The Independent Voice of West Indies Cricket

Message Board Archives

Ian Bishop Publicly Called Kemar Roach

 
Raggs 2022-06-21 19:25:42 

a great on an interview it's an insult to our greats. `He himself would have been a great if not for injuries. So please let's not be stupid in these times looking for greatness. Let's not forget Michael Holding, Andy Roberts, Joel Garner and Colin Croft left a lot of test wickets in the locker because of the Packer series. We could put easily another 50 wickets apiece on each of their tallies

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 19:32:49 

In reply to Raggs

Ian Bishop is entitled to a bit of Hyperbole..Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.Not a big deal.Move on, nothing to see here.

 
sudden 2022-06-21 19:37:24 

In reply to Dukes

So Dukes you think Roach should give back those wickets? How many are they anyway?

 
brians_da_best 2022-06-21 19:45:48 

In reply to Raggs

Roach, if he can stay fit, has another 100 wickets in him. Look at Anderson, at 40, he's still going strong.

Roach is only 34 and can okay 3 more years, considering he plays only one format.

If he ends with 350 wickets, would you call him a great?

 
Baje 2022-06-21 19:50:32 

In reply to Raggs
What makes a great..wickets..strike rates..average

 
imusic 2022-06-21 19:53:17 

In reply to Dukes

Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe

Unfair

Our greats feasted on the likes of Ken Rutherford, Gaekwad, Sandeep Patil, Jeff Crowe, Graeme Hick, Chris Broad etc.

Today’s NZ, Indian, and English teams have stronger batting lineups in general.

 
VoopsandOut 2022-06-21 19:57:55 

In reply to imusic

Precisely. We cant devalue a man's contribution because of his opposition. He still has to run in and bowl and get batsmen to play false shots. The same way, Bradman can be devalued because he did not play against certain teams. Roach has made an immense contribution. It is a matter of personal opinion if he is called great. We dont need to pull down everyone to our own levels. Jeez man.

 
tc1 2022-06-21 20:07:38 

Why Roach is not a great? Holding bowled at 90 mph, (132 ft /per sec sq) Kemar bowled at 90mph (132fT/per sec sq).
Holding has 249 wks, Kemar has 249 wks and counting.
Holding run an old ass Boycott, Kemar run a middle age Pointing, Kemar shoulder injuries preventing him from bowling at 90mph and resulted in him reinventing himself, had these injuries not occurred he would have passed Holding long ago.

Holding Bowled with 3 other greats, Kemar bowled with the Angel and Tino.

Kemar played against Bangladesh and Zim just like Lara, Shiv and Sarwan.
Kemar stats signified greatness, Go Kemar, March on to 300.

 
Raggs 2022-06-21 20:17:22 

In reply to Baje

What makes a great..wickets..strike rates..average
was you listening when Holding/ Roberts/Croft and Garner was dealing with the opposition and the likes of Alan Border fighting for survival from his arrival..Yuh serious?
Colin Croft was a great, yes with far less than Roach's haul..

 
Raggs 2022-06-21 20:19:47 

In reply to brians_da_best

f he ends with 350 wickets, would you call him a great?
great servant to West Indian cricket, yes but a great..no

 
imusic 2022-06-21 20:21:16 

In reply to tc1

Holding Bowled with 3 other greats, Kemar bowled with the Angel and Tino.

I know your intent is to disparage Gabriel by that statement.

Gabriel took 161 wickets in 56 test matches.

Same amount as Ian Bishop

Link Text

13th highest wicket taker in the history of West Indies cricket.

More than Jason Holder (142 in 56)
Wayne Daniel
Pedro Collins
Corey Collymore
Vanburn Holder etc.

 
sudden 2022-06-21 20:27:28 

In reply to tc1

There is a qualification.

You have to play on winning teams


Except Lara didn’t


I will have to check Dukes on this


I wonder whether McGrath or Anderson will have to discount their wickets against weak WI teams

 
tc1 2022-06-21 20:41:18 

In reply to imusic

Typical of you, Is the Angel and Tino equivalent to Robert, Croft and Big Bird as a supporting cast?


Stop being so narrow minded and trying to cast everything into disparaging Trini.

