Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[Cernunnos]

I think there is a strong case for it.

While one would be tempted to go by mere averages, I think it's an an unfair metric as it's
ruined by cases where the part-timer gets only 2 or 3 overs to bowl in a match. Every bowler
needs to get a decent spell to prove their actual worth. Therefore to quantify the true
effectiveness of the part-timer, I am considering matches only where the player bowled
5+ overs, i.e. was given a decent spell. The last column shows the averages based on
those matches. Since I am applying this condition to everyone uniformly, there should be no
accusation of bias.

I am considering all those who have taken 100+ wickets in ODIs
(99 for Ganguly :-)). I am of course not considering the full-time bowlers.

Ganguly comes 2nd on the list, ahead of even Imran, Kapil and Botham. Only Flintoff is ahead,
but few would consider him to be a part-timer.

This is not say that Ganguly is a great bowler overall, but it does show that when the conditions
suit him and he bowls a long spell, he is as good a bowler as any.

                          M           W        Average  Average(5+ overs)
A Flintoff    126   143   25.31   25.2
Ganguly                300   99   37.15   26.14
Imran Khan (Pak)   175   182   26.61   26.69
N Kapil Dev (India)   225   253   27.45   27.15
SP O'Donnell (Aus)   87   108   28.72   28.44
L Klusener (SA)   171   192   29.95   28.56
IT Botham (Eng)   116   145   28.54   28.65
JH Kallis                 261   233   31.48   29.58
TM Odoyo    95   102   31.77   29.74
Abdul Razzaq    231   246   31.13   30.58
WJ Cronje (SA)   188   114   34.78   30.6
CL Cairns (ICC/NZ)   215   201   32.8   30.97
CH Gayle (ICC/WI)   174   140   32.73   31.57
Mudassar Nazar    122   111   30.91   32.03
Shoaib Malik (Pak)   140   105   34.57   32.31
SR Waugh (Aus)   325   195   34.67   33.07
RA Harper (WI)   105   100   34.31   33.63
IVA Richards (WI)   187   118   35.83   34.35
RJ Shastri (India)   150   129   36.04   34.36
ST Jayasuriya    398   304   36.48   34.85
PA de Silva (SL)   308   106   39.4   34.86
Shahid Afridi    240   204   35.25   35.79
CL Hooper (WI)   227   193   36.05   36.25
Azhar Mahmood    143   123   39.13   36.9
SR Tendulkar   393   152   43.63   37.26
A Symonds (Aus)   170   124   37.57   38.34
GW Flower (Zim)   219   104   40.25   39

[justforkix]

Good compilation and effort.

Yes, in favorable conditions SG is a very good and useful bowler.

But we should consider economy rates also since we are talking about ODIs here.

[caught and bowled]

What next? Ganguly the best fielder amongst those who have taken 100 catches or more in 300 matches?

[caught and bowled]

And Imran khan, Kapil dev, Botham etc. were partime bowlers?

[indcric]

Good compilation and effort.

Yes, in favorable conditions SG is a very good and useful bowler.

But we should consider economy rates also since we are talking about ODIs here.

Exactly. Only in favourable conditions SG is a good bowler. IMO, the most effective part timer in the list below is Sanath Jayasurya. Even if we take just the Indian team, it would be Sehwag or SRT.

While there is a merit in 5+ overs argument, I think when a part timer bowls more than 5 overs in a match, he tends to become a regular bowler in that particular match (might be a case of conditions most favourable to him). Isn't it? After 300 matches, if he maintains an average of just above 26 (in matches where he bowled 5+ overs) & took only 99 wickets, it tells that he bowled less than 5 overs in many matches. That would make him an irregular (for lack of a better word) part-timer. Not a regular one.

So, yeah. Ganguly is one of the best irregular part-time bowlers in ODIs, in conditions most suited to him.

In 300 matches, he bowled more than 5 overs in 75 matches. Let us say, other captains were jealous of SG or were not as intelligent captains as SG.
SG captained 147 ODIs, in which he bowled more than 5 overs in just 34 matches. SG didn't believe himself as the "Best" part-time bowler? Or can we admit the fact that, he is only good as a bowler in certain favourable conditions? If that is the case, how is he a regular part-time bowler? If he is not a regular part-timer, how can we put him in the "Best" category in the ODIs?

