[VIDEOS] Imran Khan is the greatest cricketer ever

[tempus123]

Lol at Imran fanboys.. comparing a proven and self admitted cheater to the one against whom the charge is not of cheating. I am sure the same fanboys didn't consider Ajmal a chucker either.. and had Imran not gone on record saying it, they would have denied Imran cheated at all..

 

[OS_89]

Yeah there's no need to feign ignorance here...he did do it.

Greig says it best at 5:32

"I cannot believe that anyone who's seen that footage could possibly defend him"

It doesn't taint his career at all imo. One such incident in a long, largely controversy free career is nothing. But he did tamper.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Advise if he was just in 'Love' with the ball and did not cheat with it, how?

Afridi was tempering the ball while sachin was just removing sand

 

[#GreenRoars]

Lol at Imran fanboys.. comparing a proven and self admitted cheater to the one against whom the charge is not of cheating. I am sure the same fanboys didn't consider Ajmal a chucker either.. and had Imran not gone on record saying it, they would have denied Imran cheated at all..

Yes, Ajmal was guilty, received punishment. Yes, sachin charge wasn't cheating. But stupid ICC banned him for one match because he was removing sand from the ball. How ignorant ICC was at that time honestly. Sachin wasn't cheating, he was helping the team. Now helping isn't cheating, but ICC couldn't get that simple point ). But still, honestly Sachin was best batsman that world have ever seen. And same respect for IK too.

 

[tempus123]

Yes, Ajmal was guilty, received punishment. Yes, sachin charge wasn't cheating. But stupid ICC banned him for one match because he was removing sand from the ball. How ignorant ICC was at that time honestly. Sachin wasn't cheating, he was helping the team. Now helping isn't cheating, but ICC couldn't get that simple point ). But still, honestly Sachin was best batsman that world have ever seen. And same respect for IK too.

LOL.. Sachin was held guilty for an offence.. go and read more about it.

 

[giri26]

Imran is a great cricketer, no one is doubting that fact. But to call him greatest of all time is stretching it. No one looks at a players selective record or his peak to determine his greatness. Imran finished with a batting average of 37 and a bowling average of 22 which is great but not greatest of all time record. He did amazingly great for a bowling all-rounder and was better than his peers at the time he was playing. He was a good captain and probably the best for Pakistan or even Asia but there have been better captains. Pakistan won 14 out of the 48 games he captained. Good record but again not the greatest record among captains. Pakistani fans may bring other factors into account to say how that record as captain was better than others but again the world does not see it that way. They would just look at the final records and say Imran did very well but again there are others who may have similar records. Sobers was a batting all-rounder and he captain 39 games for WI averaged 59 with the bat and had a bowling average of 34 and his winning percentage as captain is slightly lower than Imran. sobers was a batting all-rounder so he did well in that discipline.

There have been players from other countries who have influenced their team fortunes equally or more than Imran, you cannot blame them for not being an all-rounder. Allan Border is regarded as a great captain, he may not have won more than Steve Waugh but pulled through Australia during their worst phase meanwhile averaging 50+ and scoring 10000+ runs.

So we cannot call one player has the greatest of all time as it is very subjective. If you ask the Australians, they will call Bradman as their greatest cricketer or Warne or McGrath etc...So even though Imran was a great cricketer, I would not go as far as calling him the greatest. No one can be the greatest.

 

[Belawal2014]

Imran is a great cricketer, no one is doubting that fact. But to call him greatest of all time is stretching it. No one looks at a players selective record or his peak to determine his greatness. Imran finished with a batting average of 37 and a bowling average of 22 which is great but not greatest of all time record. He did amazingly great for a bowling all-rounder and was better than his peers at the time he was playing. He was a good captain and probably the best for Pakistan or even Asia but there have been better captains. Pakistan won 14 out of the 48 games he captained. Good record but again not the greatest record among captains. Pakistani fans may bring other factors into account to say how that record as captain was better than others but again the world does not see it that way. They would just look at the final records and say Imran did very well but again there are others who may have similar records. Sobers was a batting all-rounder and he captain 39 games for WI averaged 59 with the bat and had a bowling average of 34 and his winning percentage as captain is slightly lower than Imran. sobers was a batting all-rounder so he did well in that discipline.

There have been players from other countries who have influenced their team fortunes equally or more than Imran, you cannot blame them for not being an all-rounder. Allan Border is regarded as a great captain, he may not have won more than Steve Waugh but pulled through Australia during their worst phase meanwhile averaging 50+ and scoring 10000+ runs.

So we cannot call one player has the greatest of all time as it is very subjective. If you ask the Australians, they will call Bradman as their greatest cricketer or Warne or McGrath etc...So even though Imran was a great cricketer, I would not go as far as calling him the greatest. No one can be the greatest.

/thread.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Sad times for a forum when an admin acts like a 11 year old kid.

lol, Admins can't do fun? hum koi jin to nahe hain bhai, first we are members then admins

 

[Monsee]

Lol at Imran fanboys.. comparing a proven and self admitted cheater to the one against whom the charge is not of cheating. I am sure the same fanboys didn't consider Ajmal a chucker either.. and had Imran not gone on record saying it, they would have denied Imran cheated at all..

There goes my favorite cricketer and his poster on my wall argument...out of the window!

When Pakistanis do it they are cheats, when Indians do it, they are wrongly accused...maana bhai paisa bolta hai magar sharam bhi koi cheeze hoti hai, you know what that means?

 

[Monsee]

Imran is a great cricketer, no one is doubting that fact. But to call him greatest of all time is stretching it. No one looks at a players selective record or his peak to determine his greatness. Imran finished with a batting average of 37 and a bowling average of 22 which is great but not greatest of all time record. He did amazingly great for a bowling all-rounder and was better than his peers at the time he was playing. He was a good captain and probably the best for Pakistan or even Asia but there have been better captains. Pakistan won 14 out of the 48 games he captained. Good record but again not the greatest record among captains. Pakistani fans may bring other factors into account to say how that record as captain was better than others but again the world does not see it that way. They would just look at the final records and say Imran did very well but again there are others who may have similar records. Sobers was a batting all-rounder and he captain 39 games for WI averaged 59 with the bat and had a bowling average of 34 and his winning percentage as captain is slightly lower than Imran. sobers was a batting all-rounder so he did well in that discipline.

There have been players from other countries who have influenced their team fortunes equally or more than Imran, you cannot blame them for not being an all-rounder. Allan Border is regarded as a great captain, he may not have won more than Steve Waugh but pulled through Australia during their worst phase meanwhile averaging 50+ and scoring 10000+ runs.

