Imran v Hadlee v Miller

[stephen]

forget du Plessis, wtf is Lee doing in there

That's Bollywood star Brett Lee to you.

 

[TheJediBrah]

forget du Plessis, wtf is Lee doing in there

Lee was never rated that highly in Aus, for some reason he was overseas though. Something about his natural blonde hair and pointy features appealing to the subcontinental demographic? No idea.

 

[trundler]

How the **** did Warne and Lara pull as much as they did though

 

[TheJediBrah]

Warne was pure will. If you want ***** that badly, and chase after it enough, it will keep happening. He would have had a huge failure rate though.

 

[Coronis]

As far as this thread is concerned i would have Miller just ahead of Imran and then Hadlee. Certainly at Test Level Hadlee was the poorest performing batsman of the three.

I would love to had seen what Proctor would have done in a long career, alas we will never know, ( I think he would have been pretty good)

And as has been mentioned , Faulkner of South Africa is rarely given his due. One of the very best all-rounders of all time, only ever played against Australia & England, no chance to boost his record against minnow teams.

Name another all-rounder who scored over 700 runs in a five Test Series as he did against Australia, in Australia in 1910/11, in a side heavily beaten, also managed 10 wickets as well

Based on their first class stats and the fact they all played through roughly the same era, I am easily convinced that Procter would have been considered greater than Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil.

 

[trundler]

Based on their first class stats and the fact they all played through roughly the same era, I am easily convinced that Procter would have been considered greater than Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil.

There have been too many exceptions for this to be a rule.

 

[Daemon]

Warne was pure will. If you want ***** that badly, and chase after it enough, it will keep happening. He would have had a huge failure rate though.

Yes, Warne was probably the Anderson with the Kookaburra of attracting women. If you try that many times eventually you'll see some success and people will be duped into thinking you're actually good at it.

 

[vcs]

Yes, Warne was probably the Anderson with the Kookaburra of attracting women. If you try that many times eventually you'll see some success and people will be duped into thinking you're actually good at it.

Needs to go into the CW Lexicon thread

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Based on their first class stats and the fact they all played through roughly the same era, I am easily convinced that Procter would have been considered greater than Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil.

Based on their first class stats I am convinced that Ramprakash and Hick would have been better than Tendulkar if given a decent chance in test cricket.

For all we know Rice might've been better than Procter.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yes, Warne was probably the Anderson with the Kookaburra of attracting women. If you try that many times eventually you'll see some success and people will be duped into thinking you're actually good at it.

frighteningly accurate analogy

 

[Daemon]

I do think Rice and Procter belong in the top 15 list at the very least though.

 

[trundler]

Based on their first class stats I am convinced that Ramprakash and Hick would have been better than Tendulkar if given a decent chance in test cricket.

For all we know Rice might've been better than Procter.

Yeah cricketers of the Imran/Hadlee/Miller class don't come around too often. Since then we've had 1 all rounder in the same class. Even if you don't think Procter would've been a regular Ramps at test level, if would've been likely that he'd have ended up focusing on one discipline at the expense of the other in tests, as his ROW and WSC stats suggest. Sir Richard was a fantastic genuine all rounder at FC level and merely a very good #8 in tests too.

 

[Coronis]

Based on their first class stats I am convinced that Ramprakash and Hick would have been better than Tendulkar if given a decent chance in test cricket.

For all we know Rice might've been better than Procter.

Rice was certainly a more consistent batsman than Procter, though Procter was in another league bowling wise. Tbh I’d say Rice was more in the Miller mold than anyone else has been.

 

[Migara]

Based on their first class stats and the fact they all played through roughly the same era, I am easily convinced that Procter would have been considered greater than Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil.

Based on first class stats Sir Jadeja makes Procter look like a novice.

 

[Line and Length]

Based on first class stats Sir Jadeja makes Procter look like a novice.

If you make such a statement, you should substantiate it with facts and figures.

 

[Coronis]

Based on first class stats Sir Jadeja makes Procter look like a novice.

Fortunately, we do have the context of both of their first class careers, so you don’t see this being claimed.

 

[Starfighter]

If you make such a statement, you should substantiate it with facts and figures.

Jadeja averages 47 in FC cricket and has three triple centuries. Excluding tests he averages 56.

Of course no one believes he's actually that ​good.

 

[tony p]

Since the age of 35, From the start of the 2011 season, as an all-rounder Darren Stevens figures are mightily impressive.

