Kapil Dev vs Ian Botham

[Lillian Thomson]

Everything has been done before. It just needs Papa Fish Fingers to come in and say who cares as neither are as good as Mike Proctor and we'll have the full set.

 

[ankitj]

Botham in Test as his peak was way higher and his stats are significantly better till the last 5 years where god knows why he returned.

His stats didn't change as much in last 5 years actually.

 

[Johan]

what were his numbers at the end of 86/star of 87? like 31 decemember 86?

 

[trundler]

Mike Procter,,,

Hadlee level with ball (GOAT,,, much better than Imran),,,

Botham level with bat,,,

SA's greatest cricketer hence proved

 

[ankitj]

what were his numbers at the end of 86/star of 87? like 31 decemember 86?

Not too different.

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[wpdavid]

His stats didn't change as much in last 5 years actually.

View attachment 33116

Yeah, well it was only 10% of his tests, so his overall stats wouldn't have changed hugely. His stats during those five years compared to the rest of his career would tell a different story.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yeah, well it was only 10% of his tests, so his overall stats wouldn't have changed hugely. His stats during those five years compared to the rest of his career would tell a different story.

His stats over that period were still better than David Capel and most of the others they tried to replace him with though.

 

[trundler]

Didn't his stats go from Miller on roids to good to Abdul Razzaq

 

[wpdavid]

His stats over that period were still better than David Capel and most of the others they tried to replace him with though.

I was about to quibble about the late David Capel, but I thought I'd better check, and you're probably right. I had remembered his occasional triumphs and forgotten his overall test averages of 15.6 and 50.6, unfortunately with bat and ball respectively,.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I was about to quibble about the late David Capel, but I thought I'd better check, and you're probably right. I had remembered his occasional triumphs and forgotten his overall test averages of 15.6 and 50.6, unfortunately with bat and ball respectively,.

England have had 4 high quality allrounders in the last 50 years (Greig, Botham, Flintoff, Stokes) and in between lots of awful ones while they've been searching for the next good one.

 

[Migara]

Didn't his stats go from Miller on roids to good to Abdul Razzaq

Razzaq was a better ODI all rounder than Botham.

 

[Zinzan]

Not a fair comparison, definitely Botham

Try Kapil Dev v Scott Styris maybe

Not bad, but Styris >>> Kapil with the bat whereas Kapil only > Styris with the ball.

Not to mention Styris wins it in the modelling department.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Not bad, but Styris >>> Kapil with the bat whereas Kapil only > Styris with the ball.

Not to mention Styris wins it in the modelling department.

Scott Styris - 2nd highest test batting average ever in the West Indies.

 

[Johan]

Not bad, but Styris >>> Kapil with the bat whereas Kapil only > Styris with the ball.

Not to mention Styris wins it in the modelling department.

what a comparasion , 36 averaging bat and 50 averaging bowler vs 32 averaging bat ( with 80+ SR ) and 29 averaging bowler

 

[Zinzan]

Well spotted.

 

[Burgey]

England have had 4 high quality allrounders in the last 50 years (Greig, Botham, Flintoff, Stokes) and in between lots of awful ones while they've been searching for the next good one.

That’s actually not a bad ratio compared with other countries tbh. Certainly better than Australia in that time frame. And they were all very, very good cricketers tbh

 

[TheJediBrah]

That’s actually not a bad ratio compared with other countries tbh. Certainly better than Australia in that time frame. And they were all very, very good cricketers tbh

Hey Mitch Marsh, James Faulkner, Andrew McDonald and Shaun Young are just as good

 

[Burgey]

Poor Watto. Overlooked again.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

That’s actually not a bad ratio compared with other countries tbh. Certainly better than Australia in that time frame. And they were all very, very good cricketers tbh

Definitely. TBF Australia didn't need aĺlrounders - their keepeers (obv Gilly) andc tail could bat and many of their batters take handy wickets.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

If SA hadn't been banned for apartheid (and a very good thing they were), they could have had post-1970 (or post Goddard):

Barlow, Procter, (kept ) Greig, Rice, McMillan, S Pollock, Kallis

In à few tests NZ had Cairns, Oram, and Vettori (McCullum keeping so most runs from the tail) in the same team along with handy part-timers (ODI allrounders) like Styris, Astle, and McMillan.