So we cannot call one player has the greatest of all time as it is very subjective. If you ask the Australians, they will call Bradman as their greatest cricketer or Warne or McGrath etc...So even though Imran was a great cricketer, I would not go as far as calling him the greatest. No one can be the greatest.

Again someone reading stats and voilla instant cricket expert...Mr. Arm Chair Critic, kindly advise what was the winning rate of some of his peer captains in those days, did you bother looking at the number of tests that ended as draws back then, what about him being the only captain to stop the 'Greatest Team Ever' and drawaing all the series with them?

These are things you do not get from merely looking at stats!

 

[giri26]

Again someone reading stats and voilla instant cricket expert...Mr. Arm Chair Critic, kindly advise what was the winning rate of some of his peer captains in those days, did you bother looking at the number of tests that ended as draws back then, what about him being the only captain to stop the 'Greatest Team Ever' and drawaing all the series with them?

These are things you do not get from merely looking at stats!

It does not matter. Every era has a captain or a team which does better than the others. If we want to call them as the greatest then you can do that. I just merely said that if you make a case of Imran, some other person can make a case for another player with similar stats. There can be multiple greats in cricket. There can never be a greatest player from all era's combined. I never criticized Imran, please point me to the part I did. I agree his peers might have had inferior record but we aren't talking about Imran being greater than his peers, we are telling he is greatest of all time. If that is the case we need to compare him with captains of all era's and players of all era's. We cannot call one player the greatest of all time. There is no greatest of all time cricketer. No matter how people want to spin things and bring selective stats to prove things, there isn't one player who is better than all the players who ever played the game. You cannot make people agree to that, how much ever you try.

I can even agree Imran to be the best captain from subcontinent, Best bowler from subcontinent (Subjective as we have Wasim, Murali and Waqar who can stake claim to that) or without doubt the best all rounder from subcontinent. But best cricketer of all time in the world, I cannot as no one can be one.

 

[giri26]

These are things you do not get from merely looking at stats!

So how are people 20 years down the line decide Imran as the best cricketer of all time without looking at the stats? People who have seen him play can do it, how about people 30 years down the line come to that conclusion? The only reason people accept Bradman as the best batsman of all time is because of his freakish average. None of us have seen him bat. I agree stats does not say the true story but again, if you have to stand the test of time, you need to have some freakish stats which are better than players from all eras. You are not calling him best from subcontinent, you are calling him greatest cricketer of all time. For the entire world to agree with you, Imran should have stats which automatically make people agree when you say that, which he does not. You cannot ask people to pick and choose timeline to prove one cricketer is greatest of all time, not everyone will do that. 10-15 years down the line people will look at his overall stats and say yes he was a great cricketer but will they call him greatest of all time. I doubt it. There in lies the problem. No one can be the greatest cricketer of all time, period. It will never happen unless we have a Bradman whose average has stood the test of time.

 

[Hitman]

A simple question - How many runs did Sachin score by that incident of him tampering with the ball? Another question, Imran openly confessed in his autobiography that he used to regularly tamper with the ball. So how many wickets did Imran take in his career by tampering with the ball?

 

[saadsahabjee]

These are things you do not get from merely looking at stats!

So how are people 20 years down the line decide Imran as the best cricketer of all time without looking at the stats? People who have seen him play can do it, how about people 30 years down the line come to that conclusion? The only reason people accept Bradman as the best batsman of all time is because of his freakish average. None of us have seen him bat. I agree stats does not say the true story but again, if you have to stand the test of time, you need to have some freakish stats which are better than players from all eras. You are not calling him best from subcontinent, you are calling him greatest cricketer of all time. For the entire world to agree with you, Imran should have stats which automatically make people agree when you say that, which he does not. You cannot ask people to pick and choose timeline to prove one cricketer is greatest of all time, not everyone will do that. 10-15 years down the line people will look at his overall stats and say yes he was a great cricketer but will they call him greatest of all time. I doubt it. There in lies the problem. No one can be the greatest cricketer of all time, period. It will never happen unless we have a Bradman whose average has stood the test of time.

We call bradman the greatest on the basis of the 52 matches that he played and averaged 99 with the bat .You are saying that imran does not have have the stats to match bradman . Lets analyze his stats from 1980 to 1990.

Matches Played 55
Batting average 47
Bowling Average 19 [ can be considered equal to 53 as a batsman ]

And do not even talk about not outs , this is not odis where you can remain not not till 50 overs to increase your average [ e.g Dhoni 25%]. This we are talking about tests where Imran used to come at 6 or 7 and has to bat with the tail to win or save/draw the match and in his era Pakistan's batting was not that strong that they declared every second innings.

Also he was Playing Odis in that Period [ 1980-1990 ] which bradman never even heard of in his era.

Matches 140

Batting avg 35 [ in a completely bowlers dominated era ]
Bowling avg 24

His test stats alone can be matched with Bradman's , I have provided his stats with a bigger sample size than bradman's . Now kindly if you can show me any other player's stats with a sample size equal to 50 matches [ that can match his performance ] then it would be really helpful.

 

[giri26]

We call bradman the greatest on the basis of the 52 matches that he played and averaged 99 with the bat .You are saying that imran does not have have the stats to match bradman . Lets analyze his stats from 1980 to 1990.

Matches Played 55
Batting average 47
Bowling Average 19 [ can be considered equal to 53 as a batsman ]

And do not even talk about not outs , this is not odis where you can remain not not till 50 overs to increase your average [ e.g Dhoni 25%]. This we are talking about tests where Imran used to come at 6 or 7 and has to bat with the tail to win or save/draw the match and in his era Pakistan's batting was not that strong that they declared every second innings.

Also he was Playing Odis in that Period [ 1980-1990 ] which bradman never even heard of in his era.

Matches 140

Batting avg 35 [ in a completely bowlers dominated era ]
Bowling avg 24

His test stats alone can be matched with Bradman's , I have provided his stats with a bigger sample size than bradman's . Now kindly if you can show me any other player's stats with a sample size equal to 50 matches [ that can match his performance ] then it would be really helpful.