6792 runs@35.74 H.S. 237, 13 cent, 37 fifties
423 wickets@22.72, Best 8-75, 5 wkts innings 26, 10 wkts match 1.

Makes you wonder what he could have done if he bowled in his younger days. Probably deserved a few one day games, considering the likes of Paul Franks, Alex Louden, Scott Borthwick, Stuart Meaker & Stephen Parry all got games.

And i saw his 8-75 v Leic At Canterbury in August 2017 out of a total of 350. Pure class.

One other all-rounder who i forgot to mention in my previous post who is forgotten is Maurice Tate.
Good enough to score 1198 runs@25.48 with a century and 155 wickets@26.16. Batted very low in the order for England, but for his county Sussex, usually batted in the top 4, over 20000 runs,sometimes even opening with Ted Bowley. Over 2500 first-class wickets as well.

 

[Flem274*]

fleming is smoking. brett lee tho wtf ewwwwwww.

Many of my views have evolved. Two of them directly involving Hadlee.
I have Hadlee as one of my truly elite top tier bowlers. Ftr
Marshall, Steyn, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Muralitharan, Warne, (Trueman?)
And if you are arguably at most one or two positions behind McGrath while being somewhat similar in style and a much better bat, it really is a no brainier for him to be a automatic selection.

The other one being that I down played the importance of bowling all rounders and rated them behind batting all rounders and possibly also batsmen who were special in the codon.
This view stemming from looking at the greatest teams and noting that none of them had great bowling or for that matter batting all rounders. They just went for the superior bats and 4 best bowlers. But the great WI and Aussie teams don't come along every day and not indicative of every day cricket. And while I wouldn't drop a clearly superior bowler for one who can bat a bit, among two competitive teams I do see the value of a decent tail and how partnerships down the order can change a match. So most things being equal or McGrath v Hadlee, I would go Sir Richard.

But basically where I still differ from most here is that I believe all three all round aspects of the game are equal and just as valuable to a team. I've seen teams loose because of tail collapse, crucial drops in the cordon and I've seen teams win because of rear guard actions, taking half chances at slip and by wickets by the batting all-rounder . But it's about balance, batting shouldn't factor in to the decision for all of the bowlers, no. 8 for sure and would help if no. 9 was handy with the bat. While having at least one batsman who can bowl a few over when needed is always a plus. And finally, even if Sobers never bowled an over in tests, and I had one spot for a batsman I would choose him over Sachin because of his ability in the cordon along with them being rated in the same tier as batsmen.

So my personal ATG XI

Hutton
Hobbs
Bradman
Smith / Tendulkar / Richards
Sobers
Kallis
Gilchrist / Knott
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne / Muralitharan
Steyn

For the record playing Sobers as a batsman with Kallis being 1st 5th bowling option and they would share the load to minimize potential wear.


Sorry for the unnecessarily long response.

yessss i did it, my allrounder fetish pulled you over (or at least im claiming it has).

tbf i've come closer to your side over the years. i still like to keep the great bowling allrounders for my side so the other team will have a bit of a tail, but my side is now

hobbs
hutton
bradman
tendulkar
sobers
kallis
gilchrist
imran
hadlee
warne
marshall

as ever, tossing up whether i want wasim or davo in there for the left arm angle.

Trying to find a good picture of Miller. Unfortunately not too many out there. Here's a good one with Lindwall

cdg!

Looks like CDG's doppelganger

yessss

Yes, Warne was probably the Anderson with the Kookaburra of attracting women. If you try that many times eventually you'll see some success and people will be duped into thinking you're actually good at it.

im so glad 'anderson with a kookaburra' is becoming a thing

 

[kyear2]

fleming is smoking. brett lee tho wtf ewwwwwww.

yessss i did it, my allrounder fetish pulled you over (or at least im claiming it has).

tbf i've come closer to your side over the years. i still like to keep the great bowling allrounders for my side so the other team will have a bit of a tail, but my side is now

hobbs
hutton
bradman
tendulkar
sobers
kallis
gilchrist
imran
hadlee
warne
marshall

as ever, tossing up whether i want wasim or davo in there for the left arm angle.

cdg!

yessss

im so glad 'anderson with a kookaburra' is becoming a thing

It's true.

Still think Steyn is a must over Imran and tbh I am playing Sobers just as a batsman.
So not quite as all in on the all rounder wagon lol.