"Best" is some body who performs well irrespective of weather, pitch conditions, match states etc. How can we call a fair (or wet in this case) weather bowler the Best part-timer? There is no need to exaggerate SG's usefulness as a part-timer. I think most people agree that he is a very useful bowler in certain favourable conditions.

[dextrous]

Sanath Jayasurya can def. not be considered a part-time bowler. He started off his career as a left-arm spinner who could hit the ball hard at #7,8--he was def. not a batman to start with, but to his credit, he developed his batting.

[Cernunnos]

Good compilation and effort.

Yes, in favorable conditions SG is a very good and useful bowler.

But we should consider economy rates also since we are talking about ODIs here.

I thought of economy rate, but it does not tell much. Plus, scoring rates have increased with
the decades, so comparison is not that meaningful.

Even then, he is among the best:
(ignoring 80s players)

In 5+ over matches  Avg.   Eco.
---------------------------------------
A Flintoff                25.2    4.31
Ganguly                 26.14   4.44
Imran Khan (Pak)    26.69    -
N Kapil Dev (India)  27.15    -
SP O'Donnell (Aus)   28.44    -
L Klusener (SA)       28.56   4.64
IT Botham (Eng)      28.65    -
JH Kallis                 29.58   4.67
TM Odoyo               29.74   4.64
Abdul Razzaq          30.58   4.66
WJ Cronje (SA)       30.60   4.25
CL Cairns (ICC/NZ)  30.97   4.75
CH Gayle (ICC/WI)   31.57   4.50
Mudassar Nazar       32.03    -
Shoaib Malik (Pak)   32.31   4.33
SR Waugh (Aus)      33.07   4.44
RA Harper (WI)       33.63    -
IVA Richards (WI)    34.35    -
RJ Shastri (India)     34.36    -
ST Jayasuriya          34.85   4.68
PA de Silva (SL)       34.86   4.66
Shahid Afridi           35.79   4.54
CL Hooper (WI)       36.25   4.28
Azhar Mahmood      36.90   4.55
SR Tendulkar          37.26   4.77
A Symonds (Aus)    38.34   4.92
GW Flower (Zim)    39.00   4.45

[Cernunnos]

Good compilation and effort.

Yes, in favorable conditions SG is a very good and useful bowler.

But we should consider economy rates also since we are talking about ODIs here.

Exactly. Only in favourable conditions SG is a good bowler. IMO, the most effective part timer in the list below is Sanath Jayasurya. Even if we take just the Indian team, it would be Sehwag or SRT.

Even on gross Avg, Eco & S/R, Ganguly is better than Sehwag and SRT.

While there is a merit in 5+ overs argument, I think when a part timer bowls more than 5 overs in a match, he tends to become a regular bowler in that particular match (might be a case of conditions most favourable to him). Isn't it? After 300 matches, if he maintains an average of just above 26 (in matches where he bowled 5+ overs) & took only 99 wickets, it tells that he bowled less than 5 overs in many matches. That would make him an irregular (for lack of a better word) part-timer. Not a regular one.

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

So, yeah. Ganguly is one of the best irregular part-time bowlers in ODIs, in conditions most suited to him.

In 300 matches, he bowled more than 5 overs in 75 matches. Let us say, other captains were jealous of SG or were not as intelligent captains as SG.
SG captained 147 ODIs, in which he bowled more than 5 overs in just 34 matches. SG didn't believe himself as the "Best" part-time bowler? Or can we admit the fact that, he is only good as a bowler in certain favourable conditions? If that is the case, how is he a regular part-time bowler? If he is not a regular part-timer, how can we put him in the "Best" category in the ODIs?

Firstly by part timer I mean a player who is primarily a batsman, who bowls. Since bowling is not his primary job, he is not beholden to perform in conditions where he is not suitable.

