Balanced yardstick in cricket (9 August 1999)
M
09-Aug-1999
9 August 1999
Balanced yardstick in cricket
M. Shoaib Ahmed
Is Tendulkar a better batsman than Bradman? Was Garfield Sobers a
superior all-rounder in comparison to Ian Botham? Or was Freddie
Spofforth a bigger demon than Waqar Younis?
The above are questions which confuse young enthusiasts of the game
all over the world. Unfortunately, for them (and also for the game of
cricket) the yardstick which these youngsters choose as their
reference of comparisons is the statistical analysis of these
players. By the above, I do not wish to run down or devalue the
importance of statistics in the game of cricket. Indeed the study of
facts and figures forms an integral part of the cricketing canvas.
Probably, no other sport in the world lays as much stress and
importance on statistics as the game of cricket. The amount of time,
research and printed space allotted to statistics by the world of
cricket is immense to the extent of being phenomenal. Cricketing
records and their implications on performances and merits assume
pivotal importance in proper context. The problem begins when an
overdose of statistics overwhelms other factors.
For me to write on such a topic is more difficult than most would
imagine. After having remained a chronic addict of facts and figures
for so long, I feel that there is a limit to where these numbers can
guide us in our cricketing assessments. Can we really call Rashid
Khan the best-ever Test batsman produced by Pakistan just because he
has an average of 188.00? Can we forget the cavalier style of Maqsood
Ahmed who won the title of 'Merry Max' on the merit of his aggressive
batting in England but never managed a Test century? Is it just for
us to call Zaheer Abbas a greater batsman than Hanif Mohammad just
because 'Zed' has more test runs to his credit? Is Kapil Dev a better
bowler than Richard Hadlee just because he has overtaken Hadlee in
the tally of test scalps?
All these are questions whose answers can never be found in the
records books. Cricket records may well be the numerical analyst's
main tool but even then the game is primarily the domain of the
artists and idealists. The rhythm which flowed from the bat of Majid
Khan in the 1976-77 series against New Zealand; or the sting of
Imran's swing against India in 1982-83 and the patience of Hanif's
marathon innings against the West Indies in 1957-58; can never be
measured quantitatively. The stature of W.G. Grace, the speed of
'fiery' Fred Truman, the bite of West Hall the commanding presence of
Bradman, and the mastery of Gary Sobers were for posterity to
remember. Their impact can neither be evaluated numerically nor can
their performance be reckoned without regard for time calculated.
Drawing parallells in any field of life is tricky business but in
cricket it becomes all the more hazardous since here we tend to
overestimate the value of cricketing records. Let us give due respect
to those who create new records but also let us not forget those who
created the original records at a time when doing so was a much more
difficult and much less profitable exercise.
Source :: The Dawn(www.dawn.com)