Comparing Kapil dev and Imran Khan

[Coronis]

Botham only played some 125 onedayers .bat avg: about 23. str:rate :79.
Kapil : 225 onedayers .bat avg: about 23.79 str:rate :95

Kapil sinks Botham by a whopping margin in 1 dayers.

In tests too Kapil has 15 >or=75 scores where as Botham has only 16.what i mean is though Botham has 14 100's against Kapil's 8, Kapil has 13 >83 knocks.Infact he has 3 >=97 knocks.and Botham's str: rate in these >= 75 scores is only 76.45.where as for Kapil it is a whopping 96.45.you look at the difference in this str: rates mate.almost 20 once they crosses 75.it is not a small difference in impact that Kapil makes ones he is in full flow. another admirable thing is that Kapil maintains this str:rate of 96.45 in alien conditions of (wi+saf+aus+eng+nzl) combined,where as for Botham it sinks down to 62 abroad.so yes i agree, Kapils runs/inns is 28.52 aginst Botham's 32.29, but what about this str:rate difference of 20? if it was only a small difference in str: rate we could have ignored it.infact as a matter of fact the general conception that Botham is the best batsman among the 4 is because of his aggresive style of play, in other words the impact he makes.similarly what about Kapil who only trails by 3.77 in runs/inns but towers by 20 in str: rate?and these are my justifications for considering Kapil as the better bat of the 4.

Seriously, you are placing way too much importance on strike rate in test matches. Kapil Dev was not a better test batsman than Ian Botham.

 

[feroz rawther]

My opinion: Kapil was definitely a more talented batsman, but he didn't fully showcase his talents. Imran was a far better bowler (undeniably) but batting wise, its pretty close. Imran clearly ahead though, despite horrible fielding!

this is my frustration.people tend to give lot weightage to certain aspects when compared to others depending on their preferences .mate ...since we a comparing all round abilities all departments should be given equal weightage. even one day batting and bowling should be considered as separate entities and given marks based on performances.Kapil was a clear better all round fielder than Imran.

 

[feroz rawther]

Seriously, you are placing way too much importance on strike rate in test matches. Kapil Dev was not a better test batsman than Ian Botham.

then pls enlighten me despite a low batting average when compared to a lot of other batsmen, why is Viv considered the best of them all?

 

[Coronis]

this is my frustration.people tend to give lot weightage to certain aspects when compared to others depending on their preferences .mate ...since we a comparing all round abilities all departments should be given equal weightage. even one day batting and bowling should be considered as separate entities and given marks based on performances.Kapil was a clear better all round fielder than Imran.

Yes, I agree, Kapil was a much better fielder than Imran. However, due to the massive bowling superiority, along with relatively close batting, I rate him as the better cricketer, and better all rounder. Not even mentioning his captaincy.

 

[Coronis]

then pls enlighten me despite a low batting average when compared to a lot of other batsmen, why is Viv considered the best of them all?

His aggressive style, his presence, or aura when at the wicket, probably even the fact that he never wore a helmet. Contemporary accounts help, along with the fact that for the first 80 or so matches of his career i.e the majority, he averaged 60 rather than 50, and people remember more of him in his younger days.

 

[hendrix]

Classic case of picking and choosing stats. You can't use ODI stats as indicators of Test quality and vice versa.

No mention of Imran's excellent bowling record throughout the 80s (behind only Malcolm Marshall), the fact that he played into his 40s, the huge impact he had on the team and developing players...

I mean really, are we using the longevity argument AGAINST Imran?

 

[feroz rawther]

His aggressive style, his presence, or aura when at the wicket, probably even the fact that he never wore a helmet. Contemporary accounts help, along with the fact that for the first 80 or so matches of his career i.e the majority, he averaged 60 rather than 50, and people remember more of him in his younger days.

the only thing Kapil lacks from the above is ' wearing a helmet '.but Kapil had his positives too.a str rate difference of +11 from Viv which in your opinion has no value, being in a much weaker team etc. any way Kapil too was unique to me in the sense that no body in those bowler friendly 80s had this huge str: rate of 80.91.also having elaborated the batting details w.r.t Botham and Kapil i shall stick to my opinion and you shall have yours.

 

[Goughy]

Botham in his peak was easily the best batsman of the 4. Even his overall record shows that.

