Kapil Dev vs Ricky Ponting

[capt_Luffy]

Botham vs Ponting would be interesting.

I would go with Botham. Many would. And that's kinda my point, most will consider that a fair comparison. Both Botham and Kapil were practically equal as bowlers and Botham despite being the better bat, wasn't that better overall to Dev with a 2 run average boost. I think @BazBall21 's argument will be that Botham at his peak was infact better than Ponting (which is tbf a good argument), but overall I just don't think Botham was enough ahead of Kapil to defeat Ponting and Dev vs Ponting being a no match. I just can't see that really.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Don vs anyone is not a discussion.

To most atleast.

 

[BazBall21]

I will disagree. Kapil's numbers against the two best teams (WI and Australia) are immaculate. He wasn't the most consistent, but as a whole I think has a strong enough case over Ponting.

His record in Australia with the ball is good but to suggest they were always the second best team throughout his career is disingenuous.

He has plenty of high points because he was a top player. But overall output matters. Someone with an away split of 26/33, having never been going at better overseas figures than that throughout his career, just isn't better than Ponting. The overall production and the prime just aren't quite there for it to be a proper discussion imo.

 

[capt_Luffy]

His record in Australia with the ball is good but to suggest they were always the second best team throughout his career is disingenuous.

He has plenty of high points because he was a top player. But overall output matters. Someone with an away split of 26/33, having never been going at better overseas figures than that throughout his career, just isn't better than Ponting. The overall production and the prime just aren't quite there for it to be a proper discussion imo.

Ponting himself was no Great overseas player himself. Kapil carried Indian bowling with quite a below average fielding, he had to cut down his pace to bowl longer. Just looking at his home/away split as 26/33 and saying he was a home bully is kinda detached from the reality imho.

 

[BazBall21]

I would go with Botham. Many would. And that's kinda my point, most will consider that a fair comparison. Both Botham and Kapil were practically equal as bowlers and Botham despite being the better bat, wasn't that better overall to Dev with a 2 run average boost. I think @BazBall21 's argument will be that Botham at his peak was infact better than Ponting (which is tbf a good argument), but overall I just don't think Botham was enough ahead of Kapil to defeat Ponting and Dev vs Ponting being a no match. I just can't see that really.

Botham just yeah because of 1977-1985. He was disappointing v WI and didn't age well but Ponting had his issues in India. Ricky's steep decline did come after a longer period of time, but pace bowling all rounders have it tough for longevity (which does make Kapil's sustainability impressive).

 

[BazBall21]

Ponting himself was no Great overseas player himself. Kapil carried Indian bowling with quite a below average fielding, he had to cut down his pace to bowl longer. Just looking at his home/away split as 26/33 and saying he was a home bully is kinda detached from the reality imho.

I never said he was a home bully and I said there was context. I just think you can only go so far with those figures when they were never better at any point of his career.

And I do think he fulfilled his potential with the ball and his batting was dangerous but naturally volatile.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Botham just yeah because of 1977-1985. He was disappointing v WI and didn't age well but Ponting had his issues in India. His steep decline came after a longer period of time, but pace bowling all rounders have it tough for longevity (which does make Kapil's sustainability impressive).

Kinda my point Exactly. Botham and Kapil are very close as bowlers to me (Kapil just due to tougher home conditions). And yeah, Ian is a better cricketer because he was a much better batsman; but he wasn't that better batsman to suggest they had a huge gulf between them. I just don't like rating players off of peaks much. Sachin never was as good as Viv (76-81) but almost everyone rates him ahead. I will go with consistency over peak every instance.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I never said he was a home bully and I said there was context. I just think you can only go so far with those figures when they were never better at any point of his career.

And I do think he fulfilled his potential with the ball and his batting was dangerous but naturally volatile.

Imo, 29 with ball as the lead bowler over bowling in unresponsive home conditions (equivalent to say a 26/7 averaging bowler for me) and 31 with bat batting down with 8 centuries, multiple innings at crisis, a fast SR in an otherwise slow batting unit and not unnaturally high not outs, for 17 years missing a single game in between, is bloody great.

 

[BazBall21]

Kinda my point Exactly. Botham and Kapil are very close as bowlers to me (Kapil just due to tougher home conditions). And yeah, Ian is a better cricketer because he was a much better batsman; but he wasn't that better batsman to suggest they had a huge gulf between them. I just don't like rating players off of peaks much. Sachin never was as good as Viv (76-81) but almost everyone rates him ahead. I will go with consistency over peak every instance.

Botham better with the ball in that period for me, Kapil obviously sustained himself for longer.

And 1977-1985 is too long to be a peak. Likewise 1999-2008 for Ponting. Two guys that were GODs for a long time. I think longevity would be more notable if Kapil ever got close to the same levels as those two over a stretched period but I don't think he did.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Botham better with the ball in that period for me, Kapil obviously sustained himself for longer.

