Ian Botham vs Kapil Dev

[smash84]

Kapil for a variety of reasons :

1. Botham's best was a 4 year peak which coincided with a lot of depleted squads in the world thanks to Packer and World series.

2. Has a very poor record against the West Indies. Had no series against them in which he had any impact at all. No centuries or any meaningful knock against them. Kapil was stellar against the West Indies, scoring 3 centuries along with a few superb 80s and 90s and averages below 25 against them with the ball. In more than one series emerged as one of the best bowlers of the series between the two teams and that takes some doing when the competition is the likes of Marshall and Holding.

3. While Botham was very good in the slips, Kapil never fielded close in for the number of catches to be of any use as a metric. But Kapil was a superb outfielder in his own right, one of the most complete fielders of the 80s.

Once the top teams of the world got their squads back and settled after Packer, Botham's "decline" suddenly set in. Coincidence?

Interesting analysis

 

[Jacknife]

Kapil for a variety of reasons :

1. Botham's best was a 4 year peak which coincided with a lot of depleted squads in the world thanks to Packer and World series.

2. Has a very poor record against the West Indies. Had no series against them in which he had any impact at all. No centuries or any meaningful knock against them. Kapil was stellar against the West Indies, scoring 3 centuries along with a few superb 80s and 90s and averages below 25 against them with the ball. In more than one series emerged as one of the best bowlers of the series between the two teams and that takes some doing when the competition is the likes of Marshall and Holding.

3. While Botham was very good in the slips, Kapil never fielded close in for the number of catches to be of any use as a metric. But Kapil was a superb outfielder in his own right, one of the most complete fielders of the 80s.

Once the top teams of the world got their squads back and settled after Packer, Botham's "decline" suddenly set in. Coincidence?

It's widely known and reported why Botham's decline stated, he had a bad back injury around 81/82. I read some where that his back problems actually started in the late 70's but didn't become severe till he hurt it around the years I said above. All you need to do is look at the bowler he was in 79/80, to the one he became by 83/84 and later, although never express pace he was quick enough but after the injuries that dropped off quite severely.

 

[Hit Wicket]

It's widely known and reported why Botham's decline stated, he had a bad back injury around 81/82. I read some where that his back problems actually started in the late 70's but didn't become severe till he hurt it around the years I said above. All you need to do is look at the bowler he was in 79/80, to the one he became by 83/84 and later, although never express pace he was quick enough but after the injuries that dropped off quite severely.

Well, every fast bowler has his share of injuries. Kapil and Imran themselves had severe injuries among the great all rounders of the 80s.

Botham is undoubtedly a great all rounder and like any other great player would have great performances. He has some against top quality opposition as well. But there is little doubt that his widely talked about peak of 4 years benefited from playing some depleted and weaker sides.

Even during his peak years, he was very ordinary against the West Indies. This is not a knock on Botham, but look at how Imran, Kapil, and Hadlee brought forth their best against the best side of their times while Botham's game plummeted and could not even maintain average standards.

Moreover, if one brings ODIs into the discussion(even to a limited extent) Kapil starts looking like the clear front runner among the two. A batting average of 60 and a bowling average of 20 while leading the team to a World Cup triumph! Winning the semi final of the Benson and Hedges world championship with the bat, and the final with the ball and end up with an average of 20 with the ball in the tournament! Can't think of any of Botham's exploits in ODIs which would even remotely match these.

 

[Furball]

Genuine question - what serious injuries did Kapil suffer? The only Test he missed from his debut to his retirement was because the BCCI dropped him for "disciplinary" reasons.

 

[Hit Wicket]

Had a knee surgery in 1984 and lost quite a bit of pace and the late swing as a result. Had to change his bowling style quite a bit and developed an off cutter to remain effective. Before the surgery, he had taken 250 test wickets in just 60 test matches with 18 5 wicket hauls and a strike rate of less than 55.

 

[Teja.]

Genuine question - what serious injuries did Kapil suffer? The only Test he missed from his debut to his retirement was because the BCCI dropped him for "disciplinary" reasons.

He was carrying a knee injury and was advised to rest before he played a 6 match test series' against the West Indies in India, '84 as literally the only 'bowler' in the side.

and I know I've said this before but he got 29 wickets @ 18.5 in that series.

 

[ret]

@ hit wkt .... Thanks for the info .... Earlier it was 'too close to call' for me but now my vote goes to Kapil .... 250 wkts in his first 60 tests. That + his batting = awesome

 

[smash84]

yeah.....hit wicket has certainly given me some food for thought

 

[weldone]

Yes, after the injury Kapil became a less attacking bowler. With reduced pace, he had to change his line of bowling from off-stump to outside off-stump - and had to develop that off-cutter.

 

[Jacknife]

Well, every fast bowler has his share of injuries. Kapil and Imran themselves had severe injuries among the great all rounders of the 80s.

Botham is undoubtedly a great all rounder and like any other great player would have great performances. He has some against top quality opposition as well. But there is little doubt that his widely talked about peak of 4 years benefited from playing some depleted and weaker sides.

Even during his peak years, he was very ordinary against the West Indies. This is not a knock on Botham, but look at how Imran, Kapil, and Hadlee brought forth their best against the best side of their times while Botham's game plummeted and could not even maintain average standards.

Moreover, if one brings ODIs into the discussion(even to a limited extent) Kapil starts looking like the clear front runner among the two. A batting average of 60 and a bowling average of 20 while leading the team to a World Cup triumph! Winning the semi final of the Benson and Hedges world championship with the bat, and the final with the ball and end up with an average of 20 with the ball in the tournament! Can't think of any of Botham's exploits in ODIs which would even remotely match these.

