****OFFICIAL**** Imran Khan vs Botham Debate Thread

[adharcric]

So you think Botham was ABSOLUTELY the more impressive "match-winner" of the two?
Consider the following:

Botham won 12 MOM awards and 3 MOS awards.
Imran won 11 MOM awards and 8 MOS awards.

I'll be generous and say that they're pretty close, because if anything even that statistic favors Imran. Now don't go telling me that Botham simply changed the momentum of the game and didn't turn in mammoth award-winning performances ... Botham was great, but Imran was greater.

 

[bagapath]

.... when comparing to players of fairly equal worth

Well, thats what i think of these two - they are fairly equal. using their respective averages against WI to push imran miles ahead of botham in this race is totally unacceptable to me. it is not such a vital stat. everyone struggled against marshall/ holding/ garner. if performance against the best is such an important criteria then laxman rocks and inzy sucks.

imran was a great bowler and a very competent batsman. he could attack or defend at will. but he did not play as many matching winning knocks as his match winning spells. botham was clearly a better bat who would turn many a match upside down with his batting alone. he was great bowler for the first half of his career and became quite average later. looking at their careers in totality, there is nothing to stop me from concluding that as all-rounders they both were awesome, inspiring and intimidating. And equals. i cant separate them.

 

[Swervy]

So you think Botham was ABSOLUTELY the more impressive "match-winner" of the two?
Consider the following:

Botham won 12 MOM awards and 3 MOS awards.
Imran won 11 MOM awards and 8 MOS awards.

I'll be generous and say that they're pretty close, because if anything even that statistic favors Imran. Now don't go telling me that Botham simply changed the momentum of the game and didn't turn in mammoth award-winning performances ... Botham was great, but Imran was greater.

I am talking about batting in test cricket...how many of those awards were awarded to Imran thanks to mainly his bowling.

 

[adharcric]

It's not just one statistic that shows Imran as the superior one. Now, I'm not saying there's a HUGE gap between these two; obviously, there isn't ... hence the heated debate here. Yet, there is enough substantial evidence to show that Imran > Botham.

Pro-Imran
Imran had better batting and bowling averages
Imran was more consistent

Pro-Botham
Botham scored more centuries and half-centuries

***MOM, MOS are pretty much even; 4-wicket, 5-wicket and 10-wicket hauls VERY slightly favor Beefy

I think all that points to Imran ... personal opinion

 

[adharcric]

I am talking about batting in test cricket...how many of those awards were awarded to Imran thanks to mainly his bowling.

First off, are we debating who was the better match-winner or the better match-winner by means of runs scored?

Second, doesn't the fact that Botham has 3 MOS awards to Imran's 8 show you that Botham had spurts of brilliance while Imran was just as brilliant yet more consistent and reliable?

 

[Swervy]

It's not just one statistic that shows Imran as the superior one. Now, I'm not saying there's a HUGE gap between these two; obviously, there isn't ... hence the heated debate here. Yet, there is enough substantial evidence to show that Imran > Botham.

Pro-Imran
Imran had better batting and bowling averages
Imran was more consistent

Pro-Botham
Botham scored more centuries and half-centuries

***MOM, MOS are pretty much even; 4-wicket, 5-wicket and 10-wicket hauls VERY slightly favor Beefy

I think all that points to Imran ... personal opinion

I would hardly say there is substantial evidence to suggest Imran was a better batsman, there is in fact plenty of weight behind the aruement that Botham was a better bat, given that it would appear that most of the people on this forum who watched the games back in the early 80s are pretty much all saying Botham was the better batsman...

Just remember Imrans batting average only really went higher than Bothams when Imran basically stopped bowling.

Now overall though, when talking about all rounders, obviously Imran was able to keep going longer, but Bothams allround performamces in those first 5 years have probably never been bettered, before or since....20 five wicket innings, 4 ten wicket matches, 249 wickets to go along with 3000 runs and 11 test hundreds in just over 50 tests (together with 60 catches).

Now no matter how Botham slumped later on, it doesnt taint how astonishing he was in those early years...in all aspects of the game. I actually think he was unlucky in captaincy and if he had have kept his nose clean later on, may well have been given another crack at it....so we will never know I guess

Imran for a good spell of the 80s was an outstanding bowler, a true great, but no matter what his batting average suggests, he wasnt someone Pakistan could look to and say, right, get us out of this with the bat.....whereas Botham was, and often in those early years he simply just did it..

