Bublu Bhuyan
School Cricketer
Like many, I too rate Sir Garfield Sobers as the greatest cricketer to have ever lived. Let's face it, he is widely regarded as the greatest ever all rounder.
The point I'm about to raise is his bowling ability. Here's a paragraph from Wikipedia (Sir Garfield Sobers's page) -
Let's look at Sobers's career bowling figures -
235 wickets @ 34.03, SR 91.9
It's true that stats don't give us the complete picture. It's quite true that someone like Viv Richards with an average lower than all of his contemporaries of his era is still considered far better than each one of them. It's also true that despite there being a huge gap in the average between Tendulkar and Lara all throughout their careers, the latter was always considered in the same league as Sachin.
But having said that, how can a player with a very mediocre bowling average of 34.03 and a pathetic strike rate of 91.9 be considered as 'a bowler of extraordinary skill'? It's just irrational.
What's the opinion of the rest of you guys on the issue?
The point I'm about to raise is his bowling ability. Here's a paragraph from Wikipedia (Sir Garfield Sobers's page) -
Richie Benaud described Sobers as "the greatest all-round cricketer the world has seen". Sobers, wrote Benaud, was "a brilliant batsman, splendid fielder, particularly close to the wicket, and a bowler of extraordinary skill, whether bowling with the new ball, providing orthodox left-arm spin or over-the-wrist spin".
Let's look at Sobers's career bowling figures -
235 wickets @ 34.03, SR 91.9
It's true that stats don't give us the complete picture. It's quite true that someone like Viv Richards with an average lower than all of his contemporaries of his era is still considered far better than each one of them. It's also true that despite there being a huge gap in the average between Tendulkar and Lara all throughout their careers, the latter was always considered in the same league as Sachin.
But having said that, how can a player with a very mediocre bowling average of 34.03 and a pathetic strike rate of 91.9 be considered as 'a bowler of extraordinary skill'? It's just irrational.
What's the opinion of the rest of you guys on the issue?