Comparison of great specialist cricketers with great all-rounders

[Muloghonto]

5 hours ago, Khota said:

Do you even have any clue how advanced the analytics in baseball is? Every placement on the outfield is a result of analytics. There is lot of science and statistics that goes into baseball.

That doesnt mean there is much strategy between bat and ball. It’s nearly negligible.

5 hours ago, Khota said:

The mechanics in soccer and hockey are the same. batting and bowling are two different demands on the body which one person cannot carry out. I can give you lot of examples but it seems like your mind is made up.

Except they have. Your imaginary scenarios mean nothing when we already have had great all rounders in cricket.

[Khota]

15 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

That doesnt mean there is much strategy between bat and ball. It’s nearly negligible.

Except they have. Your imaginary scenarios mean nothing when we already have had great all rounders in cricket.

There is lot more startegy involved in hitting a baseball. baseballs come at a bat routinely at 100 mph whereas in cricket they never. Reaction time is lot more critical in baseball.

[Muloghonto]

40 minutes ago, Khota said:

There is lot more startegy involved in hitting a baseball. baseballs come at a bat routinely at 100 mph whereas in cricket they never. Reaction time is lot more critical in baseball.

There is very little strategy involved in hitting a ball pitched at 90mph in a locus of 4 inches, with a curved surface, than hitting a ball coming between 60-90mph with a flat surface from a locus of 4x4 feet. Basic physics says so. As usual, you are wrong and the physics is provable. This is also seen in the fact that baseball has two essential strokes while cricket has dozen plus. Strategy involves thought. Less reaction time equals less time to think and therefore far less strategic options at play.Stop talking nonsense.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, Rightarmfast said:

I think it maybe possible to be good at two things in a single sport. But the thing is, the sample space is too small. We haven't seen a single allrounder who would set the stage on fire in the last 25 yrs I would say. Kallis wasnt really a game changer,Razzaq and Azhar Mahmood not really solid enough to take a pure batsman's or bowlers position. 

Kapil himself for sure wasn't a better bowler than Javagal Srinath or Bumrah. He sure had to give up on his pace just to sustain his longetivity. Imran Khan for most part of his career was a pathetic bat. When he started batting, he couldnt bowl. 

So, the point is that a pure batsman or bowler would always be a better bet. 

 

my 2 pence is that, a great allrounder can be accomodated when you have 2 great bowlers and 2 great batsmen in the side to complement him. 

Kapil pre knee injury was definitely better than Srinath. Kapil till the mid 80s and same with Botham, were genuine allrounders who could command a spot in the team on the basis of their batting or bowling alone. 

[putrevus]

Saying Kallis is greater than Sachin as a test player does not mean Sachin was not a match winner. Some people talk as if Sachin was Bradman who scored triple and double hundreds for fun . Sachin was never Sehwag in India who scored 250 plus run in day lighting up the scoreboard either.Yes Sachin was  great but it does not mean Kallis cannot be better than him overall as a package for test matches.

 

 

 

 

[Rightarmfast]

Could be or should be are different. Fact is, Kallis was not good as Sachin or Lara! Simple. 

 

Sachin till 93-94 was a sight to behold. Comparing him to Sehwag is almost like not understanding the intricacies of batting.

[Muloghonto]

27 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Saying Kallis is greater than Sachin as a test player does not mean Sachin was not a match winner. Some people talk as if Sachin was Bradman who scored triple and double hundreds for fun . Sachin was never Sehwag in India who scored 250 plus run in day lighting up the scoreboard either.Yes Sachin was  great but it does not mean Kallis cannot be better than him overall as a package for test matches.

 

 

 

 

Problem is Kallis was a total fail vs McWarne, Two Ws, the two Cs, practically any bowling attack with serious teeth. This is why he is a tier below Tendy or Lara, who could score runs against the best bowling lineups series after series. 

[Sooda]

43 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Kapil pre knee injury was definitely better than Srinath. Kapil till the mid 80s and same with Botham, were genuine allrounders who could command a spot in the team on the basis of their batting or bowling alone. 

I dont think Kapil was good enough a bat to hold a place on his batting alone, could argue that he had the talent for it if he applied himself to that alone... but , extracting the stats, at the half way point of his career in 86 he averaged 30 with 3 centuries ( one against Holding Roberts Marshall and Garner in port of spain)  batting was his much lesser suite but he is still one of the greatest all rounders ever.

