****OFFICIAL**** Imran Khan vs Botham Debate Thread

[JBH001]

Bless you, Jack. You know full well that I was referring only to what the statistics, those utterly redundant and contrived mechanisms for retrospective judgement, try to inform me. Statistics mean about as little to yours truly as they once did to George Gunn; indeed, they are as female fans to Will Young, fidelity to whores and democracy to any world leader of the present epoch. They mean nowt, Jack, nowt whatsoever.

In my eyes, you will remain forever the greatest thing ever to have laid hands on willow and willow on leather. In all your imitable genius did you transmute the chic art of batsmanship from the imprecise practice that it once was into the exact (yet no less artful) science that we know today; you came to be (at least for this mere mortal) the quintessential incarnate of that science. I shall never begrudge you your rightful place beneath the cricketing crown, nor your seat upon the corresponding throne. 'Tis not without reason that you were known as The Master.

Ah, Neville. You always did have a wonderful way with words!

 

[neville cardus]

Ah, Neville. You always did have a wonderful way with words!

My way with words, Jack, is not nearly so wonderful as your way with the bat.

 

[Engle]

And all this time I thought JBH was named after some fine Scotch....

Anyhoo, 2 more reasons IK > ITB

8. Ordered back after retirement by no less than the General and Head of Pak and continued with superlative performances, culminating in the upholding of the WC

9. Broke thru glass ceilings being the 1st genuine fast bowler from the sub-cont and the 1st fast bowling/All-rounder to succeed in captaincy

 

[Sanz]

You are merely making clear your supreme dearth of cricketing knowledge. Anyone who knows anything about the history of the game could tell you, off hand, that, in 1871, W.G. scored in excess of 2,700 runs at an average of nearly eighty. Of those who trailed in his glorious wake, Richard Daft, with an average well below forty, comes closest. Not even Bradman outdid his peers to that extent.

FC figures dont cut too well with me, not to forget the fact that WG's overall FC figures aren't much better than his contemporaries. WG was a great batsman but to call him the greatest batsman along with Sir Don on the basis of that one season is stretching it too far.

 

[Sanz]

Thats enough for Sanz to know how much cricketing knowledge he possess about one of the greatest cricketers of alltime.

Awww, I dont need to learn that from you esp after hearing your views on Sobers and Lillee. I never said that Sir WG was not a great cricketer, but he certainly wasn't the best batsman to play the game, not even close.

 

[Sanz]

No,I believe stats do make them greatest ever batsmen.All I meant is that I hate this hypocrisy when people rank certain players(who are their favourite ) very highly because of their stats but when it comes to other players,same people come up with arguments like "stats don't really matter".

This is not hypocrisy, it is an opinion and in my opinion Botham was a better all rounder, Stats do tell the story of it to a certain extent. Stats tell us that Imran's performance as an allrounder wasn't as effective as Botham's. Imran either peformed as a batsman(later part of his career) or performed as a bowler (in the middle part of his career), but hardly did so together like Botham did. I dont know how you can call it hypocrisy when my criteria for picking an allrounder is different from yours.

And No Botham isn't my favorite player,definately no more favorite than Imran.

 

[Sanz]

Imran not only played tests & ODIs but also regularly played county cricket for 14 years,Australian state cricket for 6 years & very little domestic cricket in Pakistan too.So,I don't think Imran played any less cricket than Botham in all those years.

Imran played much less cricket than Botham did between 1977 and 1986.

 

[neville cardus]

FC figures dont cut too well with me, not to forget the fact that WG's overall FC figures aren't much better than his contemporaries.

That may just have something to do with the fact that he played well into his fifties.

WG was a great batsman but to call him the greatest batsman along with Sir Don on the basis of that one season is stretching it too far.

You've really no idea. Try 1873 and 1876. In fact, take his overall record by the end of the 'seventies. No-one stands comparison.

 

[SJS]

And all this time I thought JBH was named after some fine Scotch....

 

[BhupinderSingh]

This is not hypocrisy, it is an opinion and in my opinion Botham was a better all rounder, Stats do tell the story of it to a certain extent. Stats tell us that Imran's performance as an allrounder wasn't as effective as Botham's. Imran either peformed as a batsman(later part of his career) or performed as a bowler (in the middle part of his career), but hardly did so together like Botham did. I dont know how you can call it hypocrisy when my criteria for picking an allrounder is different from yours.

And No Botham isn't my favorite player,definately no more favorite than Imran.

That hypocrisy term was not directed at u,I appologize if that hurt u.

 

[archie mac]

Agreed. Mullets suck.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

FC figures dont cut too well with me, not to forget the fact that WG's overall FC figures aren't much better than his contemporaries. WG was a great batsman but to call him the greatest batsman along with Sir Don on the basis of that one season is stretching it too far.

Wwkk,I agree that FC don't really matter but W.G.Grace is a different case as he was well over 30 when he got the chance to play his first test & was twice as better as any other guy during his days of FC cricket.His overall record doesn't look too good because he played until his fifties.Personnally,I think W,G.Grace is the third greatest batsman of alltime(behind Bradman & V.Richards only).

 

[FRAZ]

YET another reason why Imran is better than Botham - because more people say so.

Kidding.

Point being ?

 

[neville cardus]

Wwkk,I agree that FC don't really matter but W.G.Grace is a different case as he was well over 30 when he got the chance to play his first test & was twice as better as any other guy during his days of FC cricket.His overall record doesn't look too good because he played until his fifties.Personnally,I think W,G.Grace is the third greatest batsman of alltime(behind Bradman & V.Richards only).

Viv? Bollocks! Not fit to oil W.G.'s bat!

 

[Sanz]

Viv? Bollocks! Not fit to oil W.G.'s bat!

Yeah Right !! What next, Bradman not fit enough to shine WG's shoes ?

 

[Anil]

w.g was probably the first great batsman, and he was certainly far ahead of his contemporaries...but to call him one of the greatest ever batsmen is stretching it quite a bit considering the greats he is compared against...he definitely has an important place in the annals of cricketing history but to consider him better than batsmen like richards, sobers, pollock, headley etc borders on the ridiculous...

 

[pasag]

You can't really compare the periods though. But I certainly wouldn't hesitate to put Grace in the same category as those names nonetheless.

 

[Anil]

in terms of impact on the game, on the way it is played, he probably ranks ahead of some of these names, in terms of pure cricketing achievement, the level of cricket he played, i don't think he is up there...

 

[Sanz]

You can't really compare the periods though. But I certainly wouldn't hesitate to put Grace in the same category as those names nonetheless.

I dont have a problem with that kind of opinion, but making comments like Sir Viv not good enough to oil WG's bat is ridiculous at best.

 

[SaeedAnwar]

Ian Botham

Tests:
Runs: 5200
Avg: 33.54
Hundereds: 14
Fifties: 22

Wickets: 383
Bowling Avg: 28.40


ODI matches:

Runs: 2113
Avg: 23.21
Hundreds: 0
Fifties: 9

Wickets: 145
Bowling Avg: 28.54