Again these are selective period you are pulling up the stats for. Do you think that 20 years from now, if someone is looking at Imran as a player would specifically pull 1980-90 and assume that he was the greatest cricketer of all time? I don't think anyone is going to do that. Imran made his test debut in 1971 and ODI debut in 1974. Anyone looking at his stats will look at his overall record. Thats why I said that even if we conclude in this forum that he is the greatest ever cricketer, it will never stand the test of time and in 20 years time if someone bring up the same conversation, they will not do the same sort of cherry picking you have done to prove Imran is a great. Thats where lies the problem of trying to say someone is the greatest. There can never be one greatest ever player who will stand the test of time. Bradman will as his average is freakish and is almost impossible to emulate. You cannot say the same for other players.

 

[saadsahabjee]

Again these are selective period you are pulling up the stats for. Do you think that 20 years from now, if someone is looking at Imran as a player would specifically pull 1980-90 and assume that he was the greatest cricketer of all time? I don't think anyone is going to do that. Imran made his test debut in 1971 and ODI debut in 1974. Anyone looking at his stats will look at his overall record. Thats why I said that even if we conclude in this forum that he is the greatest ever cricketer, it will never stand the test of time and in 20 years time if someone bring up the same conversation, they will not do the same sort of cherry picking you have done to prove Imran is a great. Thats where lies the problem of trying to say someone is the greatest. There can never be one greatest ever player who will stand the test of time. Bradman will as his average is freakish and is almost impossible to emulate. You cannot say the same for other players.

This is not imran's fault that Bradman just played 52 matches and that too against 1 or 2 teams.You are saying that these selective stats does not matter, ok then would you like to show me selective stats of some other players equal to 50 or more matches that can match Imran's performance.[Forget about greatest ]

Also his overall record is pretty damn excellent as compared to other players

Tests:

Bowling average: 22 - Very good or excellent according to his era ? Yes
Batting average : 37 - Good or very good according to his era ? Yes

Odis:

Batting average : 35 - Very good or excellent according to his era ? Yes
Bowling average : 26 - Good or very good according to his era? Yes

where as Sobers bowling average of 34 with a Sr of 91 is not even debatable .

 

[giri26]

This is not imran's fault that Bradman just played 52 matches and that too against 1 or 2 teams.You are saying that these selective stats does not matter, ok then would you like to show me selective stats of some other players equal to 50 or more matches that can match Imran's performance.[Forget about greatest ]

Also his overall record is pretty damn excellent as compared to other players

Tests:

Bowling average: 22 - Very good or excellent according to his era ? Yes
Batting average : 37 - Good or very good according to his era ? Yes

Odis:

Batting average : 35 - Very good or excellent according to his era ? Yes
Bowling average : 26 - Good or very good according to his era? Yes

where as Sobers bowling average of 34 with a Sr of 91 is not even debatable .

I am just saying that his overall stats will not make him automatically greatest player of all time. Just being an all rounder does not mean that he needs to be the greatest player. It depends on how a player influenced and contributed to his team and great players do that. There are players who have done equally or better on other era's too. Sobers and Kallis were batting allrounders. so they did their jobs as a batting allrounders. Averaging 55+ with the bat and under 35 with the ball is great for a batting all rounder. For a bowling all rounder greatness is averaging 30+ with the bat and under 25 with the ball. Imran ticks that box. He probably is the greatest bowling all rounder in the world and best all rounder of all time from the subcontinent. But that does not make him the greatest of all time.

 

[Buffet]

I agree his peers might have had inferior record but we aren't talking about Imran being greater than his peers, we are telling he is greatest of all time. If that is the case we need to compare him with captains of all era's and players of all era's.

Who said that Border and his peers had an inferior % in wins as captain?


IK has 29% of wins in his career as captain. IK has 5 away wins as captain in 26 Tests - making it 19% wins.

Border has 34% of win in his career as captain. Border has 13 away wins as captain in 42 Test - Making it 30% wins.

You also had Clive Lloyd with 46% away wins & 51% career wins.

Llyod and Border, both inherited a very weak team. Llyod made the team strongest and Border left a team which became the strongest. Both did a fantastic job as captain to leave a great culture and left a team which dominated cricket. Calling their record and performance as inferior seems ridiculous. Lloyd had stronger talents but that was not the case with Border. Anyway, both started with a weak team.

 

[giri26]

Who said that Border and his peers had an inferior % in wins as captain?


IK has 29% of wins in his career as captain. IK has 5 away wins as captain in 26 Tests - making it 19% wins.

Border has 34% of win in his career as captain. Border has 13 away wins as captain in 42 Test - Making it 30% wins.

You also had Clive Lloyd with 46% away wins & 51% career wins.

Llyod and Border, both inherited a very weak team. Llyod made the team strongest and Border left a team which became the strongest. Both did a fantastic job as captain to leave a great culture and left a team which dominated cricket. Calling their record and performance as inferior seems ridiculous. Lloyd had stronger talents but that was not the case with Border. Anyway, both started with a weak team.

I did not say that. It was said by the other poster. I just they might have had as I did not look at the stats.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[ChachaCricket]

A simple question - How many runs did Sachin score by that incident of him tampering with the ball? Another question, Imran openly confessed in his autobiography that he used to regularly tamper with the ball. So how many wickets did Imran take in his career by tampering with the ball?

He also openly admits of his peers tampering the ball, so how many wickets did they take due to ball tampering?

Also how many times was SA(during Steyn's career) not caught ball tampering? Probably every home match they played.

Every team tampers with the ball in one way or another. Reverse swing was ball tampering until the whites learned how to do it. Seam lifting had become an acceptable practice but reverse swing was ball tampering. How convenient.

 

[tempus123]

There goes my favorite cricketer and his poster on my wall argument...out of the window!

When Pakistanis do it they are cheats, when Indians do it, they are wrongly accused...maana bhai paisa bolta hai magar sharam bhi koi cheeze hoti hai, you know what that means?

Rubbish argument. Having a poster is different from being a fanboy who can't see the obvious difference b/w cheating and mistakes.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

5 pages worth of total subjectivity, with green vehemently praising someone, and blues vehemently trying to oppose the praise.

These threads serve nothing but flame wars.

Chest humping about Sachin or Imran imo is the worst of threads in Pakpassion.

No one will convince the other of their beliefs.

End of story.

 

[tempus123]

5 pages worth of total subjectivity, with green vehemently praising someone, and blues vehemently trying to oppose the praise.

These threads serve nothing but flame wars.

Chest humping about Sachin or Imran imo is the worst of threads in Pakpassion.

No one will convince the other of their beliefs.

End of story.

I think everything is subjective, and that's the beauty of the discussion. Otherwise we all would be reading a manual and follow the greatness parameter. Why is there a forum at all ?