 

Some contend that an all rounder has to be good enough to hold a place down on either facet of his game... Sobers - as you points out- may have just about been able to, but he was a freak - Kaillis couldnt , neither could Kapil but dosent mean they arent ATG all rounders

[Sooda]

On 10/16/2019 at 3:12 PM, Vilander said:

not always. Kallis specifically was a better batsman in certain conditions in certain periods and was always a decent proper pace bowler. In that sense you tend to look at it this way, if the primary skill is good enough to match or exceed what is needed to be selected in playing 11 and if there was always a second skill then that in itself entails higher value to the team. Ben stokes for instance if he is a better batsman than say Rahane most times ( which he is not imo and Rahane is no 5 none the less) then he will definitely have better value for the team as he bowls as well, if Rahane far exeeds him as a batsman

Thats interesting, particularly when thinking about Hardik: is his batting good enough to match or exceed what is needed -No. But the way I see it though he is a lesser batsman than (say) Vihari,.... the fact that he can bowl and relieve pressure on the bowling unit, pickup key wickets, hell even string together a match winning spell means there is a debate to be had.

 

Then again you got Ashwin and Jadeja who of course well exceed the requirements to be a bowler, and their seconds skill means their a huge asset

[putrevus]

8 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Problem is Kallis was a total fail vs McWarne, Two Ws, the two Cs, practically any bowling attack with serious teeth. This is why he is a tier below Tendy or Lara, who could score runs against the best bowling lineups series after series. 

How many 100s did Sachin score against Mcwarne in Australia again answer is one.How many 100s did Sachin score again two Ws answer is1 .What serious bowling attack did Sachin dominate again? He scored runs against Warne in 1998 series was Mcgrath playing then no.Did he dominate Walsh and Ambrose as people seem to do it.Did Warne ever had any great results against any Indian batsmen?

Did Kallis score any runs and 100s against all the above great bowlers, answer is yes.Fact is Kallis played more tests against these great bowlers playing togther than Sachin.

It took time for Kallis to become great and Sachin like Lara was instant hit.Both of them were much more flamboyant stroke makers but that should not diminish greatness of Kallis.

[Sooda]

On 10/16/2019 at 3:38 PM, maniac said:

Any examples? If it is a ODI game, I would pick Sachin hands down,  in tests too in most conditions I would pick Sachin, this is not a cherry picking comparison, it is overall if I have a batting slot vacant who would I pick and it is a no brainer it would be Sachin who is a bigger impact player than Kallis with the bat.

Dont think it is that simple though right, I agree that on pure batting ability and impact SRT > JK... but if you had a below par bowling attack and you need Kallis medium pace to help out...and/or flat or easy batting track, where again having a 5th bowler would help and the difference in ability between SRT and JK is less of a factor.... then JK becomes a potentially stronger option

[putrevus]

8 minutes ago, Sooda said:

I dont think Kapil was good enough a bat to hold a place on his batting alone, could argue that he had the talent for it if he applied himself to that alone... but , extracting the stats, at the half way point of his career in 86 he averaged 30 with 3 centuries ( one against Holding Roberts Marshall and Garner in port of spain)  batting was his much lesser suite but he is still one of the greatest all rounders ever.

 

Some contend that an all rounder has to be good enough to hold a place down on either facet of his game... Sobers - as you points out- may have just about been able to, but he was a freak - Kaillis couldnt , neither could Kapil but dosent mean they arent ATG all rounders

I disagree Kapil played in India teams where openers averaged in 20s and middle order in 30s. Kapil could walk into the playing eleven of his Indian teams as batsmen alone. You have to understand Kapil bowled more overs than any other bowler during his time as he had no support.It is a tiring job , Kallis could easy walk into his team as fifth bowler as his batting was good enough to hold his spot. 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, putrevus said:

How many 100s did Sachin score against Mcwarne in Australia again answer is one.How many 100s did Sachin score again two Ws answer is1 .What serious bowling attack did Sachin dominate again? He scored runs against Warne in 1998 series was Mcgrath playing then no.Did he dominate Walsh and Ambrose as people seem to do it.Did Warne ever had any great results against any Indian batsmen?

Did Kallis score any runs and 100s against all the above great bowlers, answer is yes.Fact is Kallis played more tests against these great bowlers playing togther than Sachin.

It took time for Kallis to become great and Sachin like Lara was instant hit.Both of them were much more flamboyant stroke makers but that should not diminish greatness of Kallis.

It doesn’t change the fact that Sachin and Lara were head and shoulders above Kallis, Ponting, Dravid in total batting metrics : runs, averages, centuries, etc. Against the bowlers named. 