"Best" is some body who performs well irrespective of weather, pitch conditions, match states etc. How can we call a fair (or wet in this case) weather bowler the Best part-timer? There is no need to exaggerate SG's usefulness as a part-timer. I think most people agree that he is a very useful bowler in certain favourable conditions.

If you want to differentiate part-timers as regular and irregular, that's fine. As far as I'm concerned, I club them together, since part-timers are not specialists by definition.

[cricinfo]

another NATAK ....eh ?

[dhruvdeepak]

the first and biggest flaw i can see, is the assumption based on stats that you can compare Ganguly the bowler, to Imran Khan the bowler. How can this be answered? Never mind the lesser ones like Kallis (??), Shastri, Shoaib Malik and Gayle. I think there should be a more clearly defined way of determining who is a part-timer and who isnt. Because in my books, Imran Khan and Kapil Dev are not. It is a joke to try and come up with stats to 'prove' this.

hows this for a better table:

                          M           W        Average  Average(5+ overs)
Ganguly                300   99   37.15   26.14
WJ Cronje (SA)   188   114   34.78   30.6
CH Gayle (ICC/WI)   174   140   32.73   31.57
Mudassar Nazar    122   111   30.91   32.03
Shoaib Malik (Pak)   140   105   34.57   32.31
SR Waugh (Aus)   325   195   34.67   33.07
IVA Richards (WI)   187   118   35.83   34.35
RJ Shastri (India)   150   129   36.04   34.36
PA de Silva (SL)   308   106   39.4   34.86
Shahid Afridi    240   204   35.25   35.79
CL Hooper (WI)   227   193   36.05   36.25
SR Tendulkar   393   152   43.63   37.26
A Symonds (Aus)   170   124   37.57   38.34
GW Flower (Zim)   219   104   40.25   39

this is more reasonable, because it seriously is laughable to compare SG to Ian Botham the bowler.

And i find the reasoning behind taking only 5+ over spells kind of difficult to understand. Isnt that what separates a part-timer from a full-timer? The ability to bowl 5+ over spells in every single match? Obviously Ganguly couldnt so it is strange to compare his 5+ over spells to a Kapil Dev, who by his job description was REQUIRED to bowl 8-10 overs in every match.

Cannot say i am satisfied or convinced by this analysis. perhaps a different way of looking at part time bowlers? First, i think it is important to decide who is a part timer without looking at statistics. Then i think we can find a more legitimate and giving-the-full-picture way of comparing part-time bowlers.

[indcric]

Dhruvdeepak, Cernunnos didn't say SG is a better bowler than Kapil or Botham. They are all-rounders. Any comparison of SG's & kapil's bowling is absurd.

The biggest flaw in the argument is restricting the data set to  prove some body is the best. If I spend a whole day on statistics restricting the data set, I might be able to prove SG is a better batsman than Sir Don  Bradman, Sir Viv Richards etc.

Without breaking the heads with all these statistics can't we say SG was not the best part-timer even in Indian team? I mean the fact that he wasn't even asked to bowl in many matches proves that. If he was the best part time bowler, why didn't he bowl in more matches, when he was captain? Was he conserving energy for next innings/match? Was he not putting team's interests above his interests? Was he not a good captain, not to know his own strengths (forget about his players' or opposition players')?

Simlple case is that, he didn't bowl 5+ overs in many matches, because he either gave lot more runs in the first 4 overs or was not able to provide a breakthrough. In which case, he was a bad part-time bowler. A part-time bowler is often asked to provide a break through quickly or restrict the run-flow immediately.

In 90 matches, in which SG bowled 1 or more overs but less than 5 overs:

 Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR  4w 5w
90  214.2  1377  11  4/21   1/4   125.18  6.42 116.9  1  0

As he was bleeding runs in the first 1 to 4 overs, he was quickly removed from the attack in 90 matches, which proves that he was a bad part time bowler in 30% of the matches.

In other 45% of the matches, he was not even considered for bowling, because captains (including himself, he captained almost half the matches he played) thought that he is not at all useful as a part timer in those pitch conditions & match states.