 

[Dr_Bassim]

I think everything is subjective, and that's the beauty of the discussion. Otherwise we all would be reading a manual and follow the greatness parameter. Why is there a forum at all ?

Everyone is subjective but willing to change and be objective when it comes to other cricketers.

When it comes to Sachin or Imran most people cannot be budged from their positions.

When we already know the answers to green vs blue...

What is the point of meandering on for 25 pages, and trying to bluntly enforce opinions on people whose life is filled with misery anyway?

 

[tempus123]

Everyone is subjective but willing to change and be objective when it comes to other cricketers.

When it comes to Sachin or Imran most people cannot be budged from their positions.

When we already know the answers to green vs blue...

What is the point of meandering on for 25 pages, and trying to bluntly enforce opinions on people whose life is filled with misery anyway?

No one is forcing their opinion on others, one would be delusional to believe he can convince someone else. All we are trying here is to put forth our viewpoint and dissect the others' possible flaws in logic.

The discussion of who is the greatest cricketer of all time, doesn't have objective of proving one as the best, it's impossible, but to gain insight into various careers, short stories, stats, and celebrating them. Meanwhile the fanboy brigades have their agenda to push their favourite players in, which is fair in my opinion..

By the way, it was not Sachin Vs Imran.. there are many other players who were discussed and rated by various posters as being higher than both.

One thing is for sure.. the thread's title has been proven wrong and now people are arguing over whether Imran was 4th or 5th best player of all time.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

No one is forcing their opinion on others, one would be delusional to believe he can convince someone else. All we are trying here is to put forth our viewpoint and dissect the others' possible flaws in logic.

The discussion of who is the greatest cricketer of all time, doesn't have objective of proving one as the best, it's impossible, but to gain insight into various careers, short stories, stats, and celebrating them. Meanwhile the fanboy brigades have their agenda to push their favourite players in, which is fair in my opinion..

By the way, it was not Sachin Vs Imran.. there are many other players who were discussed and rated by various posters as being higher than both.

One thing is for sure.. the thread's title has been proven wrong and now people are arguing over whether Imran was 4th or 5th best player of all time.

Well basically it started as is Imran Khan the Greatest Cricketer of All time ( a complete fanboyish OP thread)

Moving to

No, He is second best, Only Sobers is Better.... ( by some people)

Moving to ....

No wait, there are some others like Bradman, Richards, so he must be 3rd or 4th best


Moving to ....

No wait, he wasn't that good in ODI's as in Tests.... So he can't really be the best in the World... Asian best perhaps?

Moving to....

Well there is Sachin you know, who is better as an Asian best compared to him... ( Wackos, weirdoes, desperadoes, fanboys, idols, fanatics all jump into the thread at this point)....

If you managed to note the trend, it is rapidly now....

If Imran is better than Sachin.. . Inevitable when threads like these pop up.

Try making an innocent thread if you don't believe me.

 

[tempus123]

Well basically it started as is Imran Khan the Greatest Cricketer of All time ( a complete fanboyish OP thread)

Moving to

No, He is second best, Only Sobers is Better.... ( by some people)

Moving to ....

No wait, there are some others like Bradman, Richards, so he must be 3rd or 4th best


Moving to ....

No wait, he wasn't that good in ODI's as in Tests.... So he can't really be the best in the World... Asian best perhaps?

Moving to....

Well there is Sachin you know, who is better as an Asian best compared to him... ( Wackos, weirdoes, desperadoes, fanboys, idols, fanatics all jump into the thread at this point)....

If you managed to note the trend, it is rapidly now....

If Imran is better than Sachin.. . Inevitable when threads like these pop up.

Try making an innocent thread if you don't believe me.

Ha ha ha.. you are right.

Add to it that one fanboy brigade accusing the other of being obsessed with their favourite player.. ignoring the irony that they themselves are into this thread because their own favourite player was rated below by others.

 

[Belawal2014]

Oh bhai, ab to jaan chor do Imran ki.

 

[tempus123]

Would still be good enough to make the team as a specialist batsman in the top 7 - the only cricketer you can say for his weaker discipline.

This is false, Miller would have made it, Botham and Kapil would have made it.

Kallis and Sobers would have made it to any reasonable team as 2nd tier bowlers.

 

[tempus123]

He won the worldcup for his team as a batsman , what more do you want ??

How ?

 

[Bilal7]

Well basically it started as is Imran Khan the Greatest Cricketer of All time ( a complete fanboyish OP thread)

Moving to

No, He is second best, Only Sobers is Better.... ( by some people)

Moving to ....

No wait, there are some others like Bradman, Richards, so he must be 3rd or 4th best


Moving to ....

No wait, he wasn't that good in ODI's as in Tests.... So he can't really be the best in the World... Asian best perhaps?

Moving to....

Well there is Sachin you know, who is better as an Asian best compared to him... ( Wackos, weirdoes, desperadoes, fanboys, idols, fanatics all jump into the thread at this point)....

If you managed to note the trend, it is rapidly now....

If Imran is better than Sachin.. . Inevitable when threads like these pop up.

Try making an innocent thread if you don't believe me.

Nothing is worse than someone going on a rant about how people shouldn't discuss a certain topic. You made you point, so if you have nothing more to add here, refrain from posting and taking this off-topic.

The only one with a life full of misery here, seems to be you.

 

[Bilal7]

In one of the Ashes matches (I think the 4th one where Stokes got his 6-fer) Stokes was getting way more swing than any other bowler. Should we assume that he was ball-tampering?

That was conventional swing. Was Sachin getting the ball to reverse or was it conventional too?

A simple question - How many runs did Sachin score by that incident of him tampering with the ball? Another question, Imran openly confessed in his autobiography that he used to regularly tamper with the ball. So how many wickets did Imran take in his career by tampering with the ball?

We don't know. We don't know.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Nothing is worse than someone going on a rant about how people shouldn't discuss a certain topic. You made you point, so if you have nothing more to add here, refrain from posting and taking this off-topic.

The only one with a life full of misery here, seems to be you.

Lol, Cheer up.

At least people consider you seriously.

 

[Bilal7]

Lol at Imran fanboys.. comparing a proven and self admitted cheater to the one against whom the charge is not of cheating. I am sure the same fanboys didn't consider Ajmal a chucker either.. and had Imran not gone on record saying it, they would have denied Imran cheated at all..

