Adam Gilchrist vs Ian Botham

[capt_Luffy]

That was only to convey that I think there's a bigger gap between them than Gilchrist and Botham.

Alright then. But yeah, Gilly is ahead of Miller for me.

 

[sayon basak]

Here's the Gilchrist vs Miller poll that was done earlier this year.

Gilchrist vs Keith Miller - Greater Cricketer

Two different sorts of all-rounders.

www.cricketweb.net

 

[kyear2]

Miller >> Gilchrist > Botham

Imo.

Gilchrist > Miller > Botham

I my humble opinion Gilchrist was a top 4 all rounder in the history of the game

 

[subshakerz]

Gilly because he didn't suck against 80s WI.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Gilly because he didn't suck against 80s WI.

I think he would have struggled against them tbh

 

[Prince EWS]

I think he would have struggled against them tbh

Botham sucked against most teams most of the time. When he was having his golden run he still didn't entirely look like he should have been doing that.

 

[BazBall21]

In the first 8 years of his career, Botham scored hundreds and took five-wicket hauls too frequently to be insinuated as a player of great moments/bursts rather than a great player. The drawbacks against him are his record v WI and being generally ineffective after turning 30.

He did okay v WI with the ball before the 1985-86 tour, but was always a disappointment against them with the bat.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I think he would have struggled against them tbh

Given he was only a teenager I think he would have too.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Botham sucked against most teams most of the time. When he was having his golden run he still didn't entirely look like he should have been doing that.

Yea maybe he was just pretty lucky during his peak and then the rest of his career was his actual level