I'm not a big Botham fan and a very, very strong case can be made that Imran was a greater cricketer - all things considered. Also, though, a strong case can be made that Botham was - at his peak - the finest cricketer that has walked onto a field. It is a snapshot argument vs body of work.

 

[feroz rawther]

There are certain requirements that Kapil the batsman did not fulfill as well as Imran the batsman. If the side needed to see off a lot of overs to save the match, Kapil was found lacking when compared to Imran. If the side needed the all-rounder to support the specialist batsman, Kapil was found lacking to Imran. So there are two sides to the story. Kapil and Imran as batsmen are very close, yes. They are very different, too, and it's a bit like comparing the batting of Gilchrist and Flower (of course at a much lower dimension).

Anyway, if you want to prove that the strength of Kapil's batting is going to take him above Imran as an all-rounder, then that's not something I am going to agree with. For longevity, Kapil has a case against Botham for the number 2 slot.

Kapil's style of play was agressive and you cannot expect him to play defensively.Imran might have performed the way you specified in a few inns, but if you go thru his >75 scores you can see Kapil completely changing the course of match with his aggressive stroke play in a number of those inns. another thing is though a lot of batsmen has much higher str: rates than Viv, why is Viv considered the best of them all? because of his style of taking the bowling to shreds.Kapil's str: rate of 80.91 was the highest in the 80's.to put this in context even Viv had a str: rate of 69.28 only. and this str: rate of 80.91 was maintained not only in subcntinent conditions but in eng,aus,wi etc too.another thing is str: rate * avg: determines the impact of batsman. though this impact is more applicable to one dayers the below calculation would show the impact of Kapildev in tests. 80.91*31.05 against 69.28*50.23 for Viv Richards. than means Kapil was 72.2 % as effective as Viv. i bet no body, not even other speicalist batsmen of those times had created that much impact in 80's. that is Viv first and then Kapil

 

[Coronis]

I'm not a big Botham fan and a very, very strong case can be made that Imran was a greater cricketer - all things considered. Also, though, a strong case can be made that Botham was - at his peak - the finest cricketer that has walked onto a field. It is a snapshot argument vs body of work.

I do believe, in his peak, Botham was one of the best, if not the best cricketer in the world, his decline was such a travesty. Overall still the best batsman of the four, but yeah would never rate him above Imran or Hadlee based on his whole career.

 

[Goughy]

Kapil's style of play was agressive and you cannot expect him to play defensively.Imran might have performed the way you specified in a few inns, but if you go thru his >75 scores you can see Kapil completely changing the course of match with his aggressive stroke play in a number of those inns. another thing is though a lot of batsmen has much higher str: rates than Viv, why is Viv considered the best of them all? because of his style of taking the bowling to shreds.Kapil's str: rate of 80.91 was the highest in the 80's.to put this in context even Viv had a str: rate of 69.28 only. and this str: rate of 80.91 was maintained not only in subcntinent conditions but in eng,aus,wi etc too.another thing is str: rate * avg: determines the impact of batsman. though this impact is more applicable to one dayers the below calculation would show the impact of Kapildev in tests. 80.91*31.05 against 69.28*50.23 for Viv Richards. than means Kapil was 72.2 % as effective as Viv. i bet no body, not even other speicalist batsmen of those times had created that much impact in 80's. that is Viv first and then Kapil

In a 5 day Test, why is strike rate so important? It isn't apart from a occasional situations. BTW, where do you get Kapil's strike rate from in Tests. None of the major sites list it.

 

[Goughy]

I do believe, in his peak, Botham was one of the best, if not the best cricketer in the world, his decline was such a travesty. Overall still the best batsman of the four, but yeah would never rate him above Imran or Hadlee based on his whole career.

Yeah, I wouldn't argue with that. Botham, after 25 Tests, is the only cricketer I know of with a batting average of over 40 (he had 6 tons) and a bowling average of under 20 (it was under 19 and he was the qucikest - joint - post war to 100 wickets in terms of Tests and had 14 fivers and averaged over 6 wickets a Test.) Insane numbers. For a short but glorious period he combined batting and bowling like no one before or since.

 

[Goughy]

Oh and since this is another thread on all rounders, thought I'd bring up the ICC All Rounder Rankings.