 

Lol at ignorant kids like you thinking Sachin was an instant hit. He was rushed to international cricket and didn’t score his first ton or average 40 for the first four years. Kallis was a zero vs quality bowling. He like Ponting had instant revival when these bowlers retired. Not a coincidence. 

[Muloghonto]

17 minutes ago, Sooda said:

I dont think Kapil was good enough a bat to hold a place on his batting alone, could argue that he had the talent for it if he applied himself to that alone... but , extracting the stats, at the half way point of his career in 86 he averaged 30 with 3 centuries ( one against Holding Roberts Marshall and Garner in port of spain)  batting was his much lesser suite but he is still one of the greatest all rounders ever.

 

Some contend that an all rounder has to be good enough to hold a place down on either facet of his game... Sobers - as you points out- may have just about been able to, but he was a freak - Kaillis couldnt , neither could Kapil but dosent mean they arent ATG all rounders

Ok so name a batsman in India during the 80s that would’ve made the team if not for Kapil. The answer is nobody. He averaged 30-32 with the bat in first half of his career, when only one guy in the team averaged 50( Sunny) and two guys averaged 40 ( Vengsarkar and Jimmy). What helps his case even more, is that he often outperformed regular bats against the hall of fame WI attack. 

[Muloghonto]

40 minutes ago, putrevus said:

I disagree Kapil played in India teams where openers averaged in 20s and middle order in 30s. Kapil could walk into the playing eleven of his Indian teams as batsmen alone. You have to understand Kapil bowled more overs than any other bowler during his time as he had no support.It is a tiring job , Kallis could easy walk into his team as fifth bowler as his batting was good enough to hold his spot. 

 

 

Except nobody walks into the team as a fifth bowler in tests, fifth bowlers are always allrounders or part timers. The batting allrounders who could walk into their team as 3rd or 4th bowler were Sobers, Tony Greig and Aubrey Faulkner.

Bowling allrounders who could walk in their team as the 5th or 6th batsman are Kapil, Botham, Mankad and Keith Miller. 

Rest are all there on the basis of their primary skill.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Muloghonto

[putrevus]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

It doesn’t change the fact that Sachin and Lara were head and shoulders above Kallis, Ponting, Dravid in total batting metrics : runs, averages, centuries, etc. Against the bowlers named. 

 

Lol at ignorant kids like you thinking Sachin was an instant hit. He was rushed to international cricket and didn’t score his first ton or average 40 for the first four years. Kallis was a zero vs quality bowling. He like Ponting had instant revival when these bowlers retired. Not a coincidence. 

What metrics are those which place Sachin higher ,the fact is that Sachin never cracked 900 ratings is testment to it.Sachin was instant hit because he got hit in his face in fourth test yet he batted on and he was a kid.I never said Sachin score 100s early in his career.Bradman's statement changed the perception about Sachin too in 1992.

 

Of all the great players he never scored two hundreds in a test match nor did he ever have series where he scored 500 plus runs.Yes he always scored his runs in most series.Let us not make Sachin into Bradman.Sachin was a steady eddy who scored his runs at a very good average and he rarely faced full strength great bowling attacks of his times.

 

 

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

What metrics are those which place Sachin higher ,the fact is that Sachin never cracked 900 ratings is testment to it.

Cracking 900 points requires a purple patch, somethign Sachin never had. He was the epitome of consistency without purple patch. You cannot crack 900 rating scoring 100-150 every 3-4 innings and having 4 outta 10 50+ scores in a ten innings sequence. Yet, that is exactly what a team needs long term over purple patch followed by ghanta for an entire season. 

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

Sachin was instant hit because he got hit in his face in fourth test yet he batted on and he was a kid.I never said Sachin score 100s early in his career.Bradman's statement changed the perception about Sachin too in 1992.

No. Sachin wasn’t an instant hit. He took 3-4 years to find his feet in international cricket. Lara was the instant hit. Scores 277 in his 4th innings, 501 and 375 in his third season etc. 

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

Of all the great players he never scored two hundreds in a test match nor did he ever have series where he scored 500 plus runs.Yes he always scored his runs in most series.Let us not make Sachin into Bradman.Sachin was a steady eddy who scored his runs at a very good average and he rarely faced full strength great bowling attacks of his times.

 

 

Nobody has faced more quality bowlers in their career than Sachin. He faced Hadlee when Hadlee was #2 bowler in the world, he faced Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Mushie, Saqqi, Akhtar, McGrath, Hughes, Warne,McGill, Gillespie, Johnson, Fraser, Anderson, Broad, Swann, Donald, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn, Philander, Walsh, Ambrose,Bishop plus Murali. That is a bigger collection of pacers with under 25 average and spinners under 30 than any batsman in history of test cricket.

