Kapil Dev vs Courtney Walsh

[capt_Luffy]

I did and used someone like Richie Richardson. His rpi=41. Using our (WI) "worse" decent batsman ie Sarwan his rpi = 38. Therefore unless we're lowering standards for argument's sake, Dev's batting output is not close to that of an average batsman. It's probably closer to the underachievers like the Hoopers and Logies.

How the ****ing hell you thought of Richie Richardson as an average batsman!???? Dude is literally top 100 Ever!!? Someone like KL Rahul or Kraigg Brathwaite are average batsmen. The likes of Hooper is also an above average batter easily. Logie is more like it. I mean, how you even landed on Richardson!???

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Kapil's English and Pakistan records being termed as complete failures by just average reading is such lame superficial analysis.

Care to enlighten us??

 

[capt_Luffy]

Care to enlighten us??

Pakistan:

78: 3m, 7@61. Debut series, and the Indian bowlers did specifically bad in this one. Chandrasekhar averaged 48, Bedi 74 and Prasanna 125. Verdict; was debut and everyone shitted, can't blame too hard here.

83: 6m, 24@34. It's Imran's golden series, with some serious ball tampering allegations. Kapil was the 2nd highest wicket taker and had around similar averages to othe top Pakistani bowlers. Verdict; not a great series, but overall considering everything, a really good one.

84: 2m, 1@126. Practically bowled a single innings. Pakistan never batted for the 2nd innings that game, and Kapil bowled 5 overs in the 2nd one. Verdict; one bad innings here really.

89: 4m, 12@31. Man of the match in the 1st Test, was good in two others, wicketless in one; bowled a single innings in all the other 3. Verdict; a pretty good series here.



England:

79: 4m, 16@31. Took a 5-fer in the 1st Test, 3 wickets in 3 innings to follow and 2 wickets in the last. Was 2nd highest wicket taker after Botham. India should had really won the last game, but oh well..... Verdict; a really good series.

82: 3m, 10@43. Was again the man of the match in the 1st Test, taking 8 wickets in a loosing cause. Sucked in the other 2 though. Verdict; I won't call being MOTM in one of a three match series a failure, but failing so hard in the other two makes it hard to classify as successful either. Overall alright, with great highs and lows.

86: 3m, 10@30. Again, MOTM in the first game. Difference being, India won that game, and so did the next one to win the series. Was better this turn around in the other 2 games as well. Verdict; hard to agree against it being really good.

90: 3m, 7@63. Yeah, this was a really high scoring series, but overall he just sucked. Verdict, was a really Bad series here.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

How the ****ing hell you thought of Richie Richardson as an average batsman!???? Dude is literally top 100 Ever!!? Someone like KL Rahul or Kraigg Brathwaite are average batsmen. The likes of Hooper is also an above average batter easily. Logie is more like it. I mean, how you even landed on Richardson!???

I also mentioned Sarwan or are you just going to skip over him. And he's definitely an average batsman who made 38 rpi. That's significantly more than Kapil. Therefore Kapil is well below, imo, an average batsman.

Or maybe we just see things differently. I see a cricket level or test standard batsman as those who average 40+ and scores a century around one every 5 or so tests. Below that standard, you have the under achievers. Like the current WI has zero test standard batsmen. I'd take Kapil over any one of them. But that's a pretty low bar imo.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Pakistan:

78: 3m, 7@61. Debut series, and the Indian bowlers did specifically bad in this one. Chandrasekhar averaged 48, Bedi 74 and Prasanna 125. Verdict; was debut and everyone shitted, can't blame too hard here.

83: 6m, 24@34. It's Imran's golden series, with some serious ball tampering allegations. Kapil was the 2nd highest wicket taker and had around similar averages to othe top Pakistani bowlers. Verdict; not a great series, but overall considering everything, a really good one.

84: 2m, 1@126. Practically bowled a single innings. Pakistan never batted for the 2nd innings that game, and Kapil bowled 5 overs in the 2nd one. Verdict; one bad innings here really.

89: 4m, 12@31. Man of the match in the 1st Test, was good in two others, wicketless in one; bowled a single innings in all the other 3. Verdict; a pretty good series here.



England:

79: 4m, 16@31. Took a 5-fer in the 1st Test, 3 wickets in 3 innings to follow and 2 wickets in the last. Was 2nd highest wicket taker after Botham. India should had really won the last game, but oh well..... Verdict; a really good series.

