• 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.

Ian Botham v Shaun Pollock

Greater cricketer, Ian Botham vs Shaun Pollock


  • Total voters
    39

Slifer

International Captain
Much tougher comparison. Pollock the better bowler (imo) and Ian the better batsman. On paper Pollock's looks to have the bigger advantage due to his bowling .....Will stew on this for a bit....
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Pretty CW result but Botham's number of fifers and centuries sways it for me. Both were rather underwhelming for a third of their careers though Botham was the pits towards the end but his peak with bat and ball simultaneously is unmatched. Pollock batted #8 more than anywhere else and his average flatters his output quite a bit. Looked good tho.
 

BazBall21

International Captain
Pretty CW result but Botham's number of fifers and centuries sways it for me. Both were rather underwhelming for a third of their careers though Botham was the pits towards the end but his peak with bat and ball simultaneously is unmatched. Pollock batted #9 more than anywhere else and his average flatters his output quite a bit. Looked good tho.
Agree on Pollock’s batting. Flattering average relative to output, but he looked decent from what I’ve seen.
 

Dendarii

International Debutant
It was ODIs and just three matches, but Pollock once played a series purely as a batsman and averaged over 100.

 

Migara

International Coach
Pretty CW result but Botham's number of fifers and centuries sways it for me. Both were rather underwhelming for a third of their careers though Botham was the pits towards the end but his peak with bat and ball simultaneously is unmatched. Pollock batted #8 more than anywhere else and his average flatters his output quite a bit. Looked good tho.
I would take Pollock the bowler over Botham the all rounder every day of the week.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I would take Pollock the bowler over Botham the all rounder every day of the week.
I think you're conflating his ODI and test legacy. He stopped being a primary threat from ~2002ish. Lost a lot of effectiveness as he lost pace. He basically devolved into Vaas by the end of his career. He was still very economical so still gun in ODIs but very underwhelming in tests. 2 fifers in his last 5 years. Now he didn't fall off a cliff like Botham did in his last 35 odd tests but no way I'd take Pollock ahead of Botham for most of their careers. Pollock was amazing for a long time but he did resort to bowling dry a lot of times when pitches didn't suit him and SA pitches are notoriously spicy. This is reflected in his stats too. Him being a gun #8 makes it close but I wouldn't take him on bowling alone at all.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
I think you're conflating his ODI and test legacy. He stopped being a primary threat from ~2002ish. Lost a lot of effectiveness as he lost pace. He basically devolved into Vaas by the end of his career. He was still very economical so still gun in ODIs but very underwhelming in tests. 2 fifers in his last 5 years. Now he didn't fall off a cliff like Botham did in his last 35 odd tests but no way I'd take Pollock ahead of Botham for most of their careers. Pollock was amazing for a long time but he did resort to bowling dry a lot of times when pitches didn't suit him and SA pitches are notoriously spicy. This is reflected in his stats too. Him being a gun #8 makes it close but I wouldn't take him on bowling alone at all.
Pollock was worldclass level until 2003, around 70 percent of his career. His last five years he only played 30 tests and even then he was never completely crap like Botham towards the end but quite respectable.

Pollock has a very good record in the SC. Helped win matches in Pakistan, India and SL. He took a 7fer in Australia on a road.

Pollock as a bowler was a great even if he never scored a run. When you add his batting record I take him over Botham who in the final analysis was basically a decent batsman and decent bowler combo. In the end, if you are not worldclass in one discipline, you should be rated behind other allrounders who are.
 

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Stats wise over an entire career - Pollock easily, but Botham's presence and x-factor were something else. Even with a beer gut and a blond mullet (and years past his best) he smashed the Aussies for 138 at the Gabba in 86/87 to set up a surprise Ashes' series win.
 

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Pollock was worldclass level until 2003, around 70 percent of his career. His last five years he only played 30 tests and even then he was never completely crap like Botham towards the end but quite respectable.

Pollock has a very good record in the SC. Helped win matches in Pakistan, India and SL. He took a 7fer in Australia on a road.

Pollock as a bowler was a great even if he never scored a run. When you add his batting record I take him over Botham who in the final analysis was basically a decent batsman and decent bowler combo. In the end, if you are not worldclass in one discipline, you should be rated behind other allrounders who are.
Botham took his 1st 200 wickets at 21. The trouble is that he took the rest at about 35/36.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Botham took his 1st 200 wickets at 21. The trouble is that he took the rest at about 35/36.
His 200th wicket came in his 41st test and his bowling peak stopped soon after.

So basically he ranged from decent to poor for 60 percent of his tests or 10 years out of 15 he played. In other words, for most of his career, he wasnt a worldclass player or even a particularly quality one.
 

Coronis

International Coach
His 200th wicket came in his 41st test and his bowling peak stopped soon after.

So basically he ranged from decent to poor for 60 percent of his tests or 10 years out of 15 he played. In other words, for most of his career, he wasnt a worldclass player or even a particularly quality one.
“We shouldn’t downgrade a player for playing past his peak”
 

Top