If Bish had not incur an injury, he would be an all-time great.

 
bird 2022-06-21 20:49:35 

In reply to brians_da_best
100 wickets I don't think so Roach should only play in the Caribbean

 
tc1 2022-06-21 20:54:21 

In reply to sudden


You can add the great Shiv, Gayle and the legend Samwell to the list.

We await the dukes' stats and analytics.

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 21:35:35 

In reply to sudden

How did this

Ian Bishop is entitled to a bit of Hyperbole..Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.Not a big deal.Move on, nothing to see here.


Trigger this

So Dukes you think Roach should give back those wickets? How many are they anyway?

 
InHindsight 2022-06-21 21:38:09 

If Kemar can maintain this for another two or so years yeah I'd count him among our greats


Some here facetious well

 
sudden 2022-06-21 21:40:56 

In reply to Dukes

The part about Banga and Zim. In addition to the reference about greats etc. The implication seems to be that becos Roach did, he is not a great hyperbole or not

 
Brerzerk 2022-06-21 21:55:17 

 
powen001 2022-06-21 21:59:41 

In reply to Raggs

ease off o the bad weed nah.

249 wickets ...in the middle of our Great Fast Bowlers pack and with quite a few more wickets to come...and you discounting and calling into question that he earned them?

naah Raggs...

same kind of thinking that refuses to accept that Jason Holder has been the WORLD #1 ALL ROUNDER for quite some time.

self loathing perhaps?

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 22:00:57 

In reply to sudden

I consider Hall,Roberts,Marshall,Holding,Garner,Croft,Ambrose and Walsh as greats.
Now if you think that Roach should be considered as in the same category as those guys, then I disagree with you.When considering people from different eras, you have to think about who they played against.

Has it dawned on you that West Indies is playing Bangladesh very often these days? The fact that back in the late 70's and early 80's we were playing Australia almost annually whereas now it has been 7 years since we played a test match against Australia.Do you think that if we were playing Australia instead of Bangladesh as frequently Roach would be on 249 wickets now?
Roach has played 10 test matches against Australia and 10 test matches against Bangladesh.He has 28 wickets at 39 against one and 41 wickets at 19 against the other.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2022-06-21 22:10:20 

In reply to Dukes

I have already told you the 4 prong played against some weak ass India, except Gavaskar; Australia, Except border; England, except Lamb but include 42 yr old Brian Close.

So yes there was no zimbabwe and Bangladesh, but some weak ass teams

Maybe we should tek way some of Lara, Shiv and Gayle runs...and all that Kohli, Root and Smith made against us and Zimbabwe and Bangadesh.

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 22:21:48 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

I have already told you the 4 prong played against some weak ass India, except Gavaskar; Australia, Except border; England, except Lamb but include 42 yr old Brian Close.



You want me to show you that the above teams were not as weak as these Bangladesh and Zimbabwe teams but I have no intention of wasting my time.You guys just throw out statements with zero evidence and I must provide facts to disprove your assertions.How about it being the other way around. I ASSERT that India,Australia and England as represented by those teams above were stronger than the recent iterations of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

 
imusic 2022-06-21 22:23:39 

In reply to Dukes

Be fair.

Australia then had good players

Redpath (earlier times)
Hookes
Kim Hughes
Chappel brothers
Border
Dyson
Etc

The OZ team today and of recent times is at least as formidable, if not more.

Yes we play Bangladesh about as often as we used to olay Oz back in the day.

But people also are fond of saying that todays game is skewed towards batsmen, meaning that it would be harder for bowlers to get wickets.

It could be said that Kemar bowled on much less bowler friendly wickets than Holding at al.

I’ve always said there should be categories of “great”

If Lara is great, and Vic is great and Sobers is great, and they most definitely are……how do you place a Everton Weekes, or a Greenidge or a Chanderpaul as great? They re not the same.

But the argument for that is that they are great players in their own right. And that’s true.

So the same would apply to Kemar Roach.

 
sudden 2022-06-21 22:24:57 

In reply to Dukes

Fair enough. That being the case wrt the teams we play against I don’t see us having many greats in the future if we continue to play second tier test cricket.