For the four greats of the 80's:
Sir Ian Botham: 646 (15/02/1980)
Imran Khan: 518 (14/01/1983)
Sir Richard Hadlee: 483 (16/04/1987)
Kapil Dev: 433 (02/01/1981)

and the other great all rounders:
Sir Garry Sobers: 669 (31/12/1966)
Jacques Kallis: 616 (26/12/2002)
Keith Miller: 573 (25/01/1952)

As always, take them with a grain of sand, but still, interesting. Sobers 669 was the highest I found, from my limited searching.

Anthony McGrath: 51 (05/06/2003)

 

[feroz rawther]

You need to calm down. People will always disagree with your opinion, and you need to accept that. Imran didn't have support at the other end either until Wasim and Waqar came along. Imran too had a horrific injury in 84 when he was at the absolute peak of his powers, and had a godly average and strike rate (bowling). And Imran became the first complete proponent of reverse swing bowling. We might have been calling Imran the best ever fast bowler had it not been for that injury. Maybe not. We don't know.

Yes, Kapil didn't have the advantage of Wasim and Waqar later in his career, and couldn't unburden himself of bowling long spells like Imran did, and he deserves kudos for that. And everybody does give him kudos. He was brilliant. But using that to say he was better than Imran will always generate a backlash.

mate ... first of all i am not one of those blind supporters.not do am i over the board ill tempered. .i just thought of expressing my difference in opinions.coming to the topic.. i agree Imran too had a horrific injury in 84.but the practical difference between Imran and Kapil was that Kapil turned out to play despite doctors's advice to rest while Imran fully avoided playing for 2 years after his injury.this is evident from his dip in performance of bowling from 84 onwards.he could easily have avoided playing for 1 or 2 years and returning as fully fit as Imran did.that was his attitude towards playing for India. i cited only 1 example. like wise there would be many because Kapil played 8.2 tests/year and Imran only 4.25 tests.
and you are telling Imran had no support? he had support in very good bowlers like Sarfraz,Quadir,Iqbal quasim and from 86 onwards Akram .but for Kapil? Sastri, Madhan lal, Binny,Ghavri,Doshi,Maninder,S.Yadav,Prabhakar ...all were very ordinary bowlers.good neither at bowl figures nor at longevity.and this indeed makes a huge difference in ones track record. Anyone who has seriously watched cricket knows that good bowling unit helps to build pressure and it will help any good bowler in bowling unit to gab cheap/quick wickets.for eg: take SHaun Pollock.the real test for Pollock as a bowler used to be in sub continent and for Kapil it was in Aus,Eng,Nzl,Saf and WI. along with Pollock SAF had much more greater bowler in Allan Donald.if we go thru Donald's figures in Asia we can see how effective the Donald Pollock combination was.being in company of Donald helped Pollock a lot for sure.But with Kapil in Nzl,Eng etc he was the lone main bowler with dibbly dobbly bowlers in company.it does not need extra brilliance to know that Kapil was fairly at disadvantage here as against Pollock who had the huge advantage of being in Donald's company when ever they toured Asia, not to forget the brilliant South African fielding unit led by the dynamite Jonty Rhodes.another eg: take Warne and Mcgrath . I had watched on a number of occasions batsmen overcoming the threat of Mcgrath and getting into their groove only to find them bamboozled by Warne.just imagine the situation had Warne been not there. Mcgrath and other bowlers would have been asked to take the wkts and in such case it is quite natural that with less efficient bowlers to support him Mcgrath's figures would never have been the same as it turned out to be. i am not saying that Kapil was better test bowler than Imran but surely Kapil's bowling figures would have been a lot better but for the above factors.
and then for me only in captainy and test bowling was Imran better. in others either they were equal or Kapil better. so over all Kapil for me

 

[bagapath]

Hahaha. Reading the OP post felt like watching the IPL opening ceremony. Loud, biased, narrow visioned, uninformed and it looked like a classic example of reality severely bent to suit the agenda; I quickly changed the channel.

 

[feroz rawther]

You need to calm down. People will always disagree with your opinion, and you need to accept that. Imran didn't have support at the other end either until Wasim and Waqar came along. Imran too had a horrific injury in 84 when he was at the absolute peak of his powers, and had a godly average and strike rate (bowling). And Imran became the first complete proponent of reverse swing bowling. We might have been calling Imran the best ever fast bowler had it not been for that injury. Maybe not. We don't know.

