Richard Hadlee vs Ian Botham

[kyear2]

Guess that would be different outside CW. Botham is rated higher than Hadlee as a cricketer outside cricketweb afaik.

Is he though?

Hadlee is an absolute top tier bowler and a handy bat.

Top 6 player of all time for me, Botham doesn't make my top 35

 

[kyear2]

I'm just reponding to his point about never seeing Hadlee making an ATG team. He has, a lot, recently.

Rankings outside of CW can be catastrophically bad from the general public. The newspaper type polls are hilarious.

And even more expert opinions can be hot garbage. Not least because they are seldom actually objectively trying to rank the best players.

Public polls are atrocious and I don't count those.

Years ago I had collected quite a few "experts" teams and he didn't make any of those either.

No disrespect to the great man, I think he's the 3rd best bowler ever.

 

[kyear2]

In an ATG XI, everything gets nerfed.

Imran could be a 6/7 for a normal team but 8 for an ATG team.

Heavily lean more 7 than 6.

 

[subshakerz]

For multiple reasons I'm the opposite.

Don't like teams with Maco, Paddles and Immy. All 3 bowlers from one era is like choosing 3 batsmen from the 30's.

If I'm choosing my two opening bowlers, and I know not everyone agrees, I just want my two best, period.

I mean, those are the guys that's filling the most important positions on your team.

But all just my opinion.

I think Hadlee may have been a better new ball bowler than McGrath. He would squeeze any bit of movement off the deck and in the air with a red cherry.

But if Marshall is at the other end, then I want McGrath give his height and bounce.

 

[subshakerz]

Heavily lean more 7 than 6.

Depends. As you know, in the 80s he could replace Logie in the WI at no.5/6.

 

[subshakerz]

Is he though?

Hadlee is an absolute top tier bowler and a handy bat.

Top 6 player of all time for me, Botham doesn't make my top 35

Hadlee doesn't make top fast bowler conversations outside of CW. He gets grouped as an AR so some English pundit can wax lyrical about Botham's Headingley game and forget Hadlee existed.

 

[kyear2]

I think Hadlee may have been a better new ball bowler than McGrath. He would squeeze any bit of movement off the deck and in the air with a red cherry.

But if Marshall is at the other end, then I want McGrath give his height and bounce.

What I've said for years. Also ideally suited to bowl into the wind.

 

[kyear2]

Depends. As you know, in the 80s he could replace Logie in the WI at no.5/6.

We've had this discussion before and I greatly disagree.

Not to mention that Logie didn't make the final 11 many games during his career.

 

[kyear2]

On second thought, it's pretty hard to get Hadlee in.

1st ATG XI IMO(Test &FC):-

Jack Hobbs
WG Grace
Don Bradman
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards
Garfield Sobers
Adam Gilchrist
Imran Khan
Malcolm Marshall
Glenn McGrath
Muttiah Muralitharan

Notable ommissions:- Hadlee, Kallis, Warne, Barnes, Akram.

First off, if using first class (which the Wisden AT XI also factored in), and using greatness as an primary criteria, really good XI.

But using F /C and choosing a team to take the field, then I definitely swapping out the openers for Hutton and Barry and Imran for Wasim.

And I mentioned it upfront. But think the Wisden All Time XI factored in cricket in general. Factoring in first class for the older guys and odi's for the subsequent generation. That would solidify someone like Wasim and even Viv.

 

[sayon basak]

First off, if using first class (which the Wisden AT XI also factored in), and using greatness as an primary criteria, really good XI.

But using F /C and choosing a team to take the field, then I definitely swapping out the openers for Hutton and Barry and Imran for Wasim.

And I mentioned it upfront. But think the Wisden All Time XI factored in cricket in general. Factoring in first class for the older guys and odi's for the subsequent generation. That would solidify someone like Wasim and even Viv.

Yeah, Wasim would also offer some variation.

 

[subshakerz]

We've had this discussion before and I greatly disagree.

Not to mention that Logie didn't make the final 11 many games during his career.

50 odd tests is a lot of tests for supposedly a non test class bat in the best team in the world.

 

[kyear2]

50 odd tests is a lot of tests for supposedly a non test class bat in the best team in the world.

