Is Sobers the 'greatest cricketer' of alltime

[dps]

maybe but i do not think so

he avearged 57 with the bat batting mostly at 6 and at times on covered wickets and averages 2 wks a match at 34 and was a defensive captain

i am tempted for bradman-sobers had a sr of early 50s with the bat there

[Oxy]

He is one of the greatest crickets of all time. No question in my mind.

What an average in an era when the bowlers bowled without any restrictions...uncovered pitches...no fielding restrictions...light bats...no helmets etc etc etc.

An average of 57 in the 1960s would be worth 65-70 in todays game.

[Wazeeri]

Look at Sobers in different conditions against different oppositions and you will know that the answer is NO.

[Oxy]

Originally Posted by Wazeeri Look at Sobers in different conditions against different oppositions and you will know that the answer is NO.

Then we can discount every cricketer that has ever played the game - on the basis of 'look at them in different conditions/against different opposition'!

[safehands46]

definitely,

he could bowl spin and was a legitimate seamer. it is said that he was of decent pace at the time. he could swing the ball both ways. considering all that he was excellent fielder. His batting scores speak for themselves. he had a great eye. played the ball extremely late.

[The Godfather]

does anyone have stats on his career

[Oxy]

Originally Posted by Haroon Yasin does anyone have stats on his career

Off the top of my head.

8000+ test runs
240 odd wkts

[Zohaib Shah]

Originally Posted by Oxy Off the top of my head. 8000+ test runs 240 odd wkts

What Team did He play for?

[Oxy]

Originally Posted by Zohaib Shah What Team did He play for?

Windies.

[Javelin]

Originally Posted by dps maybe but i do not think so he avearged 57 with the bat batting mostly at 6 and at times on covered wickets and averages 2 wks a match at 34 and was a defensive captain i am tempted for bradman-sobers had a sr of early 50s with the bat there

Sobers - definitely.

Bradman - maybe.

Remember, in Bradman's days, the class system was still at it's height. The Batsmen were by and large, the "gentry", whilst the bowlers mainly came from the working classes and were used as "workhorses" on the cricket field.

Now which "working class" man wanted to upset too much the "Gentlemen" he was bowling to, and risk his livelihood?

Add to that the reluctance of the "gentry" to run around chasing the ball, whilst fielding, and you can see that run making would not be too difficult, especially for the Captain.

Bradman would still be a good player in the modern game - but the all time great ? open to question.

[TAK]

Originally Posted by Zohaib Shah What Team did He play for?

are you taking the p i s s ?

[12thMan]

Bradman maybe the greatest batsman but when it comes to best cricketer they looks at the major parts of the game, which is batting and bowling or being an all-rounder (the regular one and not the one that includes wicket keepers).

[MediumPacer]

greatest cricketer of all time..viv richards..and the 2nd imran khan..I have no doubt in my mind.
records are not everything.

[sajad mohammed]

imran

[Wazeeri]

Then we can discount every cricketer that has ever played the game

Then we can discount most cricketers from the possibility of being declared the best batsman/bowler/all rounder NOT ALL.

Sobers was one of the best the world has ever seen but he wasn't THE BEST the world has ever seen. Maybe the best of his era

[Oxy]

Originally Posted by Wazeeri Sobers was one of the best the world has ever seen

Thats exactly what I said - only the original poster (who has been banned twice since posting this thread) is asking whether he is the greatest....

[wacho]

Originally Posted by Wazeeri Sobers was one of the best the world has ever seen but he wasn't THE BEST the world has ever seen. Maybe the best of his era

If Sobers is not the BEST then who exactly is the best in your opinion?

[Oxy]

Well look at where Sobers batted - look at the batsman that came in ahead of him.

Then look at the number of runs he scored - 8000 odd runs - that Miandad-esque! He was the leading run getter of all time until Boycott overtook him (with an average of 17 runs per inngs less)

And then look at the bowlers the Windies had in that era - and look at he number of wkts Sobers took.

The only player who would have walked into ANY test team for his batting and for his bowling.

It makes him a BIG contender for one of the GREATEST players to have graced the game.

[Wazeeri]

Thats exactly what I said - only the original poster (who has been banned twice since posting this thread) is asking whether he is the greatest....

You banned him for questioning whether Sobers was the greatest??? :0

[Oxy]

Originally Posted by Wazeeri You banned him for questioning whether Sobers was the greatest??? :0

NO - for breaking about a dozen rules!

[Wazeeri]

If Sobers is not the BEST then who exactly is the best in your opinion?

No one.

It's like asking who is the best looking woman in the world ever?

There is no one answer, because people expect different things from a cricketer. Some would prefer a mechanical forever result producing robot and others would prefer a crowd pleasing magician who may have a few more bad days than the robot.

You can call people the greatest of their eras but not the greatest ever because it is so hard to compare players who played 10 years apart. Bradman statistically uncomparable had not played on as many different pitches as the players of this era, He didn't have to contend with the new breed of reverse swing bowlers, he didn't face enough great spinners. Who knows what he would have been had he played in this era.

Sobers had a good support in batting and bowling and I would expect the greatest cricketer ever to play well in seaming new Zealand conditions. I would expect V Richards to bat well throughout his career instead of just the start to be considered the best player ever.

We can cal people great cricketers but to call anyone the greatest is always arguable.