 

[Swervy]

First off, are we debating who was the better match-winner or the better match-winner by means of runs scored?

Second, doesn't the fact that Botham has 3 MOS awards to Imran's 8 show you that Botham had spurts of brilliance while Imran was just as brilliant yet more consistent and reliable?

I thought I was talking about both players batting to be honest?????

A man of the series award is merely the opinion of some ex player or whoever (well it was back in those days).....they arent based on anything but that persons opinion...really again, its an interesting stat, but nothing more really....it does help when the team you play in actually are winning, like Imrans was in the late 80's...even Botham couldnt turn that 80s England team around!!!!.

 

[IndianByHeart]

Now no matter how Botham slumped later on, it doesnt taint how astonishing he was in those early years...in all aspects of the game. I actually think he was unlucky in captaincy and if he had have kept his nose clean later on, may well have been given another crack at it....so we will never know I guess

..

He wasn't unlucky, Botham was terrible as a captain unlike Imran who was a born leader.

Botham would have been he best AR of them all had he done justice with his talent.The guy lacked maturity led a wild life and faded away far too quickly, infact towards the end of his career he didn't had much to contribute, either as a bowler or as a batsman.

 

[Swervy]

He wasn't unlucky, Botham was terrible as a captain unlike Imran who was a born leader.

Botham would have been he best AR of them all had he done justice with his talent.The guy lacked maturity led a wild life and faded away far too quickly, infact towards the end of his career he didn't had much to contribute, either as a bowler or as a batsman.

yes sure Botham wasnt ideal as captian, but he was 24 at the time and thrust into captaincy against the best team to have played the game for 30 years or so....to say he was terrible is a bit harsh I think...

However, Imran wasnt the captain you probably think he was...he was far from best tactically and was probably lucky to have such a talented squad of players. He did well to bring such a emotionally up and down team together, and really he did it by example and reputation as a player ....but dont let anyone say that Imran was a great tactical mind, because he wasnt. And Imran was in his mid 30s when given the captaincy...when Imran was 24, he wouldnt have been mature enough to be captain either...and please dont make out Imran was some holier than thou figure compared to Botham, yeah Botham liked a beer, but Imran did quite enjoy the London nightclub scene (and the women that come along with that) when he was younger

Miandad , who was Imrans great captaincy rival back then, was without a doubt the better captain on the field, but just didnt have support of his players, probably because of his somewhat flawed character.

 

[IndianByHeart]

I thought I was talking about both players batting to be honest?????

A man of the series award is merely the opinion of some ex player or whoever (well it was back in those days).....they arent based on anything but that persons opinion...really again, its an interesting stat, but nothing more really....it does help when the team you play in actually are winning, like Imrans was in the late 80's...even Botham couldnt turn that 80s England team around!!!!.

Ex-players of considerable repute, and in some cases ex-playerS! Don't remember many MOM/MOS awarded to an undeserved player.Those awards were not just given on a person's like or dislike but the players actually earned it with match winning performance.

All stats can't be discarded by saying that they mean nothing.

 

[Swervy]

Ex-players of considerable repute, and in some cases ex-playerS! Don't remember many MOM/MOS awarded to an undeserved player.Those awards were not just given on a person's like or dislike but the players actually earned it with match winning performance.

All stats can't be discarded by saying that they mean nothing.

trust me there have been a few dodgy MoM awards ....

just one off the top of my head was this one..admittedly in domestic cricket, but it goes to show that MoM awards arent absolute proof of much

http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/45/45033.html

Averages are something that us as viewers find interesting and can show trends etc, when used correctly....but they dont prove anything outright when you are talking players of similar performance...especially when those two players have differing roles within their respective teams....

 

[IndianByHeart]

trust me there have been a few dodgy MoM awards ....

just one off the top of my head was this one..admittedly in domestic cricket, but it goes to show that MoM awards arent absolute proof of much

....

Thats why i said there were not MANY undeserved mom/mos awards.

A few dodgy awards still can't take the importance of such awards.In al honsesty there were much more dodgy decisions by umpires (done deliberately) than dodgy awards.

 

[IndianByHeart]

yes sure Botham wasnt ideal as captian, but he was 24 at the time and thrust into captaincy against the best team to have played the game for 30 years or so....to say he was terrible is a bit harsh I think...

.

At the same time to say that Botham was unlucky with captaincy is also inappropriate.