[Cernunnos]

Dhruvdeepak, Cernunnos didn't say SG is a better bowler than Kapil or Botham. They are all-rounders. Any comparison of SG's & kapil's bowling is absurd.

Thanks. It was not my intention to show that SG > Kapil, Imran or Botham. I kept the names of those greats in the list as they were all-rounders and not just "only bowlers". But since they are not part-timers either, I think I should have left out their names as well to avoid the confusion.

The biggest flaw in the argument is restricting the data set to  prove some body is the best. If I spend a whole day on statistics restricting the data set, I might be able to prove SG is a better batsman than Sir Don  Bradman, Sir Viv Richards etc.

Without breaking the heads with all these statistics can't we say SG was not the best part-timer even in Indian team? I mean the fact that he wasn't even asked to bowl in many matches proves that. If he was the best part time bowler, why didn't he bowl in more matches, when he was captain? Was he conserving energy for next innings/match? Was he not putting team's interests above his interests? Was he not a good captain, not to know his own strengths (forget about his players' or opposition players')?

Why bring in Overs/Match?
Sehwag and SRT got more overs than SG because the conditions suitable to their bowling were more dominant.
If we were playing more on seaming tracks than on dry turners, the reverse would have happened. I don't see
why one should hold that against SG.

Inspite of that SG has better numbers than SRT and VS.

        Ave   Eco   S/R
VS   40.26  5.25  45.9
SRT 43.63  5.06  51.6
SG   37.15  5.02  44.3

Simlple case is that, he didn't bowl 5+ overs in many matches, because he either gave lot more runs in the first 4 overs or was not able to provide a breakthrough. In which case, he was a bad part-time bowler. A part-time bowler is often asked to provide a break through quickly or restrict the run-flow immediately.

In 90 matches, in which SG bowled 1 or more overs but less than 5 overs:

 Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR  4w 5w
90  214.2  1377  11  4/21   1/4   125.18  6.42 116.9  1  0

As he was bleeding runs in the first 1 to 4 overs, he was quickly removed from the attack in 90 matches, which proves that he was a bad part time bowler in 30% of the matches.

In other 45% of the matches, he was not even considered for bowling, because captains (including himself, he captained almost half the matches he played) thought that he is not at all useful as a part timer in those pitch conditions & match states.

Again, aren't you yourself restricting the data set to prove something?

Here are SRT's numbers by the same token.
In 115 matches  of 1-4 overs he had an average of 83.
In 141 matches he didn't even bowl.
Therefore in 65% matches he was a useless bowler.
in 75% matches SG was a useless bowler (according to your analysis).
You may say that 35% >> 25%, but when I take into account that India plays
around 75% matches on spinner friendly tracks, I no longer see SRT's performance in a favorable light.

[indcric]

Exactly. SRT & VS were marginally better than SG, when you take total % of the matches they bowled better. So, it is not correct to say that SG is the best part-time bowler ever. ODIs are mostly played on batsman-friendly tracks, on which SRT & VS are better bowlers than SG. So, they bowl a lot on batsman friendly tracks.

You might again say, why bring the total % of matches bowled. Simply because that gives a better perspective for a part time bowler. As your averages, Strike Rates etc showed, SG is even better than Imran, botham & Kapil, on seamer friendly tracks. Is it really true? No. That is skewed towards SG simply because he bowls 5+ overs only when he is doing better. In matches when he is not doing better, he will be taken off even before bowling the 5th over. Kapil, Imran & Botham don't have a choice there. They have to bowl their quota even if they are bowling relatively bad irrespective of the pitch, weather & match state.

It is important to analyze the statistics with the right perspective.

On batsman friendly tracks, obviously the average, SR & Econ rate will be worse for bowlers (even for regular bowlers, for part-timers they will be even bad). That explains the worse average (career or 5+ overs etc) of SRT & VS.

In certain favourable conditions, which are comparatively low, SG is a better bowler, which most of us agree. But that doesn't make him the best part-time bowler ever.