Should McGrath, Warne or Anderson discard their wickets against the WI?


How is Croft great? How many wickets does he have?

 
tc1 2022-06-21 22:41:50 

In reply to sudden


Can you ask Dukes if the great Sarwan should replace his score of 290 against Bangladesh?

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2022-06-21 22:44:00 

In reply to Dukes

So show the evidence that those Aussie and indian and England teams were better than bangladesh today, you say i lack evidence you show yours

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 22:44:59 

In reply to tc1

He would absolutely want to substitute his 261 against Bangladesh with a 100 against Australia in Australia.

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 22:47:19 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

I have been showing evidence on this board for YEARS.You like most people on this board do no such thing.You just assert something with nothing else.
Within the last month I have supplied numerous pieces of data to back up assertions.It is time you do the same.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2022-06-21 22:49:35 

In reply to Dukes

You, like everybody else state your opinions, but want us to accept as fact

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 23:03:28 

In reply to sudden

How is Croft great?


I suggest you examine Croft's test record series by series.Look at how the others did in those series.Then you should check the Wisden ratings points to see what his highest point ranking was and whether he was ever the # 1 bowler in the world.Check the batsmen he dismissed and compare to the others.
When you have done all that your question will be answered.

 
sudden 2022-06-21 23:57:54 

In reply to Dukes

How does that assist?

Arguably Croft could have been and in all probability would have been a great.

I don’t think he is one. Too short a career.

 
Dukes 2022-06-21 23:59:50 

In reply to sudden

Was George Headley Great?

 
sudden 2022-06-22 00:00:16 

In reply to Dukes

Debatable

And the brevity of Headley’s career was impacted by wars and the nature of the game at the time

Given those circumstances he will have been deemed a great.

Croft was a different ball game notwithstanding his returns up to the point he retired or was retired

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 00:28:32 

In reply to sudden

People tend to rate the current guy more highly than a guy from the distant past.He is fresh in the memory.I look at Anderson and Broad and there is no way I would rate them anywhere near Freddie Truman
I think you guys are too sensitive about Roach.He is the best since Walsh and Ambrose by some distance but do not compare him to Garner or Holding.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 01:09:39 

In reply to Dukes

No one is comparing Roach with Holding or Garner but there must be some defining gauge to measure what we refer to as ‘great’ when we speak to the returns and careers of a bowler

If we use wickets taken, as is the case, we cannot then go back to review which wickets were taken to so qualify the term ‘great’

The same benchmark at the same level, test cricket, must be the defined marker and thus if Holding qualifies based on that so does Roach

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 01:12:53 

In reply to sudden

So you are saying Roach is great but Bishop is not.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 01:14:34 

In reply to Dukes

I said what I just said.

I could ask you the same - are you saying that Croft is a great but Bishop is not?

 
doosra 2022-06-22 01:44:51 

overseas

31 matches
50 innings
72 wickets
average 38.6
Strike rate 68
2 5fers

that's at best an average return

what would that be equivalent to for a batter overseas?
hard to tell but perhaps an average of around 30-35 with 1 100?

Would we call a batter with an overseas average of that range a great?

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 02:44:05 

In reply to sudden

Here are a few matrices for effectiveness of a bowler
1.Wickets per test-4.62
2.Strike rate-i.e balls per wicket 49.32
3.Runs per wicket 23.30
4.Highest Wisden world ranking #1
5.Highest points-887

You could come up with your own

Get as many as you want and you will find that Colin Croft is right up there with every other West Indian fast bowler.

Everybody should know by now how I feel about Colin Croft the person but as a fast bowler he was clearly one of the most lethal.

 
Onionman0 2022-06-22 05:42:33 

In reply to imusic

Very good point .....Agree...

 
WICFan 2022-06-22 08:09:26 

Best West Indies bowler since Ambrose and Walsh retired.

Will he be remembered as a great - Yes.

Would he be in anyone's top 5 when it comes to West Indies best ever bowling attack options - No.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 09:58:43 

In reply to Dukes

before i reply may i ask again- are you saying that Croft is a 'great' but Bishop is not?

