-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
This is Botham's record in the second half of his career (before someone brings the first 51 tests 
)
51 tests 152 wickets @ 36.50.
He was 26 at this beginning of this period and played until 36. So a full decade of mostly prime youth we are talking about.
From 1982 until 1992, he played in 9 of the 11 calendar years, averaging 30 or more with the ball in 7 of those 9 years, and averaging 27 plus in the other 2 years.
Rating Botham above Pollock as a bowler is more like saying Mark Waugh was a better batsman than Steve Waugh.
The gulf in their bowling averages is enormous, and Botham did not even have to encounter the batsman friendly era of 2000s. It really shouldn't be close.
)51 tests 152 wickets @ 36.50.
He was 26 at this beginning of this period and played until 36. So a full decade of mostly prime youth we are talking about.
From 1982 until 1992, he played in 9 of the 11 calendar years, averaging 30 or more with the ball in 7 of those 9 years, and averaging 27 plus in the other 2 years.
Rating Botham above Pollock as a bowler is more like saying Mark Waugh was a better batsman than Steve Waugh.
The gulf in their bowling averages is enormous, and Botham did not even have to encounter the batsman friendly era of 2000s. It really shouldn't be close.
Last edited:
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Yep, and still a very good bowler in his second half unlike ITB.
Flem274*
123/5
this is a drug trip mate
bagapath
International Captain
If one were to rank bowlers on averages alone we might as well automate the rankings and stop talking.
Unlike Shaun, who was steadier, Botham took wickets in clusters more often. No one had taken more than botham's 27 fivefers until Hadlee overtook him. That is a good indicator of his impact in matches. He regularly bowled out teams. Got the best batters in the opposition. Took crucial wickets when it mattered. And kept winning matches with the ball. And all this happened in lightning quick speed.
In a cricketing world blessed with Lillee Roberts holding Garner imran Hadlee Marshall he became the leading wicket taker in the world. Obviously he had to keep striking wickets fast to build that record. After the same no of tests as imran, he had more wickets than him, one must remember.
The worst of Botham is well documented by everyone. Someone should remember the best of Botham was beyond the reach of great bowlers like Pollock or Walsh, who never ever won as many matches as beefy. .
bagapath
International Captain
No mate. Perhaps you didn't see him at his best. You would've agreed with me otherwise.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
look at his profile picture m8
kyear2
International Coach
Fully agree with everything here. Hutton for me the greatest opener ever. From his stats , to who he payed and the bowlers he faced to what he had to overcome. The best and it isn't especially close.
For second, Hobbs played with Sutcliffe and have never seen anyone say Sutcliffe was the superior bat.
bagapath
International Captain
Are you saying I can't possibly be right? Because I have botham's picture on my profile?.
Read my posts in full dude. And then agree or disagree. Don't look at the profile and assume my opinion is colored.
srbhkshk
International Captain
I suspect he is referring to the joint rather than the man.
bagapath
International Captain
Sutcliffe is also supposed to be someone who batted in the Boycott mode. He batted long and scored his runs at a 37 strike rate. Won't work all the time.
Hutton and Hobbs and Bradman could very well be the best choices to take up the top 3 positions in an all time XI forever.
bagapath
International Captain
HahaHaha. Missed it. Too stoned I guess.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sutcliffe faced as many balls per match as Bradman but scored at a Boycotteseque rate. Bradman's strike rate was 24 more, as good as McCabe. So Bradman was essentially the best of 2 ATG batsmen of his time combined.
By default the English 2nd XI would have Sutcliffe and Boycott opening, which would be a less than pleasant sight relative to the greatness on offer. Dexter- May-KP may make up for it though.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
I love watching dour batsmen. Literally throwing down the challenge to the bowlers. Can be very absorbing cricket.
Equating 5 wicket hauls with matchwinning really does not work in practice.
Pollock: 5 wicket hauls in 9 wins
Botham: 5 wicket hauls in 13 wins
Im not sure how you could regard Bothams 4 extra 5 wicket 'matchwinning' hauls as more important than Pollocks notably better performances in 90 something other tests. Pollocks cheap several wicket match hauls clearly helped win a lot more tests than Bothams inconsistency, because Pollock won about 50% more tests in his career. Obviously, Pollock was helped by the fact that he was part of a stronger (bowling) lineup. But the fact that he was part of a stronger bowling lineup is a large part of why he took fewer 5 wicket hauls. Its just a dodgy measure without context.
As did Anderson, while playing alongside Steyn. There is a pattern here.
They both won a lot more matches than him (52, 49 vs 33). Both took a bunch more wickets in wins at a lower average. You could say his performances in wins were better due to higher WPM. But you are comparing a very different number of sucessful tests. If if you add in the tests that he failed to win due to being crap, it is not even close.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
It works like this. If you rate Botham on one or two criteria in which he was better than Pollock or Walsh and do not consider any criteria where Pollock or Walsh were better than him, of course Botham is going to come up on top.
Make Botham bowl with Marshall, Ambrose, Donald or Steyn, you would see his 5 wicket hauls come down. Pollock missed several major hauls in his peak as he had Donald to share his wickets. Same for Walsh.
Botham breaking world record was a function of many things. When he started his career, Lance Gibbs was the leading wicket taker in history. Lillee overtook him but only played 70 matches in his career, hence that record wasn't going to last long. Botham had played 60 odd tests by the time Lillee retired, he was closing in quickly.
Either ways, Hadlee breezed past it.
Make Botham bowl with Marshall, Ambrose, Donald or Steyn, you would see his 5 wicket hauls come down. Pollock missed several major hauls in his peak as he had Donald to share his wickets. Same for Walsh.
Botham breaking world record was a function of many things. When he started his career, Lance Gibbs was the leading wicket taker in history. Lillee overtook him but only played 70 matches in his career, hence that record wasn't going to last long. Botham had played 60 odd tests by the time Lillee retired, he was closing in quickly.
Either ways, Hadlee breezed past it.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Pollock is chronically over rated around here tbh. A slower, shorter, less effective McGrath. Very effective operator but you'd pick a ton of blokes over him in the ATG stakes. Like an earlier Anderson really. Decent, but that's it. Watched him for a decade and never, ever feared he would run through an Australian line up, which is reflected in a mid-30s average. Good player, but that's about it. Basically the seam-up Murali of his generation.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not fair on Murali. Murali's "bowling" at least looked dangerous against us when he was playing at home.