Kapil Dev vs Courtney Walsh

[kyear2]

I don't understand.

You said he wasn't the no. 8 batsman.

In what scenario and in what team isn't he the no. 8 batsman?

 

[kyear2]

No, he wasn’t.

Thank you.

 

[kyear2]

I’ve no idea why. England won, Botham was better batting and bowling. People are idiots.

I was looking at the numbers and thinking the exact same thing

It was nonsense.

 

[kyear2]

A player can be considered better than his numbers if you can make a case he did well in tough conditions and elevated his game against the best opposition right? I feel like "better than his numbers" is a very standard way to describe a player who manages to do the above, not sure what peak has to do with it tbh.

With regards to what peak and decline has to do with it.

Punter was better than his numbers. He had a crazy peak, and one point having the same number that Smith does now.

He then had a crazy end of career decline where he just played too long.

He was better than his final numbers indicate.

Kapil was basically Kapil throughout and the numbers relatively consistent.

I don't think he was an ATG, Great, or even very good bowler. From watching him, reading about him he was basically what his number show.

Don't think there's any doubt that Walsh was a way better bowler.

 

[Johan]

Because Kapil did it against stronger opponents and he had lesser support.

Yes..Some people are idiots.

Yeah the mighty lineup of Geoffrey Cook, Chris Tavare, Allan Lamb, David Gower and Derek Randall is clearly so far beyond the lineup of Sunil Gavaskar, Dilip Vengsarkar, Ravi Shastri and Gundappa Vishwanath

 

[kyear2]

1. Indian pitches were predominantly flat. Kapil's away performance hardly over writes that.
2. There were quite a few turners too here really. Not helping pacers much, but definitely spinners.

But if you averaged 32 away from home, flat conditions at home doesn't explain that away. If his issue was how difficult India was to bowl on, his home numbers would have been 26 and away, what.. 21?

So yes, in the era of great fast bowling and weak spinners, were going to focus on the spinners?

 

[kyear2]

Yeah the mighty lineup of Geoffrey Cook, Chris Tavare, Allan Lamb, David Gower and Derek Randall is clearly so far beyond the lineup of Sunil Gavaskar, Dilip Vengsarkar, Ravi Shastri and Gundappa Vishwanath

Exactly. Lol

 

[subshakerz]

1. If he had averaged 26 away and 32 home I would give credence to being hampered by home pitches, it was the other way round.

Not this ridiculous argument again.

He was hampered by home conditions regardless of how well he did away.

 

[capt_Luffy]

But if you averaged 32 away from home, flat conditions at home doesn't explain that away. If his issue was how difficult India was to bowl on, his home numbers would have been 26 and away, what.. 21?

So yes, in the era of great fast bowling and weak spinners, were going to focus on the spinners?

See his record in WI and Australia and in context Pakistan; and it's pretty Great to good. He had his limitations bowling too short in England and NZ, and that's pretty much his away weakness. Just going by averages always is kinda dumb NGL.

Either Indian pitches were flat for pacers or not, pick a lane.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah the mighty lineup of Geoffrey Cook, Chris Tavare, Allan Lamb, David Gower and Derek Randall is clearly so far beyond the lineup of Sunil Gavaskar, Dilip Vengsarkar, Ravi Shastri and Gundappa Vishwanath

Wasn't in that series both bowled mid overall and batted far better?? IIRC, Kapil took 8 in the 1st match and 2 in the rest of the 2 games combined.

 

[subshakerz]

With regards to what peak and decline has to do with it.

Punter was better than his numbers. He had a crazy peak, and one point having the same number that Smith does now.

He then had a crazy end of career decline where he just played too long.

He was better than his final numbers indicate.

Imran was also better than what his final bowling numbers are but you insist to use entire career. You have no consistency with any argument you use.

You calling Kapil an average bowler is simply disrespectful honestly. Nobody is saying he is worldclass but he is better than what you are presenting him as.

 

[OverratedSanity]

But if you averaged 32 away from home, flat conditions at home doesn't explain that away. If his issue was how difficult India was to bowl on, his home numbers would have been 26 and away, what.. 21?

So yes, in the era of great fast bowling and weak spinners, were going to focus on the spinners?

Why don't you actually give your opinion here. Do you think Indian pitches are flat (for fast bowling) or not?

 

[subshakerz]

Why don't you actually give your opinion here. Do you think Indian pitches are flat (for fast bowling) or not?

He did give his opinion. Because Kapil didnt do better away, Indian pitches weren't flat lol.

 

[capt_Luffy]

He did give his opinion. Because Kapil didnt do better away, Indian pitches weren't flat lol.

But that works against his "Gavaskar fairweather merchant" argument

 

[OverratedSanity]

He did give his opinion. Because Kapil didnt do better away, Indian pitches weren't flat lol.

Kapil was an idiot. Should've sucked at home instead and done better abroad. Also, I guarantee if that had happened, this dumbass would be arguing Kapil was overrated because he didn't bowl well on flat Indian decks and needed the seaming decks of Eng/NZ to be successful. You know I'm right.

 

[subshakerz]

But that works against his "Gavaskar fairweather merchant" argument

Not really. He will reinvent this argument in a Gavaskar thread by suggesting Gavaskar only scored on the flatter Indian pitches.

 

[Johan]

Wasn't in that series both bowled mid overall and batted far better?? IIRC, Kapil took 8 in the 1st match and 2 in the rest of the 2 games combined.

Beefy, in typical beefy fashion, won the first test more or less alone, took 5/46 in first inning to limit India to 128 (got Vishi and Sunny) and also made 67 from 3-37 to stabilise the English inning, pitch flattened out and in tupocal beefy fashion he went for 1/101 right after taking a 5fer, but the first inning lead Botham secured won England the game (and the series). second test Botham took 1/86 and then 2/73 and 0/12 in the final test, so yeah, both bowled some mid.

Botham: 8 wkts @ 35.56
Botham: 403 runs @ 134.33, 2 tons.

Kapil: 10 @ 43.90
Kapil: 292 runs @ 73, 0 tons.

for some reason, someone thinks Kapil was better that series

 

[subshakerz]

Kapil was an idiot. Should've sucked at home instead and done better abroad. Also, I guarantee if that had happened, this dumbass would be arguing Kapil was overrated because he didn't bowl well on flat Indian decks and needed the seaming decks of Eng/NZ to be successful. You know I'm right.

He is just dedicated to rating Kapil on his raw average regardless of whether home or away is better.

Virtually every commentator of the era I saw talking about Kapil prefaces it with saying he had it tougher on his home wickets. But Kyear knows better.

 

[peterhrt]

Test averages of pace bowlers in India during Kapil Dev's career. Qualification 15 wickets.

Hadlee 18 wickets @ 14
Walsh 26 @ 16
Holding 30 @ 22
Dymock 24 @ 24
Marshall 36 @ 24
Botham 30 @ 25
Kapil Dev 219 @ 26
Sikander Bakht 24 @ 26
Patterson 17 @ 26
Prabhakar 19 @ 27
Imran 27 @ 28
Ghavri 58 @ 32
Clarke 21 @ 33
Binny 29 @ 33
Phillip 19 @ 34
Davis 27 @ 35
Chetan Sharma 19 @ 39
Madan Lal 19 @ 46

 

[BazBall21]

Kapil had a veru tough job in Pakistan but his record with the ball in England is underwhelming.