 
Raggs 2022-06-22 10:33:43 

Let me clear up something, Bishop said to Roach I'm gonna call you a great even though it might make you feel uncomfortable means he could be considered maybe a great to be in a debate, not a certainty

The quartet of Roberts/ Holding/ Garner/ Croft is one of the greatest combination of bowlers ever in test cricket history, some say it's the utmost best, while others will say without a spinner in that quartet it wasn't balanced so it cannot be the greatest

Of the four, I would say Colin Croft was the one who was the most effective in my eyes, I'm not a stats man but I could think his strike rate was above the other 3 so from that analysis, the Guyanese was a great, no doubts.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 10:45:15 

In reply to Raggs

what is your (Raggs) definition of a great?

 
Raggs 2022-06-22 11:09:21 

In reply to sudden

A Great is a cricketer who stands out above the ordinary that for a start. Wins games in tight situations, Makes a difference against top opposition, a consistent performer at that high level. Plus away from his home conditions he's still a major enough force. If you look back at his career, they will have at least 7 up to 10 or over that figure defining moments to easily remember.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 11:24:03 

In reply to Raggs

fair enough. your definition of course. is Bishop a great?

 
Raggs 2022-06-22 11:27:52 

In reply to sudden

no he wasn't he had the potential to be a great because of injuries he didn't make the grade.

 
sudden 2022-06-22 12:03:46 

Format
Test

Mat
43

Inns
76

Balls
8407

Runs
3909

Wkts
161

BBI
6/40

BBM
8/57

Ave
24.27

Econ
2.78

SR
52.2

4w
6

5w
6

10w
0




Format
Test

Mat
27

Inns
52

Balls
6165

Runs
2913

Wkts
125

BBI
8/29

BBM
9/95

Ave
23.30

Econ
2.83

SR
49.3

4w
7

5w
3

10w
0




the above is the career returns of two bowlers. one is being touted as a great, the other is not. based on the above who should be the great if any?

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 12:55:27 

In reply to sudden

1The most basic stat for a bowler.How often do you take a wicket? How many balls do you bowl before you take a wicket.
1.Marshall-------46.77
2.Croft----------49.32
3. Garner -------50.85
4.Holding-------50.92

All the following have been # 1 Bowler in the World at some point

1.Ambrose -----912
2.Marshall------910
3.Hall-----------898
4.Roberts-------891
5.Garner--------890
6.Croft----------887

Bowling average in test cricket

1.Marshall------20.95
2.Garner--------20.98
3.Ambrose------20.99
4.Croft----------23.30
5.Holding-------23.69

Croft played in 8 test series.He took the most wickets in 4 of them

1.WI vs Pakistan 1977
Croft 33 wickets,Garner 25 wickets

2.Australia vs WI 1979-80
Croft 16 wickets,Garner 14 wickets,Holding 14 wickets

3.Pakistan vs WI 1980-81
Croft 17 wickets,Clarke 14 wickets

4.WI vs England 1980-81
Croft 24 wickets, Holding 17 wickets

Most wickets in a 5 test series
1.Marshall 35 England 1988
2.Walsh 34 England 2000
3.Croft 33 Pakistan 1977
4.Ambrose 33 Australia 1992-93
5.Roberts 32 India 1974-75
6.Griffith 32 England 1963

It is my opinion that Croft does not disgrace himself in comparison to the others.
Do you disagree?

 
sudden 2022-06-22 13:05:22 

In reply to Dukes

correct, he doesnt disgrace himself. how about Bishop?

Bishop played 43 tests to Croft's 27. he took 161 wickets at 24.27, his strike rate was 52.2 and his best figures were 6/40.

yet Croft for you is a great but Bishop is not

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 13:42:57 

In reply to sudden

Bishop was a very good bowler but just was not quite a great

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 13:44:48 

In reply to sudden

Who do you rate higher Denis Lillee or Glen McGrath?

 
TanteMerle 2022-06-22 13:44:57 

At times I wonder how intelligent men post such nonsense

Yes Holding et al had better competition
(That is debatable of course)
With better bowling quartet applying pressure
Wickets are easier to come by....No?