 

And in tests comprising of these bowlers, he and Lara are head and shoulders above Kallis, Ponting, Dravid in their returns. This is why Tendulkar was a far superior batsman to Kallis, Ponting or Dravid, who are still ATGs but a tier below.

 

Same way how the 70s and 80s had an ATG top tier of Sunny, Boycott, Greg Chappell and Viv Richards, with another lower tier ATG in the form of Crowe, Border and Mum-n-dad. The difference back then, as is now, down to performance against elite lineups or delivering when chips are down.

[Vilander]

31 minutes ago, Sooda said:

Thats interesting, particularly when thinking about Hardik: is his batting good enough to match or exceed what is needed -No. But the way I see it though he is a lesser batsman than (say) Vihari,.... the fact that he can bowl and relieve pressure on the bowling unit, pickup key wickets, hell even string together a match winning spell means there is a debate to be had.

 

Then again you got Ashwin and Jadeja who of course well exceed the requirements to be a bowler, and their seconds skill means their a huge asset

the difference in these cases will be the condition, as in its not clear and cut who is more needed so conditions come into picture. A spinning condition where Hardik can not cut it with his pace , vihari is in. A pace condition where hardik can keep the other pacers fresh and can on his day become lead pacer he is in.  True all-rounders kinda take this out of the equation as in their first skill is definite. Imagine Hardik bowled like Shami or batted like Rahane for instance, its done he plays ahead of each of them in the 11. Kallis was like that he was SA's best batsman. and he bowled like zak. --> no question asked by any one.

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Vilander said:

the difference in these cases will be the condition, as in its not clear and cut who is more needed so conditions come into picture. A spinning condition where Hardik can not cut it with his pace , vihari is in. A pace condition where hardik can keep the other pacers fresh and can on his day become lead pacer he is in.  True all-rounders kinda take this out of the equation as in their first skill is definite. Imagine Hardik bowled like Shami or batted like Rahane for instance, its done he plays ahead of each of them in the 11. Kallis was like that he was SA's best batsman. and he bowled like zak. --> no question asked by any one.

He didn’t bowl like Zak, he bowled like Imran in the last quarter of his career: let the pacers like Donald, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn, Morkel etc do the heavy lifting and come on as a relief bowler and pick up a couple of wickets here and there. Having said that, Kallis had it in him to be a better bowler than he was. He was strong like an ox, had good bounce, seam position, could nip the ball both ways in 130-135kph range and got some swing with the new ball. His team just never really needed him to step up his bowling game or be relied on, except in one series vs WI way back in 2000 I believe, where he joined the 20 wickets and 250 runs in a series club ( a club that Imran does not enter and is dominated by Sobers, the only guy to have done it thrice ( Kapil, Botham and Miller have done it twice).

[maniac]

58 minutes ago, Sooda said:

Dont think it is that simple though right, I agree that on pure batting ability and impact SRT > JK... but if you had a below par bowling attack and you need Kallis medium pace to help out...and/or flat or easy batting track, where again having a 5th bowler would help and the difference in ability between SRT and JK is less of a factor.... then JK becomes a potentially stronger option

In a odi game srt the 5th bowler is as good as Kallis the 5th bowler. Also you have guys like Jayasuriya who can make it to a odi all time X1 who can be more effective than Kallis. Kallis wasn’t a great odi bat anyways

 

In tests sure Kallis can make it but if you pick 4 out of 6 ATG bowlers like Marshall,Wasim, Warne,Murali,Steyn and Mcgrath  and most Times you won’t need Kallis specifically because say keeper spot is taken up by Gilchrist that leaves 6 batting options

 

Sachin,Lara,Ponting,Viv  are a lockdown and all 4 are middle order so that leaves opening slots which will go to Sehwag and May be either Hayden, Greenidge, Gavaskar and Cook vying for the other slot. Sachin,Sehwag and Viv all 3 can roll their arm over to give that extra cushion. I mean I wouldn’t drop any of those 4 middle order bats for Kallis just for his bowling. May be Kallis can compete with Ponting.

 

As far as lower order goees Akram, Marshall,Warne can all bat a bit. Only out and out bunnies are Mcgrath and Murali so Kallis won’t make my first X1 anyways.

 

As mulo said maybe Sobers over Ponting so again no need for Kallis when every name I mentioned are out and out match winners

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2019 by maniac