However, Imran wasnt the captain you probably think he was...he was far from best tactically and was probably lucky to have such a talented squad of players. He did well to bring such a emotionally up and down team together, and really he did it by example and reputation as a player ....but dont let anyone say that Imran was a great tactical mind, because he wasnt. And Imran was in his mid 30s when given the captaincy...when Imran was 24, he wouldnt have been mature enough to be captain either...

This is completely flawed and it seems that you don't want to give credit to Imran on anything, not even when it comes to leadership.Imran was tactically sound as a skipper and your earlier post suggesting that Imran was criticized for not being tactically sound is also totally untrue.The only time Imran got criticized as far as captaincy was concerned was on the issue ignoring cricketers from Karachi.Also its a laugh to read that Imran was lucky to have such a talented team,when the fact happen to be EXACTLY THE OPPOSSITE.Imran led a team that had only a few class players and the rest were just ordinary cricketers.The famous test serieS b/w Pak and WI in 80's (one the was drawn and one the Pak won) were regarded as series b/w a champion team with champion players in WI and a determined team in Pakistan that had a few class players who match their rivals by sheer gut and determination.
Imran only had Miandad (even Miandad mostly struggled against WI), Qadir and later on Akram as class players, the rest were anything but ordinary.They were against a team that would easily beat their rival if man to man comparison was done.The team that was led by Akram later on was much much more gifted and had much more talent that the one led by Imran, yet it didn't yield good results.Also i believe you make your own luck, atleast this is true as far as Imran is concerned as afterall it was Imran who drafted Qadir in the team from the streets of lahore (desite strong prostest and accusation of nepotism), it was Imran who drafted Waqar younis in the team when he was nobody and it was Imran who drafted Inzi from the steets into the team.Imran had an eye for spotting talents and he gifted the cricket world with atleast 3 greats in Waqar,Qadir and Inzi , which would certainly not have been possible without IMran Khan.
Also captaining a team like Australia is much more easier than a team like Pakistan that is known for being rowdy and indisciplined.Imran did the almost impossible task of gelling the team togeather, and making the fight like tigers even when they were up against a vastly superior opponents.

and please dont make out Imran was some holier than thou figure compared to Botham, yeah Botham liked a beer, but Imran did quite enjoy the London nightclub scene (and the women that come along with that) when he was younger

What is your point here ?? Noone is saying that Botham was a bad person coz he spent time in nightclubs while Imran was an angle as he prayed in temple all night.Lots of cricketers goes to nightclub, i see no harm in it unless such activities starts to effect one's performance.Imran never let his off the field activities effect his game, however someone like Shoaib Akhtar is notorious for losing focus on the game after spending night in night club, so now they have a night curfew for him .
Botham's rapid decline had a lot to do with the wild life he led, he could have done much more with the talent he had, but he achieved less.Akhtar is another example of a guy who has not done justice with his talent.

Miandad , who was Imrans great captaincy rival back then, was without a doubt the better captain on the field, but just didnt have support of his players, probably because of his somewhat flawed character.

Rubbish! Miandad had a great cricketing mind, but what he lacked was man-management skills, to blame other players for Miandad's misfortune is totally wrong.Man-management is basics of leadership, if you aren't good in one then you can never succeed as a captain.

 

[C_C]

Well said IBH but you cant expect people to change their notions on their heroes.
People refuse to accept the painfully obvious fact that Imran was an allrounder second only to Sobers and Botham is miles(yes miles) behind- I'd rate him behind not only imran and Sir Gary but also Mankad,Kapil, Miller and soon, even Flintoff.

 

[Sanz]

It's not just one statistic that shows Imran as the superior one. Now, I'm not saying there's a HUGE gap between these two; obviously, there isn't ... hence the heated debate here. Yet, there is enough substantial evidence to show that Imran > Botham.

Pro-Imran
Imran had better batting and bowling averages
Imran was more consistent

Pro-Botham
Botham scored more centuries and half-centuries

***MOM, MOS are pretty much even; 4-wicket, 5-wicket and 10-wicket hauls VERY slightly favor Beefy

I think all that points to Imran ... personal opinion

That's ridiculous - Imran was either a bowler or a batsman. Imran wasn't really that consistent as batsman in the early part of his career and in later part he wasn't really doing much bowling.

I consider Botham and Kapil as the better allrounders.

 

[Sanz]

Well said IBH but you cant expect people to change their notions on their heroes.
People refuse to accept the painfully obvious fact that Imran was an allrounder second only to Sobers and Botham is miles(yes miles) behind- I'd rate him behind not only imran and Sir Gary but also Mankad,Kapil, Miller and soon, even Flintoff.