At least one of them was honest and acceptes his guilt. The other made an entire country take up arms and we should thank the ICC for making up the "Sachin was cleaning an already clean ball" excuse in order to stop a Nuclear World War.

 

[tempus123]

At least one of them was honest and acceptes his guilt. The other made an entire country take up arms and we should thank the ICC for making up the "Sachin was cleaning an already clean ball" excuse in order to stop a Nuclear World War.

Too bad ICC didn't consider it fit enough to consult experts like you before deciding the charge against a cheater.

 

[Bilal7]

Too bad ICC didn't consider it fit enough to consult experts like you before deciding the charge against a cheater.

Too bad they considered experts that think like you and couldn't say what they see. Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion so I have nothing more to add to this cheating topic.

 

[tempus123]

There is simply no motive for Tendulkar himself to do the tampering. He was not the captain, neither the premier bowler.. if you believe he was risking all his image and goodwill of fans back home and around the world just to get a few wickets himself in the next over he was going to bowl, you hold him in very high regard then.

A selfish cricketer who sometimes played slow risking his team's fortunes to get his own hundred, would not sacrifice his image for team's purpose, and before people jump on me saying he was not selfish, I wouldn't answer in this thread, as such discussion will derail it. Better open a new thread to prove me wrong.. Sachin did in fact play slow at least once to put his own hundred interest first than team's.

For all his faults, you can never accuse Imran to be "selfish" in that sense.

 

[tempus123]

Too bad they considered experts that think like you and couldn't say what they see. Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion so I have nothing more to add to this cheating topic.

Your point is flawed. You can always accuse ICC or any authority of bias and use your own judgment to arrive at anything.. this way nothing can be proven.

Not saying ICC isn't biased at times, but using this premise to thrash each and every decision by them is not right.

Murali is a chucker, because ICC didn't have guts to ban him.
Ajmal is not a chucker because ICC was unfair to Asians.
Tendulkar is a cheater because ICC didn't have guts to go against India.
Inzamam protested against the charge of tampering the ball by his team, and there people didn't say he was holding ICC by ransom by boycotting the match.. but the logic was the same.

By the way, India didn't protest against Tendulkar decision only, it was six players' banned and that's why it was backlash at home.. ICC didn't budge and didn't allow Sehwag to play despite enormous BCCI pressure..

 

[mudussir khawer]

yes really IMRAN KHAN is the best cricketer ever in PAKISTAN cricket
He won the world cup for PAKISTAN.

 

[Haroon786]

This is false, Miller would have made it, Botham and Kapil would have made it.

Kallis and Sobers would have made it to any reasonable team as 2nd tier bowlers.

Botham and Kapil average in the low 30s which wouldn't be good enough for a batsman perhaps a no 8 may suffice with that average though. Miller didn't play enough Tests otherwise I'm sure his average would go down.

Kallis and Sobers as I've previously mentioned would only be good enough as 4th seamers and as most teams carry one spinner in their ranks at the least, 3 seamers is all that is required and hence they wouldn't be able make the team.

 

[OS_89]

Botham and Kapil average in the low 30s which wouldn't be good enough for a batsman perhaps a no 8 may suffice with that average though. Miller didn't play enough Tests otherwise I'm sure his average would go down.

Kallis and Sobers as I've previously mentioned would only be good enough as 4th seamers and as most teams carry one spinner in their ranks at the least, 3 seamers is all that is required and hence they wouldn't be able make the team.

Why? I don't think it would be at all.

Pretty clear to me that while Imran was a far better bowler,Miller was definitely a better batsman. Don't see why his average would go down if he played more. He averaged 49 in an FC career with high quality opposition. 49 average with 41 hundreds in 226 matches. Regardless of his average in Test cricket being a minuscule amount lower than Imran, he was superior with the bat. Batted higher up the order, could change gears and attack consistently , got bigger scores, etc.

 

[Bilal7]

Your point is flawed. You can always accuse ICC or any authority of bias and use your own judgment to arrive at anything.. this way nothing can be proven.

Not saying ICC isn't biased at times, but using this premise to thrash each and every decision by them is not right.

Murali is a chucker, because ICC didn't have guts to ban him.
Ajmal is not a chucker because ICC was unfair to Asians.
Tendulkar is a cheater because ICC didn't have guts to go against India.
Inzamam protested against the charge of tampering the ball by his team, and there people didn't say he was holding ICC by ransom by boycotting the match.. but the logic was the same.

By the way, India didn't protest against Tendulkar decision only, it was six players' banned and that's why it was backlash at home.. ICC didn't budge and didn't allow Sehwag to play despite enormous BCCI pressure..

I don't consider either of Ajmal or Murali, chuckers. Ajmal is banned yes, but he was bowling 100% legally before his ban. Would Murali have been banned under the new system? I don't care, he was the GOAT as far as spinners are concerned, for me, and I'm glad he wasn't.

Inzamam took a stand and I forget if there was any proof that the Pakistanis had tampered with the ball. Taking a stand like that and forfeiting a game in protest showed how much he cared about the integrity and honesty of his team and I respect him for that.

 

[Bilal7]

There is simply no motive for Tendulkar himself to do the tampering. He was not the captain, neither the premier bowler.. if you believe he was risking all his image and goodwill of fans back home and around the world just to get a few wickets himself in the next over he was going to bowl, you hold him in very high regard then.

A selfish cricketer who sometimes played slow risking his team's fortunes to get his own hundred, would not sacrifice his image for team's purpose, and before people jump on me saying he was not selfish, I wouldn't answer in this thread, as such discussion will derail it. Better open a new thread to prove me wrong.. Sachin did in fact play slow at least once to put his own hundred interest first than team's.

For all his faults, you can never accuse Imran to be "selfish" in that sense.

Was Faf du Plessis, the captain or the premier strike bowler? Did he have any wish to taint his image, knowing full well that people wouldn't haiild his wrong-doings but actually criticize him for it?

"For all his faults" Please tell me about all these faults of your "favourite cricketer".

 

[tempus123]

I don't consider either of Ajmal or Murali, chuckers. Ajmal is banned yes, but he was bowling 100% legally before his ban. Would Murali have been banned under the new system? I don't care, he was the GOAT as far as spinners are concerned, for me, and I'm glad he wasn't.

Inzamam took a stand and I forget if there was any proof that the Pakistanis had tampered with the ball. Taking a stand like that and forfeiting a game in protest showed how much he cared about the integrity and honesty of his team and I respect him for that.

