[VIDEOS] Imran Khan is the greatest cricketer ever

[Hitman]

That is blasphemy.

My point is different people have different opinions. Fans have bias when it comes to good/great players from their nation. Pakistani fans rate Imran the greatest cricketer ever because of nothing but bias, just like how Indian fans rate Kapil a better all rounder than Imran because of nothing but bias.

 

[ChachaCricket]

My point is different people have different opinions. Fans have bias when it comes to good/great players from their nation. Pakistani fans rate Imran the greatest cricketer ever because of nothing but bias, just like how Indian fans rate Kapil a better all rounder than Imran because of nothing but bias.

Just playin with you.

 

[Bewal Express]

IK was great bowler, a decent batsman and an inspirational captain. But the greatest ever he is not.

 

[larkykid]

Venkatesh Prasad would be a better example

Prasad has frustrated me as an Indian cricket fan like no other Indian cricketer ever has. The way Jayasuriya humiliated him in the process humiliating Indian cricket, I'll never forget.

But you won't forget when he 0wn3d Amir Sohail either when he tried to get too cocky. The turning point of that match.

 

[soso_killer]

I think Imran Khan's batting average for the 10 year period is taken without context.
IIRC I think he contributed less than 40 runs per innings, which would be among the lowest. Bats averaging 50 contribute around 44 runs per match when you take the NO's. (I stand corrected)
It's equivalent to falling into the trap that Kallis was Tendulkar-Z. Khan rolled into one based on looking at stats at face value rather breaking those numbers down.

 

[Bilal7]

I think Imran Khan's batting average for the 10 year period is taken without context.
IIRC I think he contributed less than 40 runs per innings, which would be among the lowest. Bats averaging 50 contribute around 44 runs per match when you take the NO's. (I stand corrected)
It's equivalent to falling into the trap that Kallis was Tendulkar-Z. Khan rolled into one based on looking at stats at face value rather breaking those numbers down.

He used to bat lower down the order and couldn't contribute as many runs as guys who batted up the order. An average of 50 is an average of 50. There is no trap here if you know what a batting average means.

 

[OS_89]

I certainly don't agree that Imran is the best ever. He is top 10, maybe top 5.

However, with regards to the workload of the two how many of the balls bowled by sobers were spin?

It was both pace and spin. So yes, spin workload is lighter, but Sobers bowled plenty of medium pace bowling. In fact, I'd hazard an estimate that Sobers bowled more of his medium pace stuff than he did spin.

Still, you get my point. Sobers bowled more balls/test than lots of other specialist bowlers. That's how much workload he handled.

 

[Bilal7]

It was both pace and spin. So yes, spin workload is lighter, but Sobers bowled plenty of medium pace bowling. In fact, I'd hazard an estimate that Sobers bowled more of his medium pace stuff than he did spin.

Still, you get my point. Sobers bowled more balls/test than lots of other specialist bowlers. That's how much workload he handled.

Quality counts, not quantity. What was Sobers bowling strike-rate?

 

[Buffet]

I think Imran Khan's batting average for the 10 year period is taken without context.
IIRC I think he contributed less than 40 runs per innings, which would be among the lowest. Bats averaging 50 contribute around 44 runs per match when you take the NO's. (I stand corrected)
It's equivalent to falling into the trap that Kallis was Tendulkar-Z. Khan rolled into one based on looking at stats at face value rather breaking those numbers down.

Spot on here. Kallis wasn't SRT and Khan combined. Similarly, IK wasn't a top class batsman. A average is fine but Kallis didn't pick that many wickets per match as Zahir and IK didn't score many runs in his career. IK has less than even 4K runs in his entire career. Pakistan's wasn't exactly filled with Lara, Ponting and Sobers at that time for a top class batsman to bat lower.

On Topic - IK has a strong case of being the best Asian cricketer along with Murali and SRT. You can make a good case for either of them when you take all formats. I think Wasim was not far behind as well.

 

[Buffet]

Quality counts, not quantity. What was Sobers bowling strike-rate?

Irrelevant point when comparing the work load of two bowlers. Workload is simply about how much they had to work in each match as bowlers.

 

[miandadrules]

It was both pace and spin. So yes, spin workload is lighter, but Sobers bowled plenty of medium pace bowling. In fact, I'd hazard an estimate that Sobers bowled more of his medium pace stuff than he did spin.

Still, you get my point. Sobers bowled more balls/test than lots of other specialist bowlers. That's how much workload he handled.

But to counter that Imran was the spearhead whereas Sobers was the support act as far as the bowling attack was concerned.


Imran sparked a fast bowling belief in Pakistan, which Waqar instigated a revolution in.

