The great 1980s all rounders

[marc71178]

If you deem an allrounder as someone who does it with bat and ball at the same time then Botham wins hands down.

If you like to filter numbers then you pick Imran.

 

[fredfertang]

If you deem an allrounder as someone who does it with bat and ball at the same time then Botham wins hands down.

If you like to filter numbers then you pick Imran.

Couldn't have put it better myself - In his all too brief pomp Botham was without doubt the most remarkable cricketer I have ever seen - sadly however for the bulk of his career he was the most disappointing and frustrating

 

[Migara]

What a time for cricket, to be blessed with four cricketers of that caliber. Not to mention the all-time great bowlers that played during the same era. We haven't had one all-rounder approaching that sort of level since.

Considering that Mike Proctor and Adrian Kuiper were lost to apartheid, it's mind boggling how much all rounders that 1980s had.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Smali doesn't qualify for this thread since most of his posts are made up of Smilies.

 

[smash84]

 

[salman85]

At the end of the day you will be judged against what you've performed.Not what you could have performed.Botham went through a golden period,one that probably beats the golden periods of all 3 of Kapil,Imran and Hadlee when you take top drawer performances with the bat and bowl at the same time into consideration.But it is unfair on the others to judge Botham only by his golden period,or by his potential.The fact that his period of average performances were far more common than his period of fantastic performances automatically puts him on a lower pedestal than the other 3 IMO.

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

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Couldn't have put it better myself - In his all too brief pomp Botham was without doubt the most remarkable cricketer I have ever seen - sadly however for the bulk of his career he was the most disappointing and frustrating

Then either Steyn, Waqar and Philander are the greatest bowlers ever, since their peaks are unmatched.

 

[Zinzan]

yeah, Kallis. To be honest, people like Pollock, Cairns, and Flintoff had their moments, but it's only Freddie who'll be spoken in superlatives and in the same vein (from a sheer match-impacting pov) as the big 4 from the 80s.

What a load of ****, I'd suggest most CW'ers would rate both Pollock & Cairns were better test cricketers than Flintoff Here is a recent poll done between Cairns & Flintioff (tests only) which demonstrates this ....

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/44019-c-cairns-vs-flintoff-test-cricket-only.html

 

[fredfertang]

Then either Steyn, Waqar and Philander are the greatest bowlers ever, since their peaks are unmatched.

Steyn and Waqar can both make that argument with some force - Philander will have to wait a fair while yet before he can do the same

 

[benchmark00]

Pollock is so overrated on this forum imo.

 

[Zinzan]

In terms of the big 4 from the 80s...it depends entirely on what criteria you use to rate them.

At their very best, I'd probably choose Botham....

However, if I was reflecting over their entire Test careers as all-rounders I'd rate them something like;


1) Imran

Batting - For periods at the back end of his career was good enough to be selected for his batting alone, scored 6 hundreds & averaged late-30s - As a test batman 7.5

Bowling - A magnificent bowler who had it all; pace, swing, seam, control along with an intelligent mind. As a test bowler 9

Imran Total 16.5

2) Botham

Batting - Despite averaging 3-4 runs less than Imran with the bat, lets not forget he scored 14 test hundreds & at his best played some of the most memorable game-changing innings in Test history. Like Imran, for periods could have made it purely for his batting. 7.5

Bowling - His bowling career was one of two-halves. It's easy to forget what a great swing bowler Botham was in his early days, used to get it going really late, even before reverse swing was known as it is today. However in judging their whole careers, I need to consider his decline as a bowler. Overall bowling 8

Botham Total 15.5

3) Hadlee

Batting - Definitely the weakest batsman of the 4 & unlike Botham & Imran he wasn't good enough to make it purely as a batsman for much of his career. Whilst he did improve to average over 30 throughout the 2nd half of his career, in the final wash scored just 2 hundreds (& a 99). Overall batting 5.5

Bowling - An absolute Rolls Royce of fast bowlers (only 2nd to the great Marshall in my humble one-eyed NZ opinion ) who cut down his action and mastered the art of swing & seam bowling 9.5

Hadlee total 15

4) Kapil

Batting - Overall, I have him slightly behind Botham & Imran with the bat. For those that didn't see much of him, was a magnificent striker of the ball who did score 6 hundreds & averaged around 30 in the final wash 6.5

Bowling - It must be noted that he played much of his career on dry dung-heaps, although would still rate him as the weakest of the 4 when it comes to bowling. Had a magnificent action & could be a devastating swing bowler in the right conditions 7.5

Kapil total 14

 

[Burgey]

Pollock is so overrated on this forum imo.

This.

 

[smash84]

Pollock the best commentator of the all rounder lot though

 

[ankitj]

Pollock the best commentator of the all rounder lot though

Kapil Dev obviously.

 

[silentstriker]

The new Top 50 thread got me thinking about the four great all rounders of the 80s. That and Ding Dong being a putz talking about Hadlee.

Where do you rate them against each other?

Personally I have Imran > Botham > Hadlee > or = Dev.

Thoughts?

I'd like the comments on this thread kept to the more respected posters, so please onl comment if you've made 1,000 or more posts on CW.

Cheers.

Dev IMO not really in the class of others. At peak, Botham over even imran. Whole career, imran >> Hadlee > Botham > Dev.

 

[Burgey]

I think had Kapil the benefit of bowling in Enhlish conditions regularly his bowling would be more highly rated. Used to love watching him play. It all just seemed so easy to him.

 

[silentstriker]

Perhaps. He was too impatient with his batting too - could have achieved a lot more on that front if he had buckled down like Imran.

But even so, if you had to judge him by the standards of anyone but Indian fast bowling, he wouldnt be an "all time great". Eg only as bowler he wouldn't make all time XI of Australia, England, West Indies, South Africa, or Pakistan. Whereas you feel Imran and Hadlee most likely would (well maybe not WI all time XI but the competiton there is ludicrous).

I only caught the very tail end of his career. From accounts his injury early on did hamper his pace.

 

[ankitj]

Imran and Hadlee would make it to WI XI as well. Only Marshall and Ambrose have a (debatable) case to be rated as better bowlers, so they can get in as the 3rd seamer.

 

[Burgey]

Imran and Hadlee would make it to WI XI as well. Only Marshall and Ambrose have a (debatable) case to be rated as better bowlers, so they can get in as the 3rd seamer.

Haha, what a comment. McGrath has a comparable if not better record than both as a bowler and did it in what's regarded as a more batsman-friendly era.

 

[Flem274*]

I suspect he was meaning who out of the Windies seamers is better than Imran or Hadlee.