82: 3m, 10@43. Was again the man of the match in the 1st Test, taking 8 wickets in a loosing cause. Sucked in the other 2 though. Verdict; I won't call being MOTM in one of a three match series a failure, but failing so hard in the other two makes it hard to classify as successful either. Overall alright, with great highs and lows.

86: 3m, 10@30. Again, MOTM in the first game. Difference being, India won that game, and so did the next one to win the series. Was better this turn around in the other 2 games as well. Verdict; hard to agree against it being really good.

90: 3m, 7@63. Yeah, this was a really high scoring series, but overall he just sucked. Verdict, was a really Bad series here.

So overall he sucked in Pakistan and England. And in NZ, SL for that matter....but ok

 

[capt_Luffy]

I also mentioned Sarwan or are you just going to skip over him. And he's definitely an average batsman who made 38 rpi. That's significantly more than Kapil. Therefore Kapil is well below, imo, an average batsman.

Or maybe we just see things differently. I see a cricket level or test standard batsman as those who average 40+ and scores a century around one every 5 or so tests. Below that standard, you have the under achievers. Like the current WI has zero test standard batsmen. I'd take Kapil over any one of them. But that's a pretty low bar imo.

I don't see Sarwan as an average batsman too really. By average batsman I simply mean a batsman who averages around the average average for a Top 6 batsman of the era. In the simplest form of the word. That's generally around 31-33. 40+ is well above Very Good. 35+ is proper Test standard. And I actually really found the Richardson point being pretty egregious. For me, Brathwaite and Blackwood are average batsman, while Chase and Barath are well below average.

 

[capt_Luffy]

So overall he sucked in Pakistan and England. And in NZ, SL for that matter....but ok

Did you really read what I wrote?? He had one bad series each in Pakistan and England, Pakistan being literally his debut where Chandra did 48, Bedi and Prasanna 100+. SL were literal minnows in his days. NZ is fair, One very bad series and one decent but can say he sucked there.

 

[kyear2]

How the ****ing hell you thought of Richie Richardson as an average batsman!???? Dude is literally top 100 Ever!!? Someone like KL Rahul or Kraigg Brathwaite are average batsmen. The likes of Hooper is also an above average batter easily. Logie is more like it. I mean, how you even landed on Richardson!???

Kraigg is a below average test batsman. He's not what I would call test standard.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Kraigg is a below average test batsman. He's not what I would call test standard.

Test standard is different from average. And Kraigg is Test standard imo but that's a different debate.

 

[kyear2]

Pakistan:

78: 3m, 7@61. Debut series, and the Indian bowlers did specifically bad in this one. Chandrasekhar averaged 48, Bedi 74 and Prasanna 125. Verdict; was debut and everyone shitted, can't blame too hard here.

83: 6m, 24@34. It's Imran's golden series, with some serious ball tampering allegations. Kapil was the 2nd highest wicket taker and had around similar averages to othe top Pakistani bowlers. Verdict; not a great series, but overall considering everything, a really good one.

84: 2m, 1@126. Practically bowled a single innings. Pakistan never batted for the 2nd innings that game, and Kapil bowled 5 overs in the 2nd one. Verdict; one bad innings here really.

89: 4m, 12@31. Man of the match in the 1st Test, was good in two others, wicketless in one; bowled a single innings in all the other 3. Verdict; a pretty good series here.



England:

79: 4m, 16@31. Took a 5-fer in the 1st Test, 3 wickets in 3 innings to follow and 2 wickets in the last. Was 2nd highest wicket taker after Botham. India should had really won the last game, but oh well..... Verdict; a really good series.

82: 3m, 10@43. Was again the man of the match in the 1st Test, taking 8 wickets in a loosing cause. Sucked in the other 2 though. Verdict; I won't call being MOTM in one of a three match series a failure, but failing so hard in the other two makes it hard to classify as successful either. Overall alright, with great highs and lows.

86: 3m, 10@30. Again, MOTM in the first game. Difference being, India won that game, and so did the next one to win the series. Was better this turn around in the other 2 games as well. Verdict; hard to agree against it being really good.

90: 3m, 7@63. Yeah, this was a really high scoring series, but overall he just sucked. Verdict, was a really Bad series here.

There's nothing there that sheds light on anything.

One good match doesn't a great or really good series make.

A "decent" bowler and sub test standard batsman doesn't beat out a great bowler.

We're assuming this is an average team and this person will be your best bowler and you're going with the one who can bat?

Do we understand how test matches are won?