Imran made Pakistanis believe that they could bowl fast, whereas Waqar made Pakistanis believe the mantle as the fastest bowler in the world was our God given right.

 

[Buffet]

I certainly don't agree that Imran is the best ever. He is top 10, maybe top 5.

He should be in the top 10 cricketers for many. He is certainly for me.

 

[OS_89]

Quality counts, not quantity. What was Sobers bowling strike-rate?

But to counter that Imran was the spearhead whereas Sobers was the support act as far as the bowling attack was concerned.


Imran sparked a fast bowling belief in Pakistan, which Waqar instigated a revolution in.

Imran made Pakistanis believe that they could bowl fast, whereas Waqar made Pakistanis believe the mantle as the fastest bowler in the world was our God given right.

I don't know how any of that is relevant to the discussion. The discussion was about quantity of involvement in the game. Pure workload.

 

[miandadrules]

I don't know how any of that is relevant to the discussion. The discussion was about quantity of involvement in the game. Pure workload.

A spinner can bowl more overs than a fast bowler leading the attack.

 

[miandadrules]

He should be in the top 10 cricketers for many. He is certainly for me.

He was a phenomenal cricketer. Purely based on mental strength, he believed he should be a fast bowler and revised his bowling action to accomplish it. Not many people would take such a risk.

 

[Bilal7]

I don't know how any of that is relevant to the discussion. The discussion was about quantity of involvement in the game. Pure workload.

Imran was a tiger, not a donkey. So I'll let the workload debate go Sobers way.

 

[tempus123]

Posters here who are saying he was "without doubt" the greatest cricketer in history are nothing but fanboys.

He can claim to be Asia's greatest cricketer ever and that too he would have had a stiff competition with Murali and SRT.

To claim him as the greatest ever in the world is laughable.. the arrogance of the fans is apparent when we have statements like "it is so obvious that no thread was needed on it" ..

 

[Buffet]

He was a phenomenal cricketer. Purely based on mental strength, he believed he should be a fast bowler and revised his bowling action to accomplish it. Not many people would take such a risk.

One of the best example of achieving great things with hard work and will power. He first did it with his bowling and when got older, he focused on batting to get most output. Not many players can put that much effort.

 

[ChachaCricket]

Posters here who are saying he was "without doubt" the greatest cricketer in history are nothing but fanboys.

He can claim to be Asia's greatest cricketer ever and that too he would have had a stiff competition with Murali and SRT.

To claim him as the greatest ever in the world is laughable.. the arrogance of the fans is apparent when we have statements like "it is so obvious that no thread was needed on it" ..

Laughable? There is only Sobers who can challenge him outside Asia. Bradman great batsman and all hardly played against any worthy opponents and did not play enough matches.

Imran impacted the game with bowling, batting, captaincy, led the team to a WC, performed like a champion against a GOAT team and in World series cricket, developed younger players, inspired a whole country to bowl fast, the list goes on. Laughable indeed.

He isn't the greatest 'without a doubt' but he definitely makes a very convincing case.

 

[ChachaCricket]

I certainly don't agree that Imran is the best ever. He is top 10, maybe top 5.

However, with regards to the workload of the two how many of the balls bowled by sobers were spin?

Name 5 better.

 

[Enforcer]

Imranistas are having a field day.

My question to all imranistas is if imran was so good as it is made out to be , then why young fast bowlers in pakistan are emulating wasim and not imran?

Why pakistan is producing so many left- armer like wasim and not right armer like Imran?

 

[Bilal7]

Imranistas are having a field day.

My question to all imranistas is if imran was so good as it is made out to be , then why young fast bowlers in pakistan are emulating wasim and not imran?

Why pakistan is producing so many left- armer like wasim and not right armer like Imran?

Who did Wasim look up to?

 

[Enforcer]

Who did Wasim look up to?

Wasim looked upto Imran, waqar looked upto imran. Since Imran was the best and most influential bowler then. But if you see today, many young fast bowlers in pakistan are emulating wasim and not Imran. Look at number of left-armers pakistan is producing. Isn't it unnatural? Can you explain me why?

In Australia Young fast bowlers still look upto Lillee , despite having recently retired modern legends like Mcgrath. But why it didn't happen incase of pakistan?

 

[OS_89]

Wasim looked upto Imran, waqar looked upto imran. Since Imran was the best and most influential bowler then. But if you see today, many young fast bowlers in pakistan are emulating wasim and not Imran. Look at number of left-armers pakistan is producing. Isn't it unnatural? Can you explain me why?

In Australia Young fast bowlers still look upto Lillee , despite having recently retired modern legends like Mcgrath. But why it didn't happen incase of pakistan?

This is not a good point.

