Top Five Cricketers from each country

[Pap Finn Keighl]

explain to me please...

How would you rate Rice as the third best batsman among quality allrounders at the test level, above Botham, Miller and Kapil, when he has played exactly 0 test matches?

no legs. not his fault. but he is not eligible.


If Hick's case is a double quote worthy scientific evidence, what irrefutable logic do you have to sell Rice at the test level?

Because he was a specialist batsman , and he was rated very good in that by everyone.

Botham and Kapil wasn't.

And I can withdraw Rice's case as he played 0 tests. Procter's case is different.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Imagine Rice playing 0 tests at his peak. no batting average, no bowling average. not eligible for this discussion.

Ok .

What about Imran or Kapil comparison ?

Botham benefitted from playing too many tests in his 5 year peak . It hides his 10 year mediocrity. His numbers are skewed in that way.

 

[mr_mister]

You must rate Sid Barnes as an ATG opener

13 tests accross 10 years averaging 63

 

[Red]

Ok .

What about Imran or Kapil comparison ?

Botham benefitted from playing too many tests in his 5 year peak . It hides his 10 year mediocrity. His numbers are skewed in that way.

Jesus, give it a rest will you?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You must rate Sid Barnes as an ATG opener

13 tests accross 10 years averaging 63

Possible

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

This is terrible. Truly terrible.

Players get worked out. Opposition sides work out how to play them, they adjust. It’s all hypothetical. You can’t say Procter would have ahd a better test career than Botham. It’s just a what if.

And this idea being floated around that Dev was a better cricketer than Botham is ****ing tosh. One of the worst exercises in revisionist stat picking I’ve seen. Stop it, all of you. Anyone who watched them play knows Botham was a better cricketer. Those who are saying it’s Dev must never have watched them play, and their opinion is so naive their balls probably haven’t dropped yet. Terrible analysis. Just junk posting.

Doesn’t mean Dev was ordinary, doesn’t mean he wasn’t great. But the other bloke was simply better.

Yes. Botham got worked out within 5 yrs.

 

[Starfighter]

Jesus, give it a rest will you?

Indeed. A five year brilliant peak with ten otherwise mediocre years is better than Kapil's sixteen year mediocrity (if judging by the same standard).

 

[bagapath]

not going on averages alone. botham was the true match winning allrounder of the four.

Kapil was half a step behind Beefy in every way except against West Indies. he was more consistent throughout his long career but for the last few seasons when the bowling strike rate fell badly.

imran and hadlee peaked a fraction later than botham and took different paths to greatness

hadlee remained one of the greatest bowling artistes of all time with occasional batting magic

imran was the leading fast bowler in the world when the cricketing universe was filled with fast bowling champs (81-83). that makes his bowling peak very special. he worked on his batting after the shin injury in 83/84 and became extremely reliable as a middle order bat. but never touched the heights of botham's batting highs from 77 to 82. even Kapil's exploits with the bat (tied test/ 4 Sixers in lords/ century in SA or in the Hirwani test) were beyond imran.

I will be happy if you remove rice from the discussion. keeping proctor is your call. I wouldn't though.

afterwards, we can agree to disagree on the rankings; for after all we are talking about four champions of all time.

 

[bagapath]

1. It was not their fault .
Also Procter proved himself by playing 16 matches spanned over a decade against strong test teams.

Procter stats
16 matches 700 runs at 33.33
70 wickets at 17.14

If 1 wkt = 20 runs , Procter equalled Headley / Pollock from just 16 matches.

2. Botham better peak. Kapil better for longer. Overall Kapil.

Mike Procter played 7 tests.

Mike Procter - Check Procter's News, Career, Age, Rankings, Stats | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[h_hurricane]

not going on averages alone. botham was the true match winning allrounder of the four.

Kapil was half a step behind Beefy in every way except against West Indies. he was more consistent throughout his long career but for the last few seasons when the bowling strike rate fell badly.

imran and hadlee peaked a fraction later than botham and took different paths to greatness

hadlee remained one of the greatest bowling artistes of all time with occasional batting magic

imran was the leading fast bowler in the world when the cricketing universe was filled with fast bowling champs (81-83). that makes his bowling peak very special. he worked on his batting after the shin injury in 83/84 and became extremely reliable as a middle order bat. but never touched the heights of botham's batting highs from 77 to 82. even Kapil's exploits with the bat (tied test/ 4 Sixers in lords/ century in SA or in the Hirwani test) were beyond imran.

I will be happy if you remove rice from the discussion. keeping proctor is your call. I wouldn't though.

afterwards, we can agree to disagree on the rankings; for after all we are talking about four champions of all time.

Agree with whatever you have said. People who are saying Botham was 2 levels above Kapil or there is a lot of gulf between them are smoking something else though. In a direct comparison between Botham and Dev, I would say Botham is ahead, not by much though and would put both in the same tier.

Generally I find Botham over-rated compared to the other three and several people put him on a pedestal much higher than he deserves.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Indeed. A five year brilliant peak with ten otherwise mediocre years is better than Kapil's sixteen year mediocrity (if judging by the same standard).

His record outside what is considered his 5 year peak is much worse than kapils career averages, so not sure it's the same thing. In the last decade of his career Botham averaged 28.9 with the bat and 36.8 with the ball.

 

[trundler]

His record outside what is considered his 5 year peak is much worse than kapils career averages, so not sure it's the same thing. In the last decade of his career Botham averaged 28.9 with the bat and 36.8 with the ball.

Numbers worthy of an old timey NZ all rounder

 

[h_hurricane]

His record outside what is considered his 5 year peak is much worse than kapils career averages, so not sure it's the same thing. In the last decade of his career Botham averaged 28.9 with the bat and 36.8 with the ball.

Yes, stating that Kapil was anywhere near as mediocre as Botham for a decade is ludicrous.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Mike Procter played 7 tests.

Mike Procter - Check Procter's News, Career, Age, Rankings, Stats | ESPNcricinfo.com

7 tests for South Africa against Australia between 1968-1970
5 matches for Rest of the world against England in 1970
4 super tests for world 11 against Australia 1978-79

Total 16 matches
700 runs
33.33 AVG
70 wkts
17.14 AVG

 

[steve132]

7 tests for South Africa against Australia between 1968-1970
5 matches for Rest of the world against England in 1970
4 super tests for world 11 against Australia 1978-79

Total 16 matches
700 runs
33.33 AVG
70 wkts
17.14 AVG

I agree that it makes sense to include Rest of the World matches and Packer Supertests when evaluating players. The standard of play in these games was higher than that in most Test matches played at the time.

 

[bagapath]

7 tests for South Africa against Australia between 1968-1970
5 matches for Rest of the world against England in 1970
4 super tests for world 11 against Australia 1978-79

Total 16 matches
700 runs
33.33 AVG
70 wkts
17.14 AVG

It is not right to include first class matches

ICC and Wisden don’t call them tests. They’re not tests

7 tests mean nothing.

Procter doesn’t belong here.

 

[mr_mister]

Ive always hoped they'd get retrospective test status so the south africans playing them get their records boosted

 

[trundler]

If PEWS says they're tests I'll consider them to be tests.

 

[h_hurricane]

This thread has made me go back and watch Botham's 149 and 118 in 1981 ashes after ages. Boy, that was something else. Those pull shots of Lillee for sixes were **** awesome. He was indeed the best batsman among the 80's quartet.

 

[mr_mister]

What are you talking about he was a total minnow basher