With a soft bowling line up around you,
it is harder to dominate and get wickets
cause of lack of pressure....No?

One can argue that the West Indies fearsome foursome
complemented each other
and the batsmen were under constant pressure

When has Roach ever had three more pressure bowlers with him.
NEVER.. Always played on weak teams
I remember his first series with the strike team
He looked a cut above the rest

I remember Roach against RSA
He had them under pressure until an injury cut short his innings

All of the above had many misadventures,
whether is be Wars, injuries, bans ets.

You people have a tendency of cutting down your own
While bigging up foreigners.

Narine pelts, but Ashwin and bumrah bowls
Roach is not great cause of away record but Ashwin is great despite his
Holder is not #1 but Ashwin, no Stokes, no Jadeja, any non-west indian


Cricket conversations is a game of nuances
Everyone entitled to his/her opinion
But some of your here are just pathetic, and insular

I support the Ozzies.

I am a proud West Indian, but tired of the politics killing cricket,
that is why I switched a few years ago.

You need to support your Wondies players not just individual territory.


Keep all ya biases and prejudice and hatred aside
Roach is a great
Croft is a great
Bishop is a great
Headly is a great
SelfishPaul is great
Lara is Great etc...

rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes

 
sudden 2022-06-22 13:58:23 

In reply to Dukes

Glen McGrath, on sheer numbers and persistence.

Lillee for sheer pace


but McGrath.


if Croft is being considered a great so too should Bishop.

in my book, neither are. simply because they didnt attain the 249 or thereabouts wickets at under 30.

i am certain that both would have been great if they had been able to continue playing

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 14:02:11 

In reply to sudden

Reasonable

 
StumpCam 2022-06-22 14:04:41 

In reply to sudden

in my book, neither are. simply because they didnt attain the 249 or thereabouts wickets at under 30


Wouldn’t that be a wee bit more difficult if you are playing with 3 other greats on the same team???

 
sudden 2022-06-22 15:13:36 

In reply to StumpCam

you would think so but didnt our fast bowling greats played around the same time and attained those returns?

 
powen001 2022-06-22 15:30:42 

In reply to sudden

Should McGrath, Warne or Anderson discard their wickets against the WI?


Well played sah.

DUKES

I will charge you and the others with Romanticism.

Roach earned those...

If Cricket OZZie did not remove my videos of Roach tormenting Ponting then I would ask you to tell me if you did not see this eventually being the result of that glorious start against the Worlds best at the time.

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 16:11:21 

In reply to powen001

The question I am being asked is not whether Roach is a very good bowler.I know he is.It is whether he is a great bowler.
I can not agree that Roach is a great bowler with the statistics he has.

 
Khaga 2022-06-22 17:21:15 

In reply to TanteMerle

How the fugg is Ashwin coming into this?

 
bdaTryangle 2022-06-22 17:27:19 

Bringing in the "who played against who" argument seems counter-productive; the players can't control who their opponents are. We won't have West Indies playing Australia in Tests as frequently as they once did, that's the reality of international cricket for the forseeable future.

With Windies playing fewer and fewer Tests per calendar year, it's very unlikely we'll see someone approach Roach's milestone, much less any of the others.

 
doosra 2022-06-22 17:27:22 

In reply to TanteMerle

Dude
Ashwin gats 442 wickets ...about 200 more than Roach

And his overseas average is 31.8..a full 7 points below Roach's

If Roach had 400 wickets the discussion would be different

 
sudden 2022-06-22 17:41:43 

In reply to doosra

what about Croft? big grin

 
StumpCam 2022-06-22 17:43:11 

In reply to sudden

I think you all need to up the bar to 300 to enter any discussion of greatness in this modern era!
In the 4-Prong era it was only few players that surpassed the 300 tally.
Nowadays, you have numerous great bowlers who have bagged well beyond 400 wickets, a few who have exceeded 600.

So, in todays game 250 deserves a good in my book! razz

 
bdaTryangle 2022-06-22 18:22:27 

In international football, until Cristiano Ronaldo eclipsed the mark, Iran's Ali Daei held the record for most goals.