Obviously young bowlers draw more inspiration from the generation that preceded them and those who they watched play. Saying McGrath hasn't inspired fast bowlers from Australia is completely false. Stuart Clark, Josh Hazelwood, Trent Copeland are so hugely influenced by McGrath that it's obvious from their action and their style of bowling.

Imran deserves a lot of credit for beginning Pakistan's fast bowling legacy.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Imran is one of the finest cricketers of his time and of all time. But calling him the greatest cricketer of all time would be exaggerating it. Sobers is widely regarded as the greatest cricketer to have ever lived.

I thought Don was more highly regarded as GOAT

 

[Enforcer]

This is not a good point.

Obviously young bowlers draw more inspiration from the generation that preceded them and those who they watched play. Saying McGrath hasn't inspired fast bowlers from Australia is completely false. Stuart Clark, Josh Hazelwood, Trent Copeland are so hugely influenced by McGrath that it's obvious from their action and their style of bowling.

Imran deserves a lot of credit for beginning Pakistan's fast bowling legacy.

But same can't be said about pattinson , cummins etc.

 

[Haroon786]

Posters here who are saying he was "without doubt" the greatest cricketer in history are nothing but fanboys.

He can claim to be Asia's greatest cricketer ever and that too he would have had a stiff competition with Murali and SRT.

To claim him as the greatest ever in the world is laughable.. the arrogance of the fans is apparent when we have statements like "it is so obvious that no thread was needed on it" ..

What are Murali and Sachin's stats like in their weaker disciplines ? How much success did they have as captains ? While IK is regularly castigated on here for not being an exceptional fielder, were these other fellas world class in fielding ?

The answers to these questions should make it obvious why IK is comfortably ahead of them as a cricketer.

 

[tempus123]

Laughable? There is only Sobers who can challenge him outside Asia. Bradman great batsman and all hardly played against any worthy opponents and did not play enough matches.

Imran impacted the game with bowling, batting, captaincy, led the team to a WC, performed like a champion against a GOAT team and in World series cricket, developed younger players, inspired a whole country to bowl fast, the list goes on. Laughable indeed.

He isn't the greatest 'without a doubt' but he definitely makes a very convincing case.

You are saying the same thing which I said..

 

[tempus123]

What are Murali and Sachin's stats like in their weaker disciplines ? How much success did they have as captains ? While IK is regularly castigated on here for not being an exceptional fielder, were these other fellas world class in fielding ?

The answers to these questions should make it obvious why IK is comfortably ahead of them as a cricketer.

Sorry ? This criterion of weaker discipline is only valid for all rounders. Murali got 800 Test wickets and 500+ ODI wickets too.. while single handed carrying the entire generation of SL bowling.

I can make a few criteria myself, but that wouldn't make them absolute criteria for being regarded as the best ever. Name me an expert worth his salt who rated Imran Khan the best ever cricketer of all time.

 

[Haroon786]

Sorry ? This criterion of weaker discipline is only valid for all rounders. Murali got 800 Test wickets and 500+ ODI wickets too.. while single handed carrying the entire generation of SL bowling.

I can make a few criteria myself, but that wouldn't make them absolute criteria for being regarded as the best ever. Name me an expert worth his salt who rated Imran Khan the best ever cricketer of all time.

Nope it's valid for cricketers that is performance in the 3 disciplines and captaincy as well.

Just because you know that you will have to accede to my viewpoint you've not given the answers - bravo indeed.

 

[tempus123]

Nope it's valid for cricketers that is performance in the 3 disciplines and captaincy as well.

Just because you know that you will have to accede to my viewpoint you've not given the answers - bravo indeed.

Ha.. I didn't answer it because answering it will obviously mean I accept the criterion in the first place, which I don't. In your opinion, only all rounders will qualify for best cricketer award. It doesn't work this way. I refuse to play by this rule, and before you say I am a minority, please name a few respected experts who rated Imran as the best "cricketer" of all time.

A lot of people consider Viv Richards and Warne to be among the top-5 cricketers ever, and both of them were not good allrounders/captains.

 

[Haroon786]

Ha.. I didn't answer it because answering it will obviously mean I accept the criterion in the first place, which I don't. In your opinion, only all rounders will qualify for best cricketer award. It doesn't work this way. I refuse to play by this rule, and before you say I am a minority, please name a few respected experts who rated Imran as the best "cricketer" of all time.

A lot of people consider Viv Richards and Warne to be among the top-5 cricketers ever, and both of them were not good allrounders/captains.

What does cricketer to you include ? It's all the disciplines of the game and who is best across all of them is the best cricketer.