 

[kyear2]

So overall he sucked in Pakistan and England. And in NZ, SL for that matter....but ok

That's literally what I saw as well.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I don't see Sarwan as an average batsman too really. By average batsman I simply mean a batsman who averages around the average average for a Top 6 batsman of the era. In the simplest form of the word. That's generally around 31-33. 40+ is well above Very Good. 35+ is proper Test standard. And I actually really found the Richardson point being pretty egregious. For me, Brathwaite and Blackwood are average batsman, while Chase and Barath are well below average.

You better be joking about Braithwaite and Blackwood being considered average batmen. Both are categorically poor batsmen. And getting into a top 6 of an era? Neither are making any decent teams top 6. They make it into WI because our top 11 is poor.

 

[capt_Luffy]

There's nothing there that sheds light on anything.

One good match doesn't a great or really good series make.

A "decent" bowler and sub test standard batsman doesn't beat out a great bowler.

We're assuming this is an average team and this person will be your best bowler and you're going with the one who can bat?

Do we understand how test matches are won?

So what do you really expect from a 3 match Test series again?? Mind you, these 2 are his literal worst countries. Kapil is a top 40 bowler for me, Walsh top 20. You add a proper 30 batting average, and I will take him always really.

 

[kyear2]

I don't see Sarwan as an average batsman too really. By average batsman I simply mean a batsman who averages around the average average for a Top 6 batsman of the era. In the simplest form of the word. That's generally around 31-33. 40+ is well above Very Good. 35+ is proper Test standard. And I actually really found the Richardson point being pretty egregious. For me, Brathwaite and Blackwood are average batsman, while Chase and Barath are well below average.

Test standard in my estimation is 40 +, anything below is borderline and we would replace you if we could.

 

[kyear2]

So what do you really expect from a 3 match Test series again?? Mind you, these 2 are his literal worst countries. Kapil is a top 40 bowler for me, Walsh top 20. You add a proper 30 batting average, and I will take him always really.

If you're choosing this person to be the best bowler on your team, your opening strike bowler.

You're choosing Kapil Dev over Courtney Walsh, because he could bat better?

That makes no sense.

And I make no apologies for that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You better be joking about Braithwaite and Blackwood being considered average batmen. Both are categorically poor batsmen. And getting into a top 6 of an era? Neither are making any decent teams top 6. They make it into WI because our top 11 is poor.

34 is the average batting average for a Top 7 batsman this decade. Someone to average that much is an average batsman.

 

[kyear2]

34 is the average batting average for a Top 7 batsman this decade. Someone to average that much is an average batsman.

And we're spoken aplenty how this is the worst and most incapable set of test batsmen we've seen, and in one of the 2 best bowler eras post war.

 

[capt_Luffy]

If you're choosing this person to be the best bowler on your team, your opening strike bowler.

You're choosing Kapil Dev over Courtney Walsh, because he could bat better?

That makes no sense.

And I make no apologies for that.

Firstly, it's an overall comparison between the two here.

Secondly, it vastly depends on the team composition. And I think in an average team, Kapil's 30 odd batting average will be enough to outweigh Walsh's bowling lead. For instance, I will take Kapil over Walsh in the current India team easily.

 

[kyear2]

Firstly, it's an overall comparison between the two here.

Secondly, it vastly depends on the team composition. And I think in an average team, Kapil's 30 odd batting average will be enough to outweigh Walsh's bowling lead. For instance, I will take Kapil over Walsh in the current India team easily.

It's not an overall comparison.

It's which do you choose for an average team.

The likely hood would be that Walsh would be you best bowler.

You're taking a 30 average lower order batsman over who would be your best and opening bowler?

And I've said this countless times, if you're choosing your bowling attack to fix you're batting lineup, you have bigger problems and you're fixing them the wrong way, while also hurting your bowling.

And yes Walsh wins them that last BG series, and helps way more than another undercooked support bowler and inconsistent lower order runs.

You want more runs, fix the damn batting lineup.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It's not an overall comparison.

It's which do you choose for an average team.

The likely hood would be that Walsh would be you best bowler.

You're taking a 30 average lower order batsman over who would be your best and opening bowler?

And I've said this countless times, if you're choosing your bowling attack to fix you're batting lineup, you have bigger problems and you're fixing them the wrong way, while also hurting your bowling.

And yes Walsh wins them that last BG series, and helps way more than another undercooked support bowler and inconsistent lower order runs.

You want more runs, fix the damn batting lineup.

Walsh averages 34 in Australia, Kapil 24...... Last BGT if Kapil plays, we also opt for another batsman in place of Jadeja.