I agree that Kapil was a better One day player no doubt but would still have him behind Botham for Tests.
If Botham's numbers have been helped by some so called depleted/weak sides, why didn't the other all rounders etc make merry as well as well as players in general. Just remind me because I thought the only really depleted side was the Ashes in 78, what other players were missing from the sides Botham played in that era.
Yes injuries are a part of bowling but not all injuries are created equal, so to me it's pretty obvious from watching each of them bowl that Botham's back problems hampered him more than the other 2 injuries to bowl well, but that's just my opinion.
During his peak years when he played the WI he was just made Captain, knowing what happened to him when he was releaved of the Captaincy when he ripped a new one in the Aussies. I'd think it would be fair to say he would have performed much better without the Captaincy holding him back, obviously there's no way of knowing but you can make a educated guess.

 

[Hit Wicket]

I agree that Kapil was a better One day player no doubt but would still have him behind Botham for Tests.

Don't have a problem with anyone picking either of them - they are both great players. However, some of the arguments advanced in the thread earlier were bordering on ridiculous by calling Botham as the greatest all rounder ever or preemptively suggesting that anyone who chooses Kapil will do so out of nationalistic feelings.

If Botham's numbers have been helped by some so called depleted/weak sides, why didn't the other all rounders etc make merry as well as well as players in general.

Given a choice between someone who pummeled the weaker sides, but was a complete non factor against the best team of his time versus someone who was not able to hammer the weaker sides but raised his game to a different level when playing the best, the choice is an easy one for me.

Just remind me because I thought the only really depleted side was the Ashes in 78, what other players were missing from the sides Botham played in that era.

During his peak years, Botham played quite a few series against India and New Zealand not exactly top notch opposition specially their bowling attacks which revolved completely around one bowler. He also played a depleted Pakistan missing Asif Iqbal, Majid Khan, Zaheer, Imran, and Mushtaq to Packer.

I am not blaming him for the opposition he faced, but given what happened subsequently or even during his peak against West Indies leaves a huge question mark.

Yes injuries are a part of bowling but not all injuries are created equal, so to me it's pretty obvious from watching each of them bowl that Botham's back problems hampered him more than the other 2 injuries to bowl well, but that's just my opinion.

Well, that's just your opinion. The efforts that Imran and Kapil put in to come back from injuries is well documented, specially Imran who was able to come back bowling as quick as ever.

During his peak years when he played the WI he was just made Captain, knowing what happened to him when he was releaved of the Captaincy when he ripped a new one in the Aussies. I'd think it would be fair to say he would have performed much better without the Captaincy holding him back, obviously there's no way of knowing but you can make a educated guess.

That's quite a conundrum - when he was captain and played poorly against West Indies, you say he played poorly because he was captain. When he played poorly against them when he was not captain, you say he was not at his peak. Can't see any way to resolve it. A batting average of 20 and a bowling average of 35+ tells it's own story.

One can make educated guesses about how those numbers would have been reversed if he played the West Indies at his peak but not captaining, but I'd rather look at the reality. This isn't some small sample size or freak series being talked about - 4 full series over a period spread out for 6-7 years doesn't leave much room for guess work as far as I am concerned.

 

[hang on]

wasn't aware of the knee injury of dev's. thanks, hitwicket and teja, for that.

even old farts like me learn something here from the young pups! that's why i like this forum so much.

excellent points brought up by hitwicket. but, based purely on what i have seen of the two, botham has to take it. he was a marginally better bowler but a considerably better batsman. i wouldn't demur if someone said that kapil was the most talented of the 4 great ones in terms of raw ability, whatever that might mean. he was one of those naturals.

 

[smash84]

I think Hit Wicket has made a great case for Kapil being a better choice.

Kapil's game against the WI was really a level above his regular performance.

 

[Burgey]

Do people really think playing the WI in the 80s in India was the same as paying them in England?

 

[smash84]

Do people really think playing the WI in the 80s in India was the same as paying them in England?

One place was easier for batting and the other easier for bowling.

Kapil comes out ahead on both counts.

What exactly is your point?

 

[Burgey]

One place was easier for batting and the other easier for bowling.

Kapil comes out ahead on both counts.

What exactly is your point?

I'm not making any one point in particular. I haven't really got a strong view as to which of these players was the better over their whole careers. They were both great players AFAIC.

 

[Sanz]

Botham was easily the better player overall, there is no doubt about that. He was easily the better batsman (and I rate Kapil's batting highly). They were equal as bowlers and fielders or maybe Kapil may have a slight edge there but since Botham was so much better as a batsman that he clearly is the better allrounder.

In my list of 80s all rounders I have always had Kapil at the second place after Botham.

1. Botham
2. Kapil
3. Imran
4. Hadlee.

 

[smash84]

interesting ranking Sanz

Do you give a higher weightage to batting? Since Imran and Hadlee were better bowlers but probably not better bats.

 

[Sanz]

interesting ranking Sanz

Do you give a higher weightage to batting? Since Imran and Hadlee were better bowlers but probably not better bats.

No, I don't give higher ranking to batting, what I consider most important is how well they performed both as bowlers/batsmen/fielders at all times during their career.

I don't question Imran's batting skills either, I think he was a very dependable batsman in the later phase of his career when he was no longer the great bowler he once used to be earlier in his career during which he wasn't the dependable batsmen he became later on.

Again, that is my logic and I think it is a very valid one and I have always felt the same in last 20 years, I don't think it is going to change. It may not be the most popular criteria but in no way It is an attempt to demean Imran's or Hadlee's value as all rounders.

 

[Furball]

One place was easier for batting and the other easier for bowling.

Kapil comes out ahead on both counts.

What exactly is your point?

Bear in mind the West Indians would have been far more familiar with English conditions as virtually all of them had lengthy County stints.