5 and 10 fers don’t mean a whole lot. It’s two very different careers
5fers and 10fers aren't all..... Botham and Kapil, none are frontline batsmen. I don't expect that consistency from them while batting; and neither really had that. Botham gets that on impact. The same don't apply as they're frontline bowlers. I expect them to ball consistently. Kapil played 132 games out of India's 133; and the only one he missed was due to being stupidly dropped. That doesn't really helps his batting case much (he was ironically dropped for reckless batting); but as a medium pacer who was genuinely fast at his early stages and in many matches bowled spells of 14-15 overs; that's pretty impressive.
Lol
A team with a weaker bowling; but with Gavaskar, Amarnath, Viswanath, Vengsarkar and later Azharuddin; the batting wasn't certainly weaker.
lol ok.
If you really think playing 132 games without any break in between as medium pacer is non sense; then sure why not..... A 10fer and a century aren't the same thing; I don't know why it's really hard to get. Indian pitches were significantly more disadvantageous to medium pacers during Kapil's career. Getting a 10fer is much more situational; and please don't be like that due to sharing wickets with Bob Willis it was hard to get a 10fer..... If Botham had so much more competition for wickets from his competitors, won't you expect his average to be in the range of 25-26 atmost? And yes, I know Botham bowled more overs per innings but that's also skewed due to Kapil bowling significantly less in his last few years. The only advantage Botham has over Kapil is his peak and record against..... New Zealand. New Zealand is the only team both played against and Botham did significantly better. Though that's somewhat disingenuous; Botham did much better against India than Kapil did England and was better vs Pakistan at home (though Kapil was better in Pakistan). If you want to rate Botham for 5fers, 10fers, average, peak, etc. be my guest! Just don't push it on others.
Of course they’re not, a 10’fer is much more impressive.
You do know Botham has a superior record in India right?
Why would I expect that?
So he started bowling significantly less but you keep praising him for that extra longevity. Ok
Its curious, if India was so difficult for “medium” pacers why did Kapil average 26 at home and 32 away? Botham is much more consistent across different conditions. The only place he really struggled was the Windies (Pakistan he only had 1 test in so samplesizelol). Kapil struggled in England, New Zealand, Pakistan and South Africa. (not even including SL for him so there you go) Not very comparable is it?
He rated Bumrah ahead, in the famous 51 rankings
Botham averages 33 with the ball after the first 25 Tests. That's 3/4th of his career.
Is it? If we always took players in their prime then isn't Waqar Younis a better bowler than Wasim Akram? Or Brian Lara a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar?
Kapil averages 31 with the ball after his first 33 tests. That’s 3/4 of his career.
Kapil never really had a huge fall. In his last 105 games, he practically averaged the same he did his whole career, just ahead of 30. Botham did. In his 71 games over the same period (from 1980, he played for 3 years before that); he averaged almost 34.
And before that he was far better than Kapil ever was and the overall numbers still favour him. Also gj addressing none of the points in my previous post
Curious then, if Bumrah has a big decline, would that change?
The numbers favour him slightly. He went from averaging 18 to 34 for the rest part. I have already addressed most of your points I believe. Kapil was bad against England and New Zealand; Botham was against West Indies. That's all there is to it. Kapil wasn't great in Pakistan, but he outballed Imran in India.