointless.

 

 

 

also the argument where Kapil had no support, it swings both ways, because he had no support it means he had more opportunity to take wickets whereas it would've been harder for Miller to take as many wickets because he had more competition for wickets. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not going deep into other points of yours w.r.t Kapil-Botham because I  have briefly explained  the reasons for placing Kapil above Botham thru several earlier msg:s .In short w.r.t  test batting Kapil was slightly better(Based on Kapil's record in WI,his far highly aggressive batting when compared to even Botham,the quality of bowlers he faced thru out when compared to that of Botham  on the avg: etc etc.These factors above are enough to slightly overtake a slightly better peak of Botham.)Test batting is the discipline where the gap between the two is the narrowest.Here I won't even blame some one if he places Botham slightly above Kapil.But for me it is Kapil .In  test bowling it is Kapil .In both

one day batting & bowling, Kapil is way better when all factors are taken into account.  In fielding too Kapil was the better all round fielder  where as Botham was a slip specialist.In captaincy Kapil was way better as their credentials points to.So all in all Kapil easily.

 

W.R.T above 2 selected points, you can't compare across eras with out taking  the entirely different  contexts they played in.In other words going by avg:s alone is absolutely senseless.And I have briefed  reasons for selecting Kapil  above Miller already.

 

Then w.r.t 'bowling support point' , might get more oppertunity to get more wkts , but at higher  str: rate & higher econ: there by at higher avg:.For instance take the FAB 4 WI bowlers.Garner had the least count of 5 fors,10 fors etc etc.But he made up for it  by ending up with 

comfortably better avg: than Holding & Roberts & slightly behind Marshall.That is the benefit a strong bowling unit can generate.It creates pressure thru out for the opposition batsmen so that all the bowlers can benefit  from that situation in one or other way.Another example is

Mitchell Johnson from that 2013 ashes series.He was creating terror thru out so that ENG batsmen could never settle for stable & long partnerships.When ever they appeared to do so Mitchell almost struck. Straight away the coming batsman was under huge pressure to survive, settle down & then rebuild.And this was the match situation for ENG thru out all 5 tests.Naturally all the other bowlers could benefit from this 'always in turmoil' situation of the ENG batsmen.And keep in mind the other bowlers in that AUS team were 'top quality' on their own too.

But for a lone  quality bowler in a ' very weak bowling team' the situation is entirely different. 

More often he would be facing situations like 160/1 ,250/2,360/3, 500/4 etc etc because other   than him there is no body  to strike in regular intervals thru  quality wicket taking deliveries.And naturally batsmen would  grow in confidence &  get well settled & would go after this single quality bowler in his further spells.This would severely affects his stats.

in his further spells 

 

[gazza]

And how do you explain hadlee having just as good stats as other all time great bowlers even though he had no support? As I showed his record in India proves what can be achieved in India, a home grown Indian talent who is meant to be considered an all time great needs to be comparable if not better than other all time greats in his home conditions otherwise it's pretty tough to consider them a great.

Edited July 4, 2017 by gazza

[rtmohanlal]

5 hours ago, gazza said:

And how do you explain hadlee having just as good stats as other all time great bowlers even though he had no support? As I showed his record in India proves what can be achieved in India, a home grown Indian talent who is meant to be considered an all time great needs to be comparable if not better than other all time greats in his home conditions otherwise it's pretty tough to consider them a great.

this was my previous msg: w.r.t Hadlee

 

Perhaps I  can't recall the instance of Hadlee stating 'tampering should be legal' or I am hearing this for the first time. Any way if it has to be believed, then this indicates to one more thing.  Hadlee too was guilty of  involving in this  illegal exercise at least in minimal levels when compared to Imran.Other wise, if he was cent percent saint in this matter, he would have vehemently  opposed to such an unethical matter.That is just psychological.  In the late 70s & early 80s there were a handful of  world class bowlers in Lillee, Thompson,Hadlee,Imran,Wasim,Kapil, Bohtam ,Willis,Underwood,Marshall,Roberts,Holding,Garner,Clarke,,Walsh etc etc. Of these the only one bowler who played a lot 86 tests,with out any bowling support & yet ended up with an ATG average of 22.31 was Hadlee. I often wondered about how a bowler could end up that good against such a load of adversities and marvel about his quality as abowler. Now that I come to realise this statement of  his, I am forced to firmly believe that he too had his fair share of this evil .That inturn raises the esteem of both Kapil & Botham in my mind even more.Kapil was clean w.r.t this factor.Botham too,  despite having  issues w.r.t some drugs discipline etc etc was clean in this matter .So both gets even more credit  in my book.

 

Either the above said matter w.r.t  Hadlee was true in all high probablity. Or in the least probablity , it might be that Hadlee was such a great bowler.          

 

On a side note, I still remember  Viv Richards providing a statement  in the lines of 'modern day batsmen are not men enough not to wear helmets' or some thing like that.That is what pure innocence can do from a 'psychological' point of view.In his mind Viv was crystal clear that he didn't wear helmet almost all thru out his career.That confidence  of being so sure in his mind  w.r.t the  matter tempted Viv to create such a bold statement.Similarly had Hadlee been 100%  confident of being innocent w.r.t tampering, he would  so boldly & strongly have opposed tampering  as unethical.

Edited July 4, 2017 by rtmohanlal

[gazza]

Ok I'll ask in a different way because I didn't really get a response to what I wanted a response to. 