 

[tempus123]

What does cricketer to you include ? It's all the disciplines of the game and who is best across all of them is the best cricketer.

No.. it's a trade-off. There is no single definition of being the best cricketer.

Just to give you an example, if you take sample of 100 well known experts (to remove the possibility of bias) across the nationalities to pick their player of 80s, how many of them would look beyond Viv Richards ?

Second, recently the cricketer of the last 20 years was picked by ESPN (it had a 50-member jury cutting across national lines) and they picked Tendulkar as the final choice over Kallis. Now Kallis is definitely better at bowling than Sachin is, so Kallis should have been selected.

Again, I am not saying IK is NOT the greatest Asian cricketer of all time, but it's not "without doubt". He wouldn't be the best cricketer of his generation in the world either.

 

[Haroon786]

No.. it's a trade-off. There is no single definition of being the best cricketer.

Just to give you an example, if you take sample of 100 well known experts (to remove the possibility of bias) across the nationalities to pick their player of 80s, how many of them would look beyond Viv Richards ?

Second, recently the cricketer of the last 20 years was picked by ESPN (it had a 50-member jury cutting across national lines) and they picked Tendulkar as the final choice over Kallis. Now Kallis is definitely better at bowling than Sachin is, so Kallis should have been selected.

Again, I am not saying IK is NOT the greatest Asian cricketer of all time, but it's not "without doubt". He wouldn't be the best cricketer of his generation in the world either.

Unless it is used in the correct context then cricketer should be used as a word to judge players, instead I'm fine with using best batsman of the last 20 years (Tendulkar) etc.

The explanation for Viv being picked in as the player of the 80s is that the amount of quality fast bowlers in that era were quite high, whilst the amount of quality batsmen were low and with Viv's batting style he was poles apart from others and hence he dominated whereas others merely looked to survive.

IK the cricketer adds much more value to a team than a specialist batsman or bowler, he could open the bowling, bat in the top 7, was a solid fielder, could skipper the team (successfully might I add) and just had that untangle charisma to him that very few else possessed.

In rivalry with that only Sobers comes up as competition for greatest cricketer IMO.

 

[as-95]

There is no doubt that Imran is the greatest Asian cricketer ever. I believe he is the greatest cricketer of All Time too, but it's arguable. He is no doubt the greatest Asian one though.

 

[tempus123]

Unless it is used in the correct context then cricketer should be used as a word to judge players, instead I'm fine with using best batsman of the last 20 years (Tendulkar) etc.

The explanation for Viv being picked in as the player of the 80s is that the amount of quality fast bowlers in that era were quite high, whilst the amount of quality batsmen were low and with Viv's batting style he was poles apart from others and hence he dominated whereas others merely looked to survive.

IK the cricketer adds much more value to a team than a specialist batsman or bowler, he could open the bowling, bat in the top 7, was a solid fielder, could skipper the team (successfully might I add) and just had that untangle charisma to him that very few else possessed.

In rivalry with that only Sobers comes up as competition for greatest cricketer IMO.

Opinions differ, I believe, since criteria are very personal. We will keep arguing since we don't freeze on the criteria itself. We both can be accused to be biased though

As I explained, Kallis added much more "value" to the team than a Tendulkar or even Lara (who didn't bowl at all) but experts world over chose Tendulkar as the cricketer of the generation over Kallis. They may be wrong, but we need strong proof of their bias since the nationalities were not India centric.

Whatever be the "reasons" of Viv being picked as a player of the 80s it proves that one can become the greatest cricketer even by contributing only in one of the disciplines, and it's not necessary to be an all rounder.

Usually the three Asian cricketers most would agree on will be IK, Murali and Sachin.. and you would not be wrong if you picked any of them.

 

[tempus123]

If you leave the "chucking" angle and him being an Asian cricketer, there are few arguments against Murali to be regarded as the best bowler in history, certainly except Shane Warne none of the other spinners even came close .. plus the value addition is huge.. he carried SL bowling on his own.. in fact carried the SL hopes on his own.

I don't think any spinner in SL wouldn't like to be another Murali.. so inspiration angle is also very much there.

 

[Haroon786]

No - best bowler and best fast bowler is Malcolm Marshall. Best spinner and I'm sorry you can't leave the chucking angle aside, is Warne.

What I mean by value is what a player gives to a team - his batting, bowling, fielding etc.

My criteria are certainly objective because they judge the overall package and that is exactly what you want when measuring the worth of a player. Leave the specialist players to best batsmen or best bowler awards.

 

[tempus123]

No - best bowler and best fast bowler is Malcolm Marshall. Best spinner and I'm sorry you can't leave the chucking angle aside, is Warne.

What I mean by value is what a player gives to a team - his batting, bowling, fielding etc.