But the ICC being weak can be applied in all the scenario. You may not have said it but we have enough people on this forum itself who have claimed Murali was a chucker and ICC was weak in not banning him.

It's always a safe excuse to pull anyone down. If ICC banned him, see I told you, it is proven he cheated. If ICC didn't ban him, see I told you, ICC was weak.

 

[tempus123]

Was Faf du Plessis, the captain or the premier strike bowler? Did he have any wish to taint his image, knowing full well that people wouldn't haiild his wrong-doings but actually criticize him for it?

"For all his faults" Please tell me about all these faults of your "favourite cricketer".

"For all his faults" is figure of speech, but to take the literal meaning.. yes, the cheating of ball tampering, and doing it intentionally, and not only once but repeatedly.

I am not aware of Faf's conditions so can't comment on him, but my point still stands.. it was not used as a proof by the way, but speculative motivations.

 

[Bilal7]

"For all his faults" is figure of speech, but to take the literal meaning.. yes, the cheating of ball tampering, and doing it intentionally, and not only once but repeatedly.

I am not aware of Faf's conditions so can't comment on him, but my point still stands.. it was not used as a proof by the way, but speculative motivations.

Faf's case was very similar to Sachin's. Minus the drama and whitewashing. You might find it interesting if you look it up.

 

[tempus123]

Faf's case was very similar to Sachin's. Minus the drama and whitewashing. You might find it interesting if you look it up.

Whitewashing is your assumption, it's not a fact. The fact is Imran was a proven and repeated cheater, while Sachin was not even considered for cheating punishment.

 

[tempus123]

Botham and Kapil average in the low 30s which wouldn't be good enough for a batsman perhaps a no 8 may suffice with that average though. Miller didn't play enough Tests otherwise I'm sure his average would go down.

Kallis and Sobers as I've previously mentioned would only be good enough as 4th seamers and as most teams carry one spinner in their ranks at the least, 3 seamers is all that is required and hence they wouldn't be able make the team.

South Africa which was one of the best bowling attacks in the world found it fit to have Kallis as first change.. would like to know which teams would reject him outright ?

 

[Bilal7]

Whitewashing is your assumption, it's not a fact. The fact is Imran was a proven and repeated cheater, while Sachin was not even considered for cheating punishment.

It is a fact that Sachin was tampering with the ball. You only need one eye and 10% of your brain to verify this fact. Also, not worshiping Sachin helps.

 

[Bilal7]

South Africa which was one of the best bowling attacks in the world found it fit to have Kallis as first change.. would like to know which teams would reject him outright ?

They picked Kallis as a batsman. He was already in their team so they could use him as they willed. Would he be picked as a pure third seamer? Nope.

 

[tempus123]

It is a fact that Sachin was tampering with the ball. You only need one eye and 10% of your brain to verify this fact. Also, not worshiping Sachin helps.

View attachment 60681

Again, photo or video doesn't PROVE anything. You need to avoid hating Sachin to see that ICC or umpires did not find him guilty.

 

[tempus123]

They picked Kallis as a batsman. He was already in their team so they could use him as they willed. Would he be picked as a pure third seamer? Nope.

But if they wanted, they could use a better third seamer, couldn't they ? Well I am not hung up on Kallis being 1st change in SA, but since he was their 1st change bowler due to being a good batsman, in many other weaker teams he could walk in as 1st change at least easily.

 

[tempus123]

To me, neither Kallis nor Imran was a true all rounder. You need to demand not only your place in the team, but be sure of your place in the team on each of the skills alone.

Andrew Flintoff, albeit for his injury-prone short career, defined to a major extent, what a true all rounder should look like. He could keep both batsmen and bowlers in the opposition awake.

His 2005 Ashes performance showed that he was a consistent threat as no. 5-6 batsman, and was a front line bowler.

Honorable mention must also go to Chris Cairns.

 

[IndianWillow]

Sachin did cheat. Even as a massive Sachin fan I agree. He tampered with the seam. He was lifting it to get it to be more pronounced. Very next over Tendulkar started bowling massive reverse swingers somehow. Coincidence? No way.

Even Tony Greig, as big a Sachin fan as can be, said it was clear he tampered.

Will there be a bowler who has never done something to the ball? I doubt it. Under the watchful eyes of the cameras it is just that harder to evade detection these days. Tampering of some kind coexists with cricket - only the degree varies.

 

[Robert]

To me, neither Kallis nor Imran was a true all rounder. You need to demand not only your place in the team, but be sure of your place in the team on each of the skills alone.

Andrew Flintoff, albeit for his injury-prone short career, defined to a major extent, what a true all rounder should look like. He could keep both batsmen and bowlers in the opposition awake.

His 2005 Ashes performance showed that he was a consistent threat as no. 5-6 batsman, and was a front line bowler.

Honorable mention must also go to Chris Cairns.

Imran was good enough to play as a batter alone, and sometimes did.

I wouldn't put Flintoff and Cairns anywhere near him as bowlers, and a bit behind him as batters. Though Flintoff was a much better catcher than Imran.

 

[IndianWillow]

To me, neither Kallis nor Imran was a true all rounder. You need to demand not only your place in the team, but be sure of your place in the team on each of the skills alone.

Andrew Flintoff, albeit for his injury-prone short career, defined to a major extent, what a true all rounder should look like. He could keep both batsmen and bowlers in the opposition awake.

His 2005 Ashes performance showed that he was a consistent threat as no. 5-6 batsman, and was a front line bowler.

Honorable mention must also go to Chris Cairns.

Imran could play in the Pakistani side as a pure batsman alone. At least since the late 70s. Among the four all rounders, Imran and Botham had better test match standard batting technique, though Kapil and Botham were better stroke makers compared to Imran. Imran's batting is a bit overrated on this forum (not surprisingly, this is PakPassion!), but he was nevertheless a good test batsman and was probably the third or fourth best batsman in the team he played.

 

[#GreenRoars]

At least one of them was honest and acceptes his guilt. The other made an entire country take up arms and we should thank the ICC for making up the "Sachin was cleaning an already clean ball" excuse in order to stop a Nuclear World War.

And do you think sachin fans will agree? Now if i tell them that Gilly questioned sachin's honestly in his book, they will start hating Gilly too

 

[Scrolln]

There is no cricketer who is head and shoulders above the rest apart from Don Bradman, even then it can be argued that he faced timid opponents compared to the 70's,80's or 90's.

There is no clear cut greatest cricketer of all time in my book, just opinions.