Yes, Kapil didn't have the advantage of Wasim and Waqar later in his career, and couldn't unburden himself of bowling long spells like Imran did, and he deserves kudos for that. And everybody does give him kudos. He was brilliant. But using that to say he was better than Imran will always generate a backlash.

mate ... first of all i am not one of those blind supporters.not do am i over the board ill tempered. .i just thought of expressing my difference in opinions.coming to the topic.. i agree Imran too had a horrific injury in 84.but the practical difference between Imran and Kapil was that Kapil turned out to play despite doctors's advice to rest while Imran fully avoided playing for 2 years after his injury.this is evident from his dip in performance of bowling from 84 onwards.he could easily have avoided playing for 1 or 2 years and returning as fully fit as Imran did.that was his attitude towards playing for India. i cited only 1 example. like wise there would be many because Kapil played 8.2 tests/year and Imran only 4.25 tests.
and you are telling Imran had no support? he had support in very good bowlers like Sarfraz,Quadir,Iqbal quasim and from 86 onwards Akram .but for Kapil? Sastri, Madhan lal, Binny,Ghavri,Doshi,Maninder,S.Yadav,Prabhakar ...all were very ordinary bowlers.good neither at bowl figures nor at longevity.and this indeed makes a huge difference in ones track record. Anyone who has seriously watched cricket knows that good bowling unit helps to build pressure and it will help any good bowler in bowling unit to gab cheap/quick wickets.for eg: take SHaun Pollock.the real test for Pollock as a bowler used to be in sub continent and for Kapil it was in Aus,Eng,Nzl,Saf and WI. along with Pollock SAF had much more greater bowler in Allan Donald.if we go thru Donald's figures in Asia we can see how effective the Donald Pollock combination was.being in company of Donald helped Pollock a lot for sure.But with Kapil in Nzl,Eng etc he was the lone main bowler with dibbly dobbly bowlers in company.it does not need extra brilliance to know that Kapil was fairly at disadvantage here as against Pollock who had the huge advantage of being in Donald's company when ever they toured Asia, not to forget the brilliant South African fielding unit led by the dynamite Jonty Rhodes.another eg: take Warne and Mcgrath . I had watched on a number of occasions batsmen overcoming the threat of Mcgrath and getting into their groove only to find them bamboozled by Warne.just imagine the situation had Warne been not there. Mcgrath and other bowlers would have been asked to take the wkts and in such case it is quite natural that with less efficient bowlers to support him Mcgrath's figures would never have been the same as it turned out to be. i am not saying that Kapil was better test bowler than Imran but surely Kapil's bowling figures would have been a lot better but for the above factors.
and then for me only in captainy and test bowling was Imran better. in others either they were equal or Kapil better. so over all Kapil for me

 

[Goughy]

Hahaha. Reading the OP post felt like watching the IPL opening ceremony. Loud, biased, narrow visioned, uninformed and it looked like a classic example of reality severely bent to suit the agenda; I quickly changed the channel.

You read it all? I defy anyone to honestly say that they read it all

 

[feroz rawther]

In a 5 day Test, why is strike rate so important? It isn't apart from a occasional situations. BTW, where do you get Kapil's strike rate from in Tests. None of the major sites list it.

and to be frank how many tests especially from 80s resulted in all 5 days of play?i am sure a lot of them ended in either 3 or 4 days.and the speciality w.r.t str: rate is its massive ness.Kapil has 58 scores of 35 or above. in a lot of them he would have tilted the initiative
in favour of India thru his quick batting.this str rate is in cricinfo.but you have to filter country wise and select to fetch it.

 

[feroz rawther]

Hahaha. Reading the OP post felt like watching the IPL opening ceremony. Loud, biased, narrow visioned, uninformed and it looked like a classic example of reality severely bent to suit the agenda; I quickly changed the channel.

i pointed out some plain truths. if you feel as all you pointed above...so be it. i have no regrets

 

[feroz rawther]

Classic case of picking and choosing stats. You can't use ODI stats as indicators of Test quality and vice versa.

No mention of Imran's excellent bowling record throughout the 80s (behind only Malcolm Marshall), the fact that he played into his 40s, the huge impact he had on the team and developing players...

I mean really, are we using the longevity argument AGAINST Imran?

so are you telling that we need not give equal weightage to onedays as that to tests?