My criteria are certainly objective because they judge the overall package and that is exactly what you want when measuring the worth of a player. Leave the specialist players to best batsmen or best bowler awards.

It's good that your are sorry for chucking angle, because ICC has not considered him a chucker. What you or someone else thinks is immaterial, when you allow a proven cheater like Imran Khan, you can certainly allow a bowler whose chucking is not confirmed.

Talk about double standards, and convenience.

 

[saadsahabjee]

Imran is the Best no doubt

As Captain----- batting avg 53
As a bowler --- bowling avg 19

People who are comapring him with Murali just go and have a look at Murali's record against Australia , he has a bowling avg of 36 .[ In australia his bowling avg is 75 ]

Where as Imran has a bowling avg of 21 against the mighty westindies , not to forget he also scored a 100 and three 50s as well against them as a batsman.

 

[tempus123]

Imran is the Best no doubt

As Captain----- batting avg 53
As a bowler --- bowling avg 19

People who are comapring him with Murali just go and have a look at Murali's record against Australia , he has a bowling avg of 36 .[ In australia his bowling avg is 75 ]

Where as Imran has a bowling avg of 21 against the mighty westindies , not to forget he also scored a 100 and three 50s as well against them as a batsman.

Murali also was outstanding in ODIs too, which Imran wasn't. He wasn't the best ODI all rounder.

Average in Australia ? Warne's average in WI and India wasn't great either.. nitpicking.

 

[saadsahabjee]

Murali also was outstanding in ODIs too, which Imran wasn't. He wasn't the best ODI all rounder.

Average in Australia ? Warne's average in WI and India wasn't great either.. nitpicking.

Murli's Odi avg is 22 where as against Australia its 31.

 

[Haroon786]

It's good that your are sorry for chucking angle, because ICC has not considered him a chucker. What you or someone else thinks is immaterial, when you allow a proven cheater like Imran Khan, you can certainly allow a bowler whose chucking is not confirmed.

Talk about double standards, and convenience.

Yes he was considered a chucked by the old rules of the ICC.

Prove that IK was a cheater ? If you're talking about his comments on using a bottle top to remove the seam of a ball in domestic cricket then that was a one off event and he was never proven guilty of ball tampering whatsoever. Furthermore, he even won a lawsuit against Botham and Allan Lamb who accused him of ball tampering because he didn't.

It's extremely hypocritical to falsely accuse someone else of lying and then proceeding to do the same right afterwards. Mind your words next time.

 

[tempus123]

Murli's Odi avg is 22 where as against Australia its 31.

Murali is regarded as one of the best ODI bowlers of all time, may be just behind Wasim. Imran is not regarded as one of the best ODI players. Botham and Kapil were easily better all rounders than him.

I was talking about Test average of 75 in Australia.. Warne fared badly in two countries.. and Murali also fared badly in two.

 

[Bilal7]

Wasim looked upto Imran, waqar looked upto imran. Since Imran was the best and most influential bowler then. But if you see today, many young fast bowlers in pakistan are emulating wasim and not Imran. Look at number of left-armers pakistan is producing. Isn't it unnatural? Can you explain me why?

In Australia Young fast bowlers still look upto Lillee , despite having recently retired modern legends like Mcgrath. But why it didn't happen incase of pakistan?

It is absurd to say that young bowlers today don't look up to Imran. Just recently, Imran Khan jnr said that he wants to be like Imran Khan. Bhatti and Anwar alsi have Imran as their role models.

Just because we have a huge left-arm pace battery coming to the fore doesn't mean that all of them are only emulating Wasim. After the W's retired, we had an attack comprising only of right-arm bowlers, were all of them emulating Waqar and not Wasim?

Imran Khan is widely regarded as the biggest hero to most Pakistanis. The other posters here can confirm it for you.

 

[Bilal7]

Murali is regarded as one of the best ODI bowlers of all time, may be just behind Wasim. Imran is not regarded as one of the best ODI players. Botham and Kapil were easily better all rounders than him.

I was talking about Test average of 75 in Australia.. Warne fared badly in two countries.. and Murali also fared badly in two.

In what world is Imran not one of the best ODI players ever? In what universe are Botham and Kapil better ODI players "easily"?

Imran was certainly not a GOAT contender in ODIs, like he was in tests, but he was still a fantastically good player in the shorter format. He was a better bowler than those two in this format too and with the bat, neither of them, not Sachin for that matter, can say that they played a match-winning innings in a World Cup final.

Putting this much emphasis on ODIs also disqualifies the likes of Sobers and Bradman from the discussion, mind you.