 

If kapil was so great then should he not have been bowling as well as or out bowling other great bowlers of his time in his home conditions. That is, when a Hadlee or Marshall etc toured India should Kapil not have outbowled them if he was as good as you are saying? He had home advantage. 

 

[cuttermaster]

Berry is wrong. Benaud was wrong, Wisden, Cricinfo and all the contemporary players are wrong to list Khan and Botham above Dev. Berry may not know about tampering allegations (admitted in 1 county game & not proven in court) but RTM Lal here knows all. 

 

Hate to say this but you are delusional. Shakib is better than Dev. Let us debate that. 

[rtmohanlal]

3 hours ago, cuttermaster said:

Berry is wrong. Benaud was wrong, Wisden, Cricinfo and all the contemporary players are wrong to list Khan and Botham above Dev. Berry may not know about tampering allegations (admitted in 1 county game & not proven in court) but RTM Lal here knows all. 

 

Hate to say this but you are delusional. Shakib is better than Dev. Let us debate that. 

 in my earlier msg:s I  have put forward names of several players. They too know Imran very well.

[rtmohanlal]

18 hours ago, gazza said:

Ok I'll ask in a different way because I didn't really get a response to what I wanted a response to. 

 

If kapil was so great then should he not have been bowling as well as or out bowling other great bowlers of his time in his home conditions. That is, when a Hadlee or Marshall etc toured India should Kapil not have outbowled them if he was as good as you are saying? He had home advantage. 

 

I have briefed in detail w.r.t 'why & how much'  I rate Kapil as a bowler when compared to other ATG bowlers of the game thru out my posts starting from the OP  itself. Still you asked  this question really surprises me.

[gazza]

38 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

I have briefed in detail w.r.t 'why & how much'  I rate Kapil as a bowler when compared to other ATG bowlers of the game thru out my posts starting from the OP  itself. Still you asked  this question really surprises me.

I ask because your logic doesn't make sense to me, trying to understand your point of view, and perhaps I'm trying to offer a few different perspectives to you...

Edited July 5, 2017 by gazza

[gazza]

I also think it's important to seperate between formats and things like captaincy etc. bulking it altogether just doesn't make sense to me.

[rtmohanlal]

1 hour ago, gazza said:

I also think it's important to seperate between formats and things like captaincy etc. bulking it altogether just doesn't make sense to me.

that is what makes an all rounder.in other words   being good at more than one discipline.So  it does make sense

 

[gazza]

54 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

that is what makes an all rounder.in other words   being good at more than one discipline.So  it does make sense

 

Formats are very different, for example a player can be an all time great in one format but not another which is why I think it's good to seperate formats. You're not going to pick someone for a one-day team based off of their test record or FC record....

 

anyway i still have not received a response to my query about kapil and his achievements in his home conditions. If he was a great bowler then his record at home in India should be better than other pace bowlers of that time. What are your thoughts on this?

Edited July 5, 2017 by gazza

[Vijy]

On 7/2/2017 at 5:58 PM, rtmohanlal said:

Miller played from 1946-1956.. So I excluded Bradman  & Pondsford. Only Hutton from your names is there in those 8 players whose career largely coincided with that of Miller. For instance I excluded players like Sobers whose career started from 1954.Similalrly  some other players too. Keep in mind Miller batted in top 6 for almost all of his career.A ' bowling support of almost 26 avg:' means there were 4 other specialist bowlers who avg:ed 26 each on the avg: who bowled along with him in general.Just imagine as to how strong that bowling unit as a whole was.And to add to that   Miller was virtually untested as a bowler in the subcontinent(out of his comfort zone).On the other hand Kapil had 4 bowlers along with him who avg:ed 37.45 each.And  all the other points  I specified stands too.

 

When I take these  factors as a whole  I just can't place Miller above some one like Kapil whose avg:es were achieved against so much adversities.

Most of those who avg >48 were very top-notch batsman. Probably Compton was there too, and maybe May as well.

[rtmohanlal]

On 7/5/2017 at 0:20 PM, gazza said:

Formats are very different, for example a player can be an all time great in one format but not another which is why I think it's good to seperate formats. You're not going to pick someone for a one-day team based off of their test record or FC record....

 

anyway i still have not received a response to my query about kapil and his achievements in his home conditions. If he was a great bowler then his record at home in India should be better than other pace bowlers of that time. What are your thoughts on this?

When 2 contemporary players  play in 2 different formats, it is only natural to take  the performances in both the formats  into account for comparing   & evaluating these players.One format might be carrying a little more weightage(test cricket in this case) , but that doesn't mean

we can't dismiss the performance in  the other format as 'nothing happened'. Yes... it would be even more a difficult & complex task to evaluate performances of players based on 'both formats combined'. But with out taking both formats into account , i don't think there is  meaning in these comparisons because of the real truth that the plyers have indeed played both the formats.And for all rounders, since the term itself points to brilliance in 'more than one discipline' of the game fielding  & captaincy too comes into account.

Did I any where say that Kapil was greater a bowler  than bowlers like Hadlee,Roberts,Marshall, Lillee,Willis, Holding etc etc ? All i said was that 

he was  much better than his career end avg: of 29.64 because of three factors namely  longevity,work density & weak support bowling unit adversely affecting his bowling stats considerably. In one dayers too those 3 factors affected his bowling stats along  with him being himself a convincingly  better  one day bowler than test bowler .

Edited July 6, 2017 by rtmohanlal