 

[tempus123]

Imran could play in the Pakistani side as a pure batsman alone. At least since the late 70s. Among the four all rounders, Imran and Botham had better test match standard batting technique, though Kapil and Botham were better stroke makers compared to Imran. Imran's batting is a bit overrated on this forum (not surprisingly, this is PakPassion!), but he was nevertheless a good test batsman and was probably the third or fourth best batsman in the team he played.

Yes, but my standard for all rounders are a bit higher. You need to be able to create fear in the opposition based on either of your skills.

 

[tempus123]

Imran was good enough to play as a batter alone, and sometimes did.

I wouldn't put Flintoff and Cairns anywhere near him as bowlers, and a bit behind him as batters. Though Flintoff was a much better catcher than Imran.

Sorry, that's not what I mean as an allrounder, as someone who can play in the team as a batter alone, but to be able to worry the opposition as a serious threat based on either.

Flintoff may not be as good a batter, because he was injury prone and also didn't have a long career.. but impact wise, he could play both roles in terms of match winning, and such players deserve the tag. He doesn't have to be an "overall" better batsman or bowler than either.. but having ability to take 3-4 wickets and scoring 50 in the same match will create fear in opposition.

 

[Hitman]

It is a fact that Sachin was tampering with the ball. You only need one eye and 10% of your brain to verify this fact. Also, not worshiping Sachin helps.

View attachment 60681

He did tamper with the ball, plain and simply. And he got away with it because of who he was, which was a farce really.

 

[IndianWillow]

Yes, but my standard for all rounders are a bit higher. You need to be able to create fear in the opposition based on either of your skills.

All rounder can be one of:
Batting all rounder
Balanced all rounder
Bowling all rounder

Not all these three classes of all rounders can fit into one definition of an all rounder. Bowling all rounders usually don't put fear in the opposition with their batting. Batting all rounders usually don't put fear in the opposition with their bowling. Balanced all rounders are able to do both (but they may still have a stronger suite) and Imran was one of the best in this category. Any batsman averaging 40+ (over an entire decade) is a serious threat to the opposition and no opponent takes these batsmen lightly. Very few all rounders have been world class in both skills, and the very few who managed it could not sustain that excellence except over short periods. The high standard all rounders that you speak of, probably never existed.

 

[tempus123]

All rounder can be one of:
Batting all rounder
Balanced all rounder
Bowling all rounder

Not all these three classes of all rounders can fit into one definition of an all rounder. Bowling all rounders usually don't put fear in the opposition with their batting. Batting all rounders usually don't put fear in the opposition with their bowling. Balanced all rounders are able to do both (but they may still have a stronger suite) and Imran was one of the best in this category. Any batsman averaging 40+ (over an entire decade) is a serious threat to the opposition and no opponent takes these batsmen lightly. Very few all rounders have been world class in both skills, and the very few who managed it could not sustain that excellence except over short periods. The high standard all rounders that you speak of, probably never existed.

Actually they existed. Flintoff was definitely one.. but he didn't sustain it for long to be recognized as a serious all rounder. He used to take top order batsmen out, and was feared for having the ability to take the match away with the bat. Ashes 2005, he displayed this skill.. too bad he couldn't carry it on longer. One of the most properly hyped English player of that brief period.

Average is not everything, that can be made by scoring useless runs too. Being able to take a match away on your own means something even if you are inconsistent and fail in other matches to ruin your average.

 

[Sidilicious]

One of the things people forget is the lack of cricket Keith Miller had due to the WWII.

He started playing Test cricket at the age of 27!

Him and Imran have similar averages, both in Batting and bowling, but his batting average in First Class was nearly 48. I believe that would be a differentiating factor.

In the end, as far as I see it this is how it goes

Sobers is the greatest Batting All Rounder

The spot for the Balanced all rounder is very tight. Miller trumps Imran by a bit as an all-rounder IMHO due to his FC exploits and the fact that he lost a huge part of his career die to WWII.

So, Balanced All rounder goes to Miller.

I would like to consider Imran as the greatest bowling All rounder.

Over all
1) Sobers ( I believe his batting exploits were so great that he deserves to be at the top)
2) Miller
3) Imran
4) Botham
5) Haddlee
6) Kapil
7) Kallis

 

[Sidilicious]

Everyone is subjective but willing to change and be objective when it comes to other cricketers.

When it comes to Sachin or Imran most people cannot be budged from their positions.

When we already know the answers to green vs blue...

What is the point of meandering on for 25 pages, and trying to bluntly enforce opinions on people whose life is filled with misery anyway?

I think you will find many Greens admitting that IK is definitely not the greatest cricketer.

You will also find many Blues supporting IK in this thread (Indian Willow is one of them)

 

[jimbob5]

Shameful that Sachin would not stand up for Denness by speaking on his behalf & that the ICC just caved in & effectively ended his career thanks to the antics of the BCCI & their television commentator/spokesman/shill Shastri.

 

[OS_89]

And do you think sachin fans will agree? Now if i tell them that Gilly questioned sachin's honestly in his book, they will start hating Gilly too

Sachin fans like me are agreeing that he tampered. No need to generalize.

But I do disagree with Gilchrist in his book. I believe Tendulkar was totally sincere in the monkeygate episode.

 

[OS_89]

Will there be a bowler who has never done something to the ball? I doubt it. Under the watchful eyes of the cameras it is just that harder to evade detection these days. Tampering of some kind coexists with cricket - only the degree varies.

I agree. People like Allan Donald have come out and said that tampering should be legal up to a point.

However, it is difficult to regulate. You donot want another guy biting a ball like Afridi and making a mockery of it. It's impossible to make a cricketing law which allows tampering but limits it to a certain degree. To what level to you limit it? Who sets the boundaries for how much you can disfigure the ball.?

To this effect I think the current scenario is close to ideal. It's pretty clear to me atleast that umpires have taken a lenient approach to tampering and that tampering still occurs quite frequently by teams wanting to get reverse. Referees give players doing it in an obvious way a rap on the wrist but hardly do you see allout bans unless it is truly something outrageous like biting the damn ball. It's a decent enough compromise where smart tamperers are still allowed to operate so as to keep alive one of the most exciting arts in bowling, while also making sure no one goes way over the line.

 

[Haroon786]

South Africa which was one of the best bowling attacks in the world found it fit to have Kallis as first change.. would like to know which teams would reject him outright ?

A bowler averaging in the mid 30's is too mediocre to be first change.

 

[tempus123]

Sachin fans like me are agreeing that he tampered. No need to generalize.