And 1977-1985 is too long to be a peak. Likewise 1999-2008 for Ponting. Two guys that were GODs for a long time. I think longevity would be more notable if Kapil ever got close to the same levels as those two over a stretched period but I don't think he did.

They were (especially Botham) quite poor for a long time as well. I have seen enough of Kohli to understand how frustrating Botham could had grown. In a practical sense, the player doing consistently good can at times be better than one doing great for a stretch and then making the team on reputation (which Botham actually did). Botham vs Kapil for me is basically Kohli vs Williamson. And yes, at peak Botham was the much better bowler but by career, Kapil edges him for me, just.

 

[BazBall21]

Imo, 29 with ball as the lead bowler over bowling in unresponsive home conditions (equivalent to say a 26/7 averaging bowler for me) and 31 with bat batting down with 8 centuries, multiple innings at crisis, a fast SR in an otherwise slow batting unit and not unnaturally high not outs, for 17 years missing a single game in between, is bloody great.

Consistently very good over an extremely long period of time. Don't think he ever sustained high enough levels to go up against Ponting though.

 

[BazBall21]

They were (especially Botham) quite poor for a long time as well. I have seen enough of Kohli to understand how frustrating Botham could had grown. In a practical sense, the player doing consistently good can at times be better than one doing great for a stretch and then making the team on reputation (which Botham actually did). Botham vs Kapil for me is basically Kohli vs Williamson. And yes, at peak Botham was the much better bowler but by career, Kapil edges him for me, just.

I have to disagree with the notion that nearly a decade is a peak. It's a sustained length of time.

Ponting wasn't poor for that long too.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I have to disagree with the notion that nearly a decade is a peak. It's a sustained length of time.

Ponting wasn't poor for that long too.

Sustained length of time or not, I think overall there is little case to put Botham and Kapil at separate tiers. Botham was basically Kohli, played way too long while being below par and that should count against him accordingly.
Yes, Ponting wasn't poor that long. But I do think everything considered, sustained brilliance of Dev is enough for it to be a close competition. I just like to see the whole picture rather than just parts.

 

[BazBall21]

Sustained length of time or not, I think overall there is little case to put Botham and Kapil at separate tiers. Botham was basically Kohli, played way too long while being below par and that should count against him accordingly.
Yes, Ponting wasn't poor that long. But I do think everything considered, sustained brilliance of Dev is enough for it to be a close competition. Remember for the majority of those 17 years Kapil was the best bowler of his country by a mile and could had made the team at batting.

I think sustainability is more relevant when the two players are qualitatively close. Ponting was clearly better than Kapil before he really tailed off and that was after about 14 years which is a long career.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think sustainability is more relevant when the two players are close. Ponting was clearly better than Kapil before he really tailed off and that was after about 14 years which is a long career.

At days end, Ponting is a 51 averaging bat from a flat era. I will prefer a 29 averaging pacers with high workload and uninspiring home conditions who also averages 31 with the bat; and played for the same duration of time and missed fewer games. My problem is really not whether Ponting was better or not, I myself just switched the vote; it's pretty much the idea that they aren't comparable.

 

[BazBall21]

At days end, Ponting is a 51 averaging bat from a flat era. I will prefer a 29 averaging pacers with high workload and uninspiring home conditions who also averages 31 with the bat; and played for the same duration of time and missed fewer games. My problem is really not whether Ponting was better or not, I myself just switched the vote; it's pretty much the idea that they aren't comparable.

Ponting is definitely better and tailing off at the end of a very long career doesn't change that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Ponting is definitely better and tailing off at the end of a very long career doesn't change that.

Again, a 51 averaging bat is not 'definite' over a 29 averaging bowler and 31 averaging bat; while simultaneously being worse than a 28 averaging bowler and 33 averaging bat. I just don't think being outstanding is that impressive if your overall record doesn't reflects that.

 

[BazBall21]

Again, a 51 averaging bat is not 'definite' over a 29 averaging bowler and 31 averaging bat; while simultaneously being worse than a 28 averaging bowler and 33 averaging bat. I just don't think being outstanding is that impressive if your overall record doesn't reflects that.

Kapil doing better in the final couple of years doesn't mean much to me given the events beforehand which I've gone over.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Kapil doing better in the final couple of years doesn't mean much to me given the events beforehand which I've gone over.

Again, I look at numbers at the end of career and judge. Ponting falling off a cliff and Kapil not being not noteworthy is just not right to me.

 

[BazBall21]

Again, I look at numbers at the end of career and judge. Ponting falling off a cliff and Kapil not being not noteworthy is just not right to me.

Ponting was the best batsman of an entire decade while Kapil's away split was never better than 26/33. I know who I'd rather have, and it's not particularly close.