Not once has anybody ever suggested he is an all-time great striker. He's never been on anybody's Mount Rushmore of strikers.

I wouldn't worry too much about the label of 'great' when applied to Roach. The milestone is amazing, may never be reached by a West Indian player again, but nobody's going to claim he's an all-timer. Heck he probably doesn't even make a squad for an all-time Barbados XI as a sub.

 
nissan 2022-06-22 18:29:12 

Cricinfo's take

 
openning 2022-06-22 18:38:37 

In reply to TanteMerle
Kemar Roach will go into the Hall of Fame, that make him one of our greats.
Why would any smart person compare eras?

 
Barry 2022-06-22 18:53:35 

In reply to Raggs

Colin Croft was a great, yes with far less than Roach's haul..

If ah laugh, ah sh!t

razz

 
Scar 2022-06-22 18:57:01 

In reply to StumpCam That measure ment oif at least 300 seems a reasonable argument for those in this era (considering they have more Test nations today. There were basically 3, 4 or 5 Test teams in the old days and teams played once a year most times due to travel difficulties). Rach may yet get the 50 more to make 300 over the next two years if he lasts that long.

BTW Doosra - Ashwin is a spinner - inthis day and age he should be taking more than 350 wickets as a spinner to be a great regardless of competition. Just as Lance Gibbs is a great and on or above par compared to todays spinners due to the circumstances of his time -(no of Test nations and Test/tours played annually)

 
imusic 2022-06-22 19:02:01 

In reply to bdaTryangle

Heck he probably doesn't even make a squad for an all-time Barbados XI as a sub.
reply

Damn. That’s an interesting one.

If you had to pick an all time Bim XI, would Roach make that XI?

Not sure.

Bowlers would be

Marshall
Garner
Hall
Roach? Griffith? (on reputation)

I would have to say Roach

 
bdaTryangle 2022-06-22 19:32:35 

In reply to imusic

Depending on how you feel about Griffith, Clarke and Holder, it's a fair question. Marshall and Garner are locks and Hall a near-lock in my books. Didn't mean to go on a tangent there, and I like Roach a lot.

 
Brerzerk 2022-06-22 19:47:23 

In reply to imusic
Nonsense on many levels

 
doosra 2022-06-22 20:35:41 

In reply to sudden

simple, to be considered great you have to do it well, long enough

After 27 test matches (same as Croft) Jimmy Adams had a test average of 61... had he stop at 27, would anyone call him a great test batsman? maybe not...
he played a further 27 and his average dropped 20 points down to 41

Let's take a fast bowling analogy - Jasprit Bumrah has played 29 matches and taken 123 wickets @ 21.7 with 8 5fers (Croft had 3 5fers). His record is similar to Croft's in some ways, better in others. If Bumrah were to stop now for whatever reason, would anyone call him a great test match fast bowler? I am not sure. I wouldn't.

Longevity puts a lot of things right (either way - up or down)

 
sudden 2022-06-22 21:00:19 

In reply to doosra

Agreed

 
FanAttick 2022-06-22 21:04:28 

In reply to imusic

If you had to pick an all time Bim XI, would Roach make that XI?

Not sure.

Bowlers would be

Marshall
Garner
Hall
Roach? Griffith? (on reputation)

I would have to say Roach


My Top 4 Bajan All Time:

Marshall
Garner
Hall
*Patterson…








*Thompson the pilot lol

 
Scar 2022-06-22 21:29:02 

Fan you nuh like Charlie G ? Dukes how good was Griffith in your opinion. Some say he was as fast as Hall here and there.

 
Dukes 2022-06-22 21:31:46 

In reply to FanAttick

1.Hunte
2.Greenidge
3.Worrell(capt)
4.Weekes
5.Walcott
6.Sobers
7.Murray D.A(wkpr)
8.Holford
9.Marshall
10.Hall
11.Garner

 
FanAttick 2022-06-22 21:32:43 

In reply to Scar

Fan you nuh like Charlie G ? Dukes how good was Griffith in your opinion. Some say he was as fast as Hall here and there.