It is very rare where an ODI is played on a spin-friendly track favouring SRT or VS. ODIs are either played on batsman-friendly tracks or on seamer friendly wickets.
The fact that captains often choose SRT & VS to bowl the 5th bowler's quota for India, proves that SG is not even the best part-time bowler in Indian team. SRT & VS bowl the 5th bowler's quota not because they are great bowlers, but are less worse compared to SG on most ODI tracks.

AK home & away in ODIs:

                         Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR 4w 5w
home                  90  819    3646 126  6/12   4/25   28.93  4.45  39.0  2  1
away                  80  684.3  2991  67  5/33   3/47   44.64  4.36  61.2  0  1

ZK home & away in ODIs:

                         Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR   4w 5w
home                  34  276.5  1407  45  5/42   4/47   31.26  5.08  36.9  1  1
away                  51  421.3  2146  72  4/19   4/42   29.80  5.09  35.1  2  0

Srinath home & away in ODIs:

                        Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR    4w 5w
home                  80  685.2  3143 103  5/24   5/41   30.51  4.58  39.9  0  2
away                  62  545.4  2260  88  5/23   4/23   25.68  4.14  37.2   3  1


Which should prove that the stats are not that bad for a seamer in India, and it is very bad for an Indian spinner away from Home. This is the reason why I said, It is very rare where an ODI is played on a spin-friendly track. ODIs are either played on batsman-friendly tracks or on seamer friendly wickets.

[LosingNow]

Guys.. come on.

The greatest part-time ODI bowler ever .. Mohinder Amarnath. Put all your stats (if you can even come to an agreement as to what is a good way to look at such stats) aside.

He won us the world cup

[indcric]

Guys.. come on.

The greatest part-time ODI bowler ever .. Mohinder Amarnath. Put all your stats (if you can even come to an agreement as to what is a good way to look at such stats) aside.

He won us the world cup

Was he not considered an all-rounder in ODIs (In tests, he didn't bowl that much)? If not, then I agree he is the best part-time "Indian" ODI bowler ever (not sure about the World best ODI part-time bowler).

[LosingNow]

Guys.. come on.

The greatest part-time ODI bowler ever .. Mohinder Amarnath. Put all your stats (if you can even come to an agreement as to what is a good way to look at such stats) aside.

He won us the world cup

Was he not considered an all-rounder in ODIs (In tests, he didn't bowl that much)? If not, then I agree he is the best part-time "Indian" ODI bowler ever (not sure about the World best ODI part-time bowler).

One would not call Mohinder an all-rounder ..just like one cannot call SG or SRT or YS or VS all-rounders.

Mohinder, SG, SRT, YS, VS..etc are selected for the ODI team purely based on their batting skills. Their ability to bowl turns out to be a bonus depending on the conditions or "whether they are having a good day with the ball".

Genuine all-rounders are selected in the team because of their ability to bat and also bowl. They are expected to perform with the bat and ball. Kapil, Imran, Botham, Hadlee etc fall in this category.

[RicePlateReddy]

I did comment on Ganguly's bowling skills earlier in the context of tests. If you recollect, he took 3 wickets in his first test match, and bowled well and claimed other wickets for his first 10 tests. His bowling reduced dramatically after that. I haven't followed the trend in ODIs.

I would agree that in general, he seems to have been underbowled. The biggest culprit is Ganguly himself; cause there was no discernible urge to bowl when he became captain. Perhaps though, the pressure of captaincy was too high to consider also contributing in all around capacity, that too when his fielding has always been his weakness.

losingnow, Mohinder was much more of an allrounder than even SRT. While his batting alone could have got him into the team, the phrase batting all rounder in ODIs would have been apt for him. India relied on his full quota of overs for many a game, dare I say through half his ODI career.

[justforkix]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

[pipsqueak]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

AA is at #6 in terms of strike rate (gets you a wicket every 32 balls) among bowlers who have played over 100 matches and #18 overall! go figure!

[indcric]

I did comment on Ganguly's bowling skills earlier in the context of tests. If you recollect, he took 3 wickets in his first test match, and bowled well and claimed other wickets for his first 10 tests. His bowling reduced dramatically after that. I haven't followed the trend in ODIs.