But I do disagree with Gilchrist in his book. I believe Tendulkar was totally sincere in the monkeygate episode.

Agreeing ? It's not an opinion-piece here. The fact is that he is not accused of tampering, doesn't matter what people "agree" to.

In monkeygate, Tendulkar bailed Bhajji out, due to friendship.. India were sore losers.. they lost Sydney Test and were worried about Bhajji.. threatening to boycott was childish.

 

[OS_89]

Agreeing ? It's not an opinion-piece here. The fact is that he is not accused of tampering, doesn't matter what people "agree" to.

He should have been booked for tampering but wasn't due to BCCI's pressure. Have no idea why you continue to ignore this quite obvious fact.

In monkeygate, whatever Tendulkar's story was, the aussies, especially Gilcrhist misconstrued the situation completely. Tendulkar, since the beginning to the end stuck to his story. But Mike Procter decided that Tendulkar could not have been close enough to hear what was said. Tendulkar insisted he was. During the appeal, Tendulkar still stuck to his guns and his story remained consistent (the only player who's story did not change, unlike Symonds and Harbhajan). But this time, the judge believed Sachin and judged that he was close enough to have heard what had happened.

This was the only difference , but somehow this was reported in the Aussie media as "Tendulkar changes his story from initially not hearing what was said to then saying he did hear". When in actuality he never changed his story. Procter just didn't believe him.

 

[OS_89]

A bowler averaging in the mid 30's is too mediocre to be first change.

Agree. He is a very good third seamer. Not good enough to be first change.

 

[tempus123]

Agree. He is a very good third seamer. Not good enough to be first change.

Third seamer usually is first change, isn't he ?

 

[tempus123]

He should have been booked for tampering but wasn't due to BCCI's pressure. Have no idea why you continue to ignore this quite obvious fact.

In monkeygate, whatever Tendulkar's story was, the aussies, especially Gilcrhist misconstrued the situation completely. Tendulkar, since the beginning to the end stuck to his story. But Mike Procter decided that Tendulkar could not have been close enough to hear what was said. Tendulkar insisted he was. During the appeal, Tendulkar still stuck to his guns and his story remained consistent (the only player who's story did not change, unlike Symonds and Harbhajan). But this time, the judge believed Sachin and judged that he was close enough to have heard what had happened.

This was the only difference , but somehow this was reported in the Aussie media as "Tendulkar changes his story from initially not hearing what was said to then saying he did hear". When in actuality he never changed his story. Procter just didn't believe him.

BCCI's pressure argument is pretty weak. It is based on wild assumption, not much different from BCCI influenced the DRS in Indo-Pak SF which disallowed Ajmal's wicket of Tendulkar.

 

[OS_89]

Third seamer usually is first change, isn't he ?

Haha typo. Meant fourth seamer/option.

 

[IndianWillow]

Actually they existed. Flintoff was definitely one.. but he didn't sustain it for long to be recognized as a serious all rounder. He used to take top order batsmen out, and was feared for having the ability to take the match away with the bat. Ashes 2005, he displayed this skill.. too bad he couldn't carry it on longer. One of the most properly hyped English player of that brief period.

Average is not everything, that can be made by scoring useless runs too. Being able to take a match away on your own means something even if you are inconsistent and fail in other matches to ruin your average.

So was Botham. Kapil could be very dangerous with the bat and ball too. Klusener too fits the bill. But these players are not recognized among the very best because they either had short peaks (and a long mediocre career) or not consistent enough. In effect, there were no all rounders who were feared in both batting and bowling at the same time, over a stretch of time. We don't call Kambli a great batsman inspite of an excellent short career - similarly Flintoff does not meet the definition of your serious all rounder.

 

[tempus123]

So was Botham. Kapil could be very dangerous with the bat and ball too. Klusener too fits the bill. But these players are not recognized among the very best because they either had short peaks (and a long mediocre career) or not consistent enough. In effect, there were no all rounders who were feared in both batting and bowling at the same time, over a stretch of time. We don't call Kambli a great batsman inspite of an excellent short career - similarly Flintoff does not meet the definition of your serious all rounder.

I don't think Klusener or Kallis would keep the opposition awake with their bowling. Flintoff did meet the criteria, because there was no big weakness in his game. Kambli example was flawed.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Sachin fans like me are agreeing that he tampered. No need to generalize.

But I do disagree with Gilchrist in his book. I believe Tendulkar was totally sincere in the monkeygate episode.

Yeah bro i know, i am biggest fan of Sachin Tendulkar to be honest, but some people which makes me to raise some points. Indeed, gilly was wrong no doubt.

 

[IndianWillow]

I don't think Klusener or Kallis would keep the opposition awake with their bowling. Flintoff did meet the criteria, because there was no big weakness in his game. Kambli example was flawed.

Klusener was a very good bowler. I have seen him bowl 150k thunderbolts and he could swing both ways. Perhaps you didn't realize that Klusener was a bowler to start with and began his journey as a bowler who batted as #11 batsman in FC cricket. He batted at the positions #9-10 when he began his international career. He began his test debut with a spectacular 8/64 (on a batting paradise, actually) against a strong Indian batting lineup and set up a famous and landslide victory at Kolkota. He even competed with Donald and was expected to become a leading pace bowler. In 1998, he sustained a serious ankle injury that reduced his pace considerably, so he stopped focusing on bowling and he started focusing more on batting and became a star batsman in 1999. Klusener had enormous ability with bat and ball, but his career was cut short by injury. He wasn't a slogger, he was more like Yuvraj - a clean striker of the ball - yet he could score very fast.

 

[Bilal7]

To me, neither Kallis nor Imran was a true all rounder. You need to demand not only your place in the team, but be sure of your place in the team on each of the skills alone.

Andrew Flintoff, albeit for his injury-prone short career, defined to a major extent, what a true all rounder should look like. He could keep both batsmen and bowlers in the opposition awake.

His 2005 Ashes performance showed that he was a consistent threat as no. 5-6 batsman, and was a front line bowler.

Honorable mention must also go to Chris Cairns.

It is absurd to say that Flintoff was a true all-rounder during his peak and then say that Imran wasn't. He averaged a bloody 50+ with the bat during the 10 years of his peak, where he was one of the best pacers in the world, if not the best, and is also Pakistan's and arguably Asia's greatest captain.

You are spouting pure rubbish here, I'm afraid. Imran might have some fanboys but you're one of his haters, posing as a fan.