I was just joking…Griffith was a good bowler

 
FanAttick 2022-06-22 21:34:04 

In reply to Dukes

Fair enough…if we’re going with a 4-Prong I would have Roach over Holford - Sobers does the spinner role
Desmond Haynes (12th man)
Garner bats before Hall

 
b4u8me2 2022-06-22 22:48:14 

I believe people are confusing the word "great" with "greatest". It is silly to ask whether Roach would be in the top 5 all-time WI fast bowlers. While Roach would not be the greatest fast bowler the WI would have had, he is definitely a great of the game. He is on the verge of being only the sixth WI bowler to reach 250 test wickets. We seem to have a complex with calling any current player a great no matter their accomplishments. We call Desmond Haynes and Gordon Greenidge a great even though they achieved nothing in test matches as openers that Gayle hasn't. Their averages, number of hundreds etc are very similar. Same way we fail to recognise Roach as a great despite Walsh, Ambrose, Marshall and Garner being the only WI fast bowlers who has taken more wickets than Roach in test match cricket.

 
openning 2022-06-22 23:33:49 

In reply to imusic
Charlie MUST be included in all Barbados starting X!.
Roach may be part set of available for selection.
Videos and stats are not the same as watching these guys and following their careers in real time.
It is almost blasphemous to have an all time Barbados X1, without three Blues.
Sir Everton
Seymour
Charlie

 
imusic 2022-06-22 23:41:32 

In reply to FanAttick

*Thompson the pilot

Bajans had great hopes fuh “Pato”

 
imusic 2022-06-22 23:52:06 

In reply to openning

It could be debated that Charlie Griffith is / was no better than Jermaine Lawson

 
openning 2022-06-23 00:07:52 

In reply to Dukes
Murray D.A(wkpr)
No, No
Walcott keeps anytime you pick an All time Barbados team.
He made the team that way.

 
TanteMerle 2022-06-23 02:32:11 

In reply to doosra and khaga

You two proving my point about posting nonsense,
and not knowing about nuances


Take a look at Ashwin's home versus away record.

That is the comparison that I am making with Roach.

I remember a few years ago, there was a lot of
talk about Ashwin home and away record.

 
TanteMerle 2022-06-23 02:42:12 

Question...

Why do you all think that the all time best
Bim starting 11 would have 4 fast bowlers?

After all, Sobers can bowl pace.
If Marshall and Garner are a lock,
Is there room for two other fast bowlers?

Boy boy boy....
The thought process here is amusing.

On boy. Mi belly. All ya too funny.....

lol lol lol lol lol

 
rudebway 2022-06-23 03:12:20 

In reply to imusic

Our greats feasted on the likes of Ken Rutherford,


this is a silly thread but that gave me a laugh. i recall how hopeless Rutherford was. memories

 
imusic 2022-06-23 04:55:41 

In reply to rudebway

I felt sorry for him. Definitely a lamb thrown to the wolves.

Graeme Hick on the other hand. Big hype and CLATAAAAXXX every time. He was like a later version of Tony Greig cool

Had respect for Alan Lamb and Robin Smith. 2 South African Englishmen which naturally made me not like them, but they were tough and took their blows and resisted on more than a few occasions. They were both prize wickets to get.

 
Dukes 2022-06-23 10:22:16 

In reply to openning

Murray D.A(wkpr)
No, No
Walcott keeps anytime you pick an All time Barbados team.
He made the team that way.


Actually he did not.His first 6 matches for Barbados he was not the wicketkeeper.Bourne kept wicket on his debut and Gittens for the next 5 matches.He stopped wicketkeeping during the Australian tour in late 1951.

In my opinion the only WI wicketkeepers I have seen who were as good as David Murray were Jackie Hendriks and Michael Findlay.

 
bdaTryangle 2022-06-23 12:42:59 

In reply to imusic

Bajans had great hopes fuh “Pato”


You tell no lies. The man was genuinely fast and fierce.
Then he put on WI colours and it all fell apart. Well he was still fast. But just a tad wayward...

Had respect for Alan Lamb and Robin Smith. 2 South African Englishmen which naturally made me not like them, but they were tough and took their blows and resisted on more than a few occasions.


Of all players who represented England those two were among my favourites. Lamby was a rock against the West Indies attack for the most part.