I would agree that in general, he seems to have been underbowled. The biggest culprit is Ganguly himself; cause there was no discernible urge to bowl when he became captain. Perhaps though, the pressure of captaincy was too high to consider also contributing in all around capacity, that too when his fielding has always been his weakness.

He bowled and still bowls somewhere around 5-10 overs per test outside sub-continent, immediately after the new ball spell. After that he is not effective any way, so captains (including himself) don't give him any overs after that.

Same goes for ODIs, he bowls 1 to 3 overs on seamer friendly wickets per ODI. If he doesn't go for many runs or if he gets a wicket, he would be given more overs. Otherwise, the captains (including himself) take him out of the attack.

This is fairly consitent throughout his career (including his captaincy period).

Indian captains are not that stupid to underbowl the best ever part-time bowler when part-time bowling is a very costly commodity for ODIs for Indian team.

[sudzz]

SOURAV GANGULY FOR GOD...RIGHT NOW RIGHT AWAY...

[keep-it-cool]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

AA is at #6 in terms of strike rate (gets you a wicket every 32 balls) among bowlers who have played over 100 matches and #18 overall! go figure!

Well, he is a wicket taker. I would play him in the side as first change and because his fielding is much better than the other jokers we have out there. He can be frustrating often, but at least we can hope that he'll come up with wickets more often than not.

[keep-it-cool]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

BTW .. DV has already categorised IP as a batsman who is useful with the ball. I shall post the interview if I can get the link

[justforkix]

Why bring in Overs/Match?
Sehwag and SRT got more overs than SG because the conditions suitable to their bowling were more dominant.
If we were playing more on seaming tracks than on dry turners, the reverse would have happened. I don't see
why one should hold that against SG.

Inspite of that SG has better numbers than SRT and VS.

        Ave   Eco   S/R
VS   40.26  5.25  45.9
SRT 43.63  5.06  51.6
SG   37.15  5.02  44.3

It just shows that captains (including SG) have been prudent in bowling SG in only favorable conditions and they know his limitations, while VS and SRT have been used in almost all conditions to fill in for a 5th bowler.

Just some more info: SG has bowled 729 overs in 297 matches, SRT has bowled 1309 overs in 393 matches and VS has bowled 565 overs in 165 overs.

[justforkix]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

BTW .. DV has already categorised IP as a batsman who is useful with the ball. I shall post the interview if I can get the link

useful for which team 

[keep-it-cool]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

BTW .. DV has already categorised IP as a batsman who is useful with the ball. I shall post the interview if I can get the link

useful for which team 

Better ask DBV

[indcric]

No, 5+ overs doesn't necessarily make him a regular bowler. A regular bowler bowls full quota of 10 overs. Of the 75 ODIs considered, he bowled less than 7 overs in more than 50% of the games.

10 years from now, we may be talking about Munaf/RPS/AA as the best part-time bowler. They seem to be bowling only 5-6 overs these days 

BTW .. DV has already categorised IP as a batsman who is useful with the ball. I shall post the interview if I can get the link

Wonder when will these selectors stop being jokers. Great Indian Cricket Tradition.

[justforkix]

OK.

(EITHER) Ganguly was an excellent captain who knew the limitations of SG, the bowler and used him prudently only when conditions suited his bowling

(OR) Ganguly was a poor captain who severely underutilized SG, the best part-time bowler in the world

Please decide 

[gouravk]

selectors, in general, are jokers. DV, in particular is a maniac. 

[keep-it-cool]

OK.

(EITHER) Ganguly was an excellent captain who knew the limitations of SG, the bowler and used him prudently only when conditions suited his bowling

(OR) Ganguly was a poor captain who severely underutilized SG, the best part-time bowler in the world

Please decide 

Cue next thread - Is Ganguly the best captain at using part time bowlers?

[sudzz]

OK.

(EITHER) Ganguly was an excellent captain who knew the limitations of SG, the bowler and used him prudently only when conditions suited his bowling

(OR) Ganguly was a poor captain who severely underutilized SG, the best part-time bowler in the world

Please decide 

Cue next thread - Is Ganguly the best captain at using part time bowlers?