Was about 80 for the period, so yeah. He didn't play nearly every match

 

[subshakerz]

Was about 80 for the period, so yeah. He didn't play nearly every match

Golmes played around the same too. Like I said, you don't play that much in the best team in the world if you aren't basically the standard of lower order bat of the era.

And I can give you similar lower order bats in virtually every team of the time. Imran met that standard as a specialist 80s lower order bat.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Another Imran thread

 

[kyear2]

Golmes played around the same too. Like I said, you don't play that much in the best team in the world if you aren't basically the standard of lower order bat of the era.

And I can give you similar lower order bats in virtually every team of the time. Imran met that standard as a specialist 80s lower order bat.

Really not going to get into this with you again.

It's noted and I believe accepted by most that Dev, Botham and some would argue Procter were better quality bats than Imran. Especially Beefy, and he batted primarily at 6 and a decent amount at 7, and Dev spent more time at 7 and 8.

Not to mention the stat bump he got over his last 3 years or so. I think he was best suited for 7, and ideally beneficial at 8 with a strong keeper batsman.

 

[subshakerz]

Really not going to get into this with you again.

It's noted and I believe accepted by most that Dev, Botham and some would argue Procter were better quality bats than Imran. Especially Beefy, and he batted primarily at 6 and a decent amount at 7, and Dev spent more time at 7 and 8.

Not to mention the stat bump he got over his last 3 years or so. I think he was best suited for 7, and ideally beneficial at 8 with a strong keeper batsman.

Dev wasn't a better bat than Imran and it's not accepted by most. Botham was yes and there are worse bats than bother in every team of the era at no 5/6.

The argument you always avoid is what is the standard of the era.

 

[kyear2]

Dev wasn't a better bat than Imran and it's not accepted by most. Botham was yes and there are worse bats than bother in every team of the era at no 5/6.

The argument you always avoid is what is the standard of the era.

I'm talking about quality. And I would feel short on batting if he was my no. 6.

I feel the same way with Jadeja, he's best suited at 7 or 8.

Then again, I don't know why I'm arguing he batted way more at 7 and 8 than he did at 6, and the vast majority at 6 was when he was no longer the same bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm talking about quality. And I would feel short on batting if he was my no. 6.

I feel the same way with Jadeja, he's best suited at 7 or 8.

Then again, I don't know why I'm arguing he batted way more at 7 and 8 than he did at 6, and the vast majority at 6 was when he was no longer the same bowler.

You avoid my point again.

 

[kyear2]

You avoid my point again.

Just because they were worst players in the era who were in and out of teams and we're possibly seen as below test standard, doesn't make that the standard of the era.

The entire WI batting lineup is ****, is that the standard, or an acceptable one? Because someone can make the current WI team, does that make them a test standard bat?

I wouldn't say Sobers was a viable no. 3 test bowler either. 4th or 5th I can deal with, first change, no.

I was listening to an argument for Gilly as an all rounder (one that fully back), and the person wasn't the biggest fan, as would be made clear shortly, but said his keeping was at least as viable as Imran's batting or Kallis's bowling. Now I totally disagree and his keeping was better than both (and so was his batting btw), but that's the comp for me. And the great thing is that you're free to disagree.

In any event, he hardly batted at 6 prior to '88 / 89 in any event and most of his career was at 7 or 8.

I don't believe he was a top.order batsman. He was the best ever no. 8 and a viable no. 7.

 

[subshakerz]

Just because they were worst players in the era who were in and out of teams and we're possibly seen as below test standard, doesn't make that the standard of the era.

The entire WI batting lineup is ****, is that the standard, or an acceptable one? Because someone can make the current WI team, does that make them a test standard bat?

This isn't the argument and you know it isn't the argument.

The argument is that, overall as a bat, Imran could make any team of that time in the lower order.

And to demonstrate, I used the best team, WI, where Logie played consistently in the 80s.

But frankly, I don't need WI, I can point to virtually every other team in the 80s that had an Imran level or worse bat consistently playing at no.5/6.

What you are doing is ignoring the standard of that era and forgetting it was a tough time for batters.