On b4u8me's suggestion on Haynes/Greenidge vs Gayle, there's probably a victory bias involved. Haynes and Greenidge were on teams that won way more than they lost. Perhaps there's a bit of that where Roach is concerned.

 
doosra 2022-06-23 13:45:09 

In reply to TanteMerle

Ashwin - Home 21, Away 32 - MINUS 11

Roach Home 22, Away 39 - Minus 17

What is the point again?

Ashwin has close to 450 wickets, Roach close to 250 - a difference of about 200

No one would be screaming that Ashwin is great if he had 250 wickets at that average

 
powen001 2022-06-23 14:34:48 

In reply to FanAttick

lol lol lol
Patto


lol


not even ranked...even though remembered...and Cummins before the banning had more promise than him lol lol lol lol

 
seaegg99 2022-06-23 14:55:04 

In reply to Dukes

Great team:

1.Hunte
2.Greenidge
3.Worrell(capt)
4.Weekes
5.Walcott
6.Sobers
7.Murray D.A(wkpr)
8.Holford
9.Marshall
10.Hall
11.Garner

Good enough to get any team out and score more than enough runs. Could challenge any team.

 
natty_forever 2022-06-23 15:46:03 

In reply to tc1

One objection, Holding had to share wickets with the other greats, most of the time is Roach one taking wickets.

 
Raggs 2022-06-23 15:48:40 

In reply to doosra

Let’s not forget Croft played 27 test matches because of two major reasons- Packer and South Africa.
You know ya Footie …Heard of Duncan Edwards ? They said that teenager is a Man Utd great? How many games did he play? He died in the Munich crash with a certain Bobby Charlton on board and was claim to be twice the player he was.
Greatness is measured on all type of scales but I just can’t find the balance scale for Kemar Roach.

 
tc1 2022-06-23 15:58:56 

In reply to natty_forever


Agreed 100%


What I am saying is that Roach should be considered as a great, having reach the milestone set by the greats.

 
natty_forever 2022-06-23 16:08:14 

In reply to tc1

The stats may not say so to some, but surely his heart and perseverance must be!

 
natty_forever 2022-06-23 16:08:50 

How many bowlers come back from such injuries???

 
Raggs 2022-06-23 16:11:05 

One other thing we must remember Richard Hadlee is certainly a great. Played in a weak NZ team but his bowling kept them competitive and always in the game. So those claiming that Kemar Roach had no back up so that’s why his strike rate and performance away from region is average just need to study that Kiwi ‘s career.

 
imusic 2022-06-23 16:42:16 

In reply to Raggs

Richard Hadlee is indeed a great of the game.

Here’s a question for you. Was Imran Khan great?

 
nick2020 2022-06-23 17:05:34 

In reply to Khaga

How the fugg is Ashwin coming into this?


The war went nuclear so no man was spared.

 
Raggs 2022-06-23 17:51:33 

In reply to imusic

Imran Khan certainly has the great tag.

 
doosra 2022-06-23 17:51:53 

Imran Khan



362 wickets at 22.8 SR 53

overseas 199 wickets at 25.8, SR 59

looks a Great one to me

 
Dukes 2022-06-23 18:33:07 

In reply to imusic

Here’s a question for you. Was Imran Khan great?


Surprised you would ask such a question.

 
rudebway 2022-06-23 21:51:38 

In reply to imusic

Had respect for Alan Lamb and Robin Smith.


definitely remember Alan Lamb. I cannot recall Robin Smith. the other batsmen that i recall standing up to our 4 prong was the Indian guy Mohinda Amarnath and Allan Border

 
WICFan 2022-06-23 22:10:23 

In reply to rudebway

Robin Smith loved the battle against fast bowlers, he had real trouble against spin bowling.

 
pufftrini 2022-06-24 03:10:51 

Kemar is a very good bowler. The best we have have at the moment. Is he a great? No. It took him 72 tests to get to what Mikey did in 60. A great bowler IMHO should be taking at least 4 per tests. Kemar is not close to our 4 prong guys as he is 3 + but less than 4.The young guys like Aljo, Seales etc can learn a lot from him.