  

[pipsqueak]

OK.

(EITHER) Ganguly was an excellent captain who knew the limitations of SG, the bowler and used him prudently only when conditions suited his bowling

(OR) Ganguly was a poor captain who severely underutilized SG, the best part-time bowler in the world

Please decide 

Cue next thread - Is Ganguly the best captain at using part time bowlers?

...or "Is SG becoming increasingly useless for creating new and exciting DG threads?"

nah, that's far away! 

[WicketView]

I think there is a strong case for it.

While one would be tempted to go by mere averages, I think it's an an unfair metric as it's
ruined by cases where the part-timer gets only 2 or 3 overs to bowl in a match. Every bowler
needs to get a decent spell to prove their actual worth. Therefore to quantify the true
effectiveness of the part-timer, I am considering matches only where the player bowled
5+ overs, i.e. was given a decent spell. The last column shows the averages based on
those matches. Since I am applying this condition to everyone uniformly, there should be no
accusation of bias.

I am considering all those who have taken 100+ wickets in ODIs

(99 for Ganguly :-)). I am of course not considering the full-time bowlers.

Ganguly comes 2nd on the list, ahead of even Imran, Kapil and Botham. Only Flintoff is ahead,
but few would consider him to be a part-timer.

This is not say that Ganguly is a great bowler overall, but it does show that when the conditions
suit him and he bowls a long spell, he is as good a bowler as any.

                          M           W        Average  Average(5+ overs)
A Flintoff    126   143   25.31   25.2
Ganguly                300   99   37.15   26.14
Imran Khan (Pak)   175   182   26.61   26.69
N Kapil Dev (India)   225   253   27.45   27.15
SP O'Donnell (Aus)   87   108   28.72   28.44
L Klusener (SA)   171   192   29.95   28.56
IT Botham (Eng)   116   145   28.54   28.65
JH Kallis                 261   233   31.48   29.58
TM Odoyo    95   102   31.77   29.74
Abdul Razzaq    231   246   31.13   30.58
WJ Cronje (SA)   188   114   34.78   30.6
CL Cairns (ICC/NZ)   215   201   32.8   30.97
CH Gayle (ICC/WI)   174   140   32.73   31.57
Mudassar Nazar    122   111   30.91   32.03
Shoaib Malik (Pak)   140   105   34.57   32.31
SR Waugh (Aus)   325   195   34.67   33.07
RA Harper (WI)   105   100   34.31   33.63
IVA Richards (WI)   187   118   35.83   34.35
RJ Shastri (India)   150   129   36.04   34.36
ST Jayasuriya    398   304   36.48   34.85
PA de Silva (SL)   308   106   39.4   34.86
Shahid Afridi    240   204   35.25   35.79
CL Hooper (WI)   227   193   36.05   36.25
Azhar Mahmood    143   123   39.13   36.9
SR Tendulkar   393   152   43.63   37.26
A Symonds (Aus)   170   124   37.57   38.34
GW Flower (Zim)   219   104   40.25   39

According to your definition of best, probably true. But could you explain to me what purpose that definition serves?

[achutank]

excellent datamining skills  crrns

you have got that from cricinfo?

[ruchir]

SOURAV GANGULY FOR GOD...RIGHT NOW RIGHT AWAY...

I vote.... AYE.

[OldPal]

I agree SG is the best part time bowler in history of cricket .

RD was at fault not to give him the ball more often after his return .
should we close this thread now and start the next one as stated

"Was Ganguly the best captain at using part time bowlers "

[RicePlateReddy]

And you all laughed at Kiran More?

[dhruvdeepak]

the guiding principle holds true boss...more is not always less

[dextrous]

And you all laughed at Kiran More?

past tense?

[RicePlateReddy]

And you all laughed at Kiran More?

past tense?

Yes, past tense because it referred to laughing at him in the past when he mendaciously justified Ganguly's selection with an "all-rounder" tag. If someone chooses to continue to laugh at him, that seems well past the due date!