 

[saadsahabjee]

Murali is regarded as one of the best ODI bowlers of all time, may be just behind Wasim. Imran is not regarded as one of the best ODI players. Botham and Kapil were easily better all rounders than him.

I was talking about Test average of 75 in Australia.. Warne fared badly in two countries.. and Murali also fared badly in two.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/40560.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround

Have a look and tell me in/against which country did imran fared badly as bowler??.His worst avg is 28 as a bowler.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Murali is regarded as one of the best ODI bowlers of all time, may be just behind Wasim. Imran is not regarded as one of the best ODI players. Botham and Kapil were easily better all rounders than him.

I was talking about Test average of 75 in Australia.. Warne fared badly in two countries.. and Murali also fared badly in two.

You lost your argument right there buddy

 

[Enforcer]

It is absurd to say that young bowlers today don't look up to Imran. Just recently, Imran Khan jnr said that he wants to be like Imran Khan. Bhatti and Anwar alsi have Imran as their role models.

Just because we have a huge left-arm pace battery coming to the fore doesn't mean that all of them are only emulating Wasim. After the W's retired, we had an attack comprising only of right-arm bowlers, were all of them emulating Waqar and not Wasim?

Imran Khan is widely regarded as the biggest hero to most Pakistanis. The other posters here can confirm it for you.

Ok agreed to your point. But to say Imran is the greatest cricketer ever is a ridiculous claim. Yeah, he may be a contender for this race, but there are many others. only Imranistas can claim him the best of all time, just like sachinistas used to do for their lord.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

As good as Botham and Kapil were, Imran was MILES ahead of them. The only one who comes close during that era is Hadlee, but even he wasn't as good as Imran

 

[Enforcer]

As good as Botham and Kapil were, Imran was MILES ahead of them. The only one who comes close during that era is Hadlee, but even he wasn't as good as Imran

He was talking about ODIs. Still i feel imran was better.

 

[Bilal7]

Ok agreed to your point. But to say Imran is the greatest cricketer ever is a ridiculous claim. Yeah, he may be a contender for this race, but there are many others. only Imranistas can claim him the best of all time, just like sachinistas used to do for their lord.

Why is it a "ridiculous" claim? I personally don't think that he is but if he is a contender, like you said, calling him the best shouldn't be "ridiculous". This is Imran we are talking about, not Hafeez.

It wouldn't be ridiculous calling Sachin the best either but Imran has a stronger claim.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

He was talking about ODIs. Still i feel imran was better.

Even in ODIs, I think Imran was better

 

[IndianWillow]

I have a feeling Imran is the second greatest cricketer after Bradman. Bradman was so far ahead of his peers that it would be difficult to challenge his legacy. Sobers, Miller etc are some what overrated (and played in eras with less competition and they were not like Bradman when it came to peer superiority) and I think Imran is ahead. Imran between 1977-1987 would probably give Bradman a run for his money too, but over an entire career Bradman stays ahead. A bit strange when you think Bradman did not select Imran in his dream XI.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Ok agreed to your point. But to say Imran is the greatest cricketer ever is a ridiculous claim. Yeah, he may be a contender for this race, but there are many others. only Imranistas can claim him the best of all time, just like sachinistas used to do for their lord.

It's not a "ridiculous" claim at all if he is a "contender in this race" as you say. There is NO universally accepted Greatest of All Time. It's a matter of opinion and Imran is pretty close to press that claim.

 

[Enforcer]

Why is it a "ridiculous" claim? I personally don't think that he is but if he is a contender, like you said, calling him the best shouldn't be "ridiculous". This is Imran we are talking about, not Hafeez.

It wouldn't be ridiculous calling Sachin the best either but Imran has a stronger claim.

ok not ridiculous , what i meant was 'unfair' or 'dubious'

 

[Bilal7]

ok not ridiculous , what i meant was 'unfair' or 'dubious'

I agree with that. He's not the undisputed #1. If anyone is, it is Bradman. I would have him in my top three for sure.

 

[saadsahabjee]

A Cricinfo Article that Explains why Imran was ahead of all the all rounders of his era.

A GIANT AMONG ALL ROUNDERS.

At his peak, Imran Khan the bowler was easily among the best in the world, while his skilful batting and inspirational captaincy made him the complete package.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/484478.html

 

[Enforcer]

I agree with that. He's not the undisputed #1. If anyone is, it is Bradman. I would have him in my top three for sure.

problem is i have never seen imran in the field but i have seen wasim and has been a big fan of him right from my childhood. Hence it is difficult for me to accept that imran was better cricketer than wasim.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

problem is i have never seen imran in the field but i have seen wasim and has been a big fan of him right from my childhood. Hence it is difficult for me to accept that imran was better cricketer than wasim.