 

[Sanz]

Imran for a good spell of the 80s was an outstanding bowler, a true great, but no matter what his batting average suggests, he wasnt someone Pakistan could look to and say, right, get us out of this with the bat.....whereas Botham was, and often in those early years he simply just did it..

Well Said.

 

[Fusion]

At the same time to say that Botham was unlucky with captaincy is also inappropriate.



This is completely flawed and it seems that you don't want to give credit to Imran on anything, not even when it comes to leadership.Imran was tactically sound as a skipper and your earlier post suggesting that Imran was criticized for not being tactically sound is also totally untrue.The only time Imran got criticized as far as captaincy was concerned was on the issue ignoring cricketers from Karachi.Also its a laugh to read that Imran was lucky to have such a talented team,when the fact happen to be EXACTLY THE OPPOSSITE.Imran led a team that had only a few class players and the rest were just ordinary cricketers.The famous test serieS b/w Pak and WI in 80's (one the was drawn and one the Pak won) were regarded as series b/w a champion team with champion players in WI and a determined team in Pakistan that had a few class players who match their rivals by sheer gut and determination.
Imran only had Miandad (even Miandad mostly struggled against WI), Qadir and later on Akram as class players, the rest were anything but ordinary.They were against a team that would easily beat their rival if man to man comparison was done.The team that was led by Akram later on was much much more gifted and had much more talent that the one led by Imran, yet it didn't yield good results.Also i believe you make your own luck, atleast this is true as far as Imran is concerned as afterall it was Imran who drafted Qadir in the team from the streets of lahore (desite strong prostest and accusation of nepotism), it was Imran who drafted Waqar younis in the team when he was nobody and it was Imran who drafted Inzi from the steets into the team.Imran had an eye for spotting talents and he gifted the cricket world with atleast 3 greats in Waqar,Qadir and Inzi , which would certainly not have been possible without IMran Khan.
Also captaining a team like Australia is much more easier than a team like Pakistan that is known for being rowdy and indisciplined.Imran did the almost impossible task of gelling the team togeather, and making the fight like tigers even when they were up against a vastly superior opponents.



What is your point here ?? Noone is saying that Botham was a bad person coz he spent time in nightclubs while Imran was an angle as he prayed in temple all night.Lots of cricketers goes to nightclub, i see no harm in it unless such activities starts to effect one's performance.Imran never let his off the field activities effect his game, however someone like Shoaib Akhtar is notorious for losing focus on the game after spending night in night club, so now they have a night curfew for him .
Botham's rapid decline had a lot to do with the wild life he led, he could have done much more with the talent he had, but he achieved less.Akhtar is another example of a guy who has not done justice with his talent.


Rubbish! Miandad had a great cricketing mind, but what he lacked was man-management skills, to blame other players for Miandad's misfortune is totally wrong.Man-management is basics of leadership, if you aren't good in one then you can never succeed as a captain.

Great response. I agree with almost all your points. I specially think that Swervy's arguments have now degenerated into "I'll dispute ANY good points that favor Imran to simply boost my case for Botham". I mean to rubbish Imran's captaincy, which is regarded by the overwhelming observers as being ROCK SOLID is too much! And then to turn around and say "Botham was just unlucky" and almost imply that had he been given the Captaincy later he would've been better than Imran is again ridiculous. You can favor one player over another, that's fine. But people would give your arguments more respect if they have a sense of fairness in them, and not just "let's attack everything about the player I don't favor".

 

[FRAZ]

"Leadership" is a God gifted quality and Imran has it , as he is competing with the three main Political parties with his small one and under his leadership his party has contributed significantly.
This is the only thing which seperates Botham and Imran . Botham is a slight better batsman may be, but Imran's run were mostly scored when the team really needed em and If the two prime years were not lost that Imran lost in the early 80's due to an injury then he might have been the hall of famer . And hmmmm Botham is a great asset but again all the three allrounders of that time i.e. Richard Hadlee,Botham and Imran , Only this leadership was a thing which seperates these players and Imran also helped Wasim , Waqar and Aaqib to learn a lot and in the end Imran I guess is better as an overall sportsman.

 

[Sanz]

all the three allrounders of that time i.e. Richard Hadlee,Botham and Imran.

Did you miss Kapil Deliberately because he happens to be from a country you love so much or it's just that you dont consider him an allrounder ?