Imran's spell in Karachi 82' against India was better than what I've seen of Wasim. I've never seen any of them live, but my father had loads of cassettes stored so I have a fair idea of how they both played

 

[saadsahabjee]

problem is i have never seen imran in the field but i have seen wasim and has been a big fan of him right from my childhood. Hence it is difficult for me to accept that imran was better cricketer than wasim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FE6PcoN6nY

 

[tempus123]

You lost your argument right there buddy

LOL.. thank you judge.

 

[tempus123]

I have a feeling Imran is the second greatest cricketer after Bradman. Bradman was so far ahead of his peers that it would be difficult to challenge his legacy. Sobers, Miller etc are some what overrated (and played in eras with less competition and they were not like Bradman when it came to peer superiority) and I think Imran is ahead. Imran between 1977-1987 would probably give Bradman a run for his money too, but over an entire career Bradman stays ahead. A bit strange when you think Bradman did not select Imran in his dream XI.

For the second best player of all time, not many included him in their first choice XI, let alone Bradman.

 

[tempus123]

In what world is Imran not one of the best ODI players ever? In what universe are Botham and Kapil better ODI players "easily"?

Imran was certainly not a GOAT contender in ODIs, like he was in tests, but he was still a fantastically good player in the shorter format. He was a better bowler than those two in this format too and with the bat, neither of them, not Sachin for that matter, can say that they played a match-winning innings in a World Cup final.

Putting this much emphasis on ODIs also disqualifies the likes of Sobers and Bradman from the discussion, mind you.

Compared to Murali.. who is GOAT in ODIs too. Context, man, context.

 

[tempus123]

Yes he was considered a chucked by the old rules of the ICC.

Prove that IK was a cheater ? If you're talking about his comments on using a bottle top to remove the seam of a ball in domestic cricket then that was a one off event and he was never proven guilty of ball tampering whatsoever. Furthermore, he even won a lawsuit against Botham and Allan Lamb who accused him of ball tampering because he didn't.

It's extremely hypocritical to falsely accuse someone else of lying and then proceeding to do the same right afterwards. Mind your words next time.

Old rules of the ICC.. good defense.

Imran accepted the cheating. One off incident .. sure.. but intention was clear. You are hypocrite of a very high order if you include unproven chucking allegation to ridicule a player but discard a proven cheating allegation from the proceedings.

 

[tempus123]

In what world is Imran not one of the best ODI players ever? In what universe are Botham and Kapil better ODI players "easily"?

Imran was certainly not a GOAT contender in ODIs, like he was in tests, but he was still a fantastically good player in the shorter format. He was a better bowler than those two in this format too and with the bat, neither of them, not Sachin for that matter, can say that they played a match-winning innings in a World Cup final.

Putting this much emphasis on ODIs also disqualifies the likes of Sobers and Bradman from the discussion, mind you.

and playing a match wininng innings in a WC final is a criterion for greatness.. lol, and someone who had played a match losing innings just before the match and was saved by Inzamam's brilliance in SF.

 

[Bilal7]

Compared to Murali.. who is GOAT in ODIs too. Context, man, context.

Murali is not the GOAT in ODIs. And are we comparing Imran to Murali now? Murali was the spin bowling equivalent of Sachin and Wasim. He wasn't any better than those two.

 

[tempus123]

Murali is not the GOAT in ODIs. And are we comparing Imran to Murali now? Murali was the spin bowling equivalent of Sachin and Wasim. He wasn't any better than those two.

Yes.. and he was a GOAT of ODIs. Probably only Wasim was a better ODI bowler overall than him.

I don't remember Imran being considered with the awe associated as far as ODIs are concerned.

 

[Bilal7]

and playing a match wininng innings in a WC final is a criterion for greatness.. lol, and someone who had played a match losing innings just before the match and was saved by Inzamam's brilliance in SF.

Not criterion. Playing a match-winning innings in a World Cup final is a mark of greatness. You have no idea how cricket works if you're calling Imran's semi-final knock a match-losing effort. Inzamam rescuing Pakistan also sheds favourable light towards Imran because he was the guy who carried aloo throughout the tournament, despite people calling for the aloo to be cut.

 

[Haroon786]

Old rules of the ICC.. good defense.

Imran accepted the cheating. One off incident .. sure.. but intention was clear. You are hypocrite of a very high order if you include unproven chucking allegation to ridicule a player but discard a proven cheating allegation from the proceedings.

Unproven ? The ICC were forced to change the rules because of racist allegations. Murali was found to be bending his arm more than what was proven to be legitimate at the time and was called for chucking numerous times.

So what if he accepted that he used a bottle top once ? And what proceedings ?

Also stop lying, it doesn't look good.

 

[Bhaijaan]

All round stats are overrated. Eventually people judge you by your skill at one competency, either batting or bowling. Fact is Imran is one of the best bowlers of all time in a bowling friendly era and a great captain. He was inferior to bowlers in terms of pure ability in his own era and hence he wont ever be considered as greatest. Greatness cannot be accumulated but has to be substantial. Its not a 2+ 2 better than 3 thing. 3 is still a greater number and a greater cricketer even if 2 beats him on aggregate. Jack of all trades is never greater than master of one.

Bradman, Warne, Tendulkar,Viv, Marshal etc could all claim to be greatest in one skill and hence rated above Imran usually

 

[Bilal7]

Yes.. and he was a GOAT of ODIs. Probably only Wasim was a better ODI bowler overall than him.

I don't remember Imran being considered with the awe associated as far as ODIs are concerned.

Wasim, McGrath, Waqar, Lee, Mushtaq, Warne and arguably, even Ajmal, were all superb ODI bowlers on Murali's level. The Sri Lankan wasn't ahead of the pack.

Imran is just as big a player in ODIs, as Murali is.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Yes.. and he was a GOAT of ODIs. Probably only Wasim was a better ODI bowler overall than him.

I don't remember Imran being considered with the awe associated as far as ODIs are concerned.

Yet, Bradman and Sobers haven't played ODIs and you include them in your arguments

 

[tempus123]

Unproven ? The ICC were forced to change the rules because of racist allegations. Murali was found to be bending his arm more than what was proven to be legitimate at the time and was called for chucking numerous times.

So what if he accepted that he used a bottle top once ? And what proceedings ?

Also stop lying, it doesn't look good.

Huh.. another unproven allegation that ICC changed the rules because of racist allegations.. you can think whatever you want, but unless it's a fact, please don't bring it as an argument. I don't have time to answer or refute people's imaginative allegations.

So what if he accepted he used a bottle cap ? Nothing.. except that it proves "definitely" that he cheated the game.

 

[tempus123]

Yet, Bradman and Sobers haven't played ODIs and you include them in your arguments

Irrelevant argument.

 

[Mobashir]

All round stats are overrated. Eventually people judge you by your skill at one competency, either batting or bowling. Fact is Imran is one of the best bowlers of all time in a bowling friendly era and a great captain. He was inferior to bowlers in terms of pure ability in his own era and hence he wont ever be considered as greatest. Greatness cannot be accumulated but has to be substantial. Its not a 2+ 2 better than 3 thing. 3 is still a greater number and a greater cricketer even if 2 beats him on aggregate. Jack of all trades is never greater than master of one.

Bradman, Warne, Tendulkar,Viv, Marshal etc could all claim to be greatest in one skill and hence rated above Imran usually

LOL
Now that really is a shokingly poor post without any logic and a lot of nonsense!

 

[tempus123]

Wasim, McGrath, Waqar, Lee, Mushtaq, Warne and arguably, even Ajmal, were all superb ODI bowlers on Murali's level. The Sri Lankan wasn't ahead of the pack.

Imran is just as big a player in ODIs, as Murali is.

A lone spinner place and a lone all rounder place is usually there in the ODI sides. If Imran makes it to all time ODI sides ahead of Botham and Kapil, I agree. Murali will most likely make it to spinner's place.

 

[Mobashir]

Wasim, McGrath, Waqar, Lee, Mushtaq, Warne and arguably, even Ajmal, were all superb ODI bowlers on Murali's level. The Sri Lankan wasn't ahead of the pack.

Imran is just as big a player in ODIs, as Murali is.

Wow, what's happening this morning here?
Are you ok?
Imran was never as good as Murali in ODI cricket. Murli is a champion ODI cricketer. Imran is just a very good ODI cricketer.

You don't have to make things up to proove Imran is the best asian cricketer ever, that's a no contest.

 

[Haroon786]

Huh.. another unproven allegation that ICC changed the rules because of racist allegations.. you can think whatever you want, but unless it's a fact, please don't bring it as an argument. I don't have time to answer or refute people's imaginative allegations.

So what if he accepted he used a bottle cap ? Nothing.. except that it proves "definitely" that he cheated the game.

How is Murali being a chucker an unproven allegation ? Was he not called for chucking several times and found to be chucking by the contemporaneous rules ?

I don't have time either for posters of your caliber.

If that can be used as evidence for 'cheating' then the likes of Warne, Tendulkar and Dravid are also cheaters.

 

[Haroon786]

LOL
Now that really is a shokingly poor post without any logic and a lot of nonsense!

Ignore him, trolls enjoy the attention.