-
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.
The great 1980s all rounders
- Thread starter Burgey
- Start date
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
This is debatable. Botham averaged 28 with half of his matches in more bowler friendly conditions with better bowling support. Kapil averaged 29 with lesser support and lasted longer having played on more unforgiving pitches.Botham was a better bowler than Kapil anyway.
On the same note, I do think Botham was a considerably better batsman.
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
I think it was more the cannabis laws.
Botham bowled 21815 balls in a period of 14 years & 10 months. Kapil bowled first 21823 balls( total 27740 balls) in a period of just 11 years & 2 months. There is a difference of almost 31.5% work desnity( balls bowled/year) between the 2. In these first 21823 balls Kapil averaged 29.11(against 29.64 career average) against Botham's 28.4 . As I earlier stated bowling support strength of Kapil in first 21823 balls was 38.8 where as for Botham it was far far better 31.53( this is playing each test along with '3 bowlers each who averages 38.8 & 31.53 respectively) .
I always think as to how Kapil would have ended up if he bowled only 21815 balls in his career in a span of 14 years & 10 months( taking his own breathing space) with 3 support bowlers averaging 31.53 each just as Botham had in his career. I am sure in that scenario Kapil would have averaged at the least 26.75 as against 29.11 and hence for me is the better bowler of the 2.Keep in mind Kapil had to bowl a lot more because of being the lone str; bowler .If he had the same privileges as an Imran or Botham he could easily have played' just as a batsman or bowled a lot fewer in several series' there by significantly getting his end average improved.
Coronis
International Coach
Thats ridiculous conjecture and you’ve just pulled that number out of your ass. Similar to how we cant ignore Botham’s decline you can’t just chop up Kapil’s career to suit your own views. Lets address some more of this post...
Botham in India 7 matches 30 wickets @ 25.53. 3 5 wicket hauls.
Kapil in India 65 matches 219 wickets @ 26.49. 11 5 wicket hauls.
Botham in England 59 matches 226 wickets @ 27.54 with 17 5 wicket hauls.
Kapil in England 13 matches 43 wickets @ 39.18 with 5 wicket hauls.
So despite both players having better records in India, Beefy had much easier bowling conditions? And Kapil’s record would be better? Seems more like he was a HTB comparitively.
Another part of your post... Botham played with a stronger attack so..... you’d presume Kapil would take more wickets per match with less support than him correct? Like Warne and Murali yes? But..... no......... Worse average, worse strike rate, less wpm, worse peak. I don’t see how you can argue that Kapil is a better bowler than Botham.
Last edited:
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Kept us all awake at night.
srbhkshk
International Captain
As much as rtramdas logic is ridiculous to say the least, can people stop pretending that England isn't easier to bowl for pacers compared to India?
Sure Kapil averaged better in India, that can happen, he learnt his trade in India and played all his life there, he knew the conditions he knew how to bowl and he couldn't adjust to the English pitches as well. If he played all his life in England - he will probably learn how to bowl better over there and by virtue of easier bowling conditions could probably average better - it's not an impossibility.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
So much conjecture...
Coronis
International Coach
Its not an impossibility, but based on the facts we have: Botham was far better in England. Botham was better in India. Doesn’t that make the whole point moot.
srbhkshk
International Captain
Sure, but Kapil averages better in India than Botham does in England? What does that say about their quality?
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Nothing. Put the spreadsheets away and go and watch some cricket.
srbhkshk
International Captain
great point, well made.
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
I’m glad it looks as good from India as it does from England.
Coronis
International Coach
And Botham averages better in India than Kapil does in England. What does that say about their quality?
srbhkshk
International Captain
It probably says that 7 matches is not good enough to judge a player, especially one with such highs and lows as Botham.
Coronis
International Coach
It wasn’t a serious question. It was highlighting the pointlessness of your previous post.
srbhkshk
International Captain
Well yeah,It's no fast bowling after all.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Miller absolutely was an ATG bowler. His WPM is explained easily by the fact he bowled on average 31 overs per match. For comparison, his contemporaries, Johnston and Lindwall, bowled 46 overs per match and 37 overs per match, respectively. During Miller's career, especially around the 48 Ashes and the years after, Australia almost always played five bowlers, a combination of:
Lindwall
Miller
Johnston
Johnson
Loxton/Toshack
Toshack and Johnston, in particular, were capable of bowling long accurate economical spells. Usually Lindwall and Miller let fly with the new ball, before the others would take over. The other thing to consider is that Miller was batting at either 4 or 5, and was prone to niggling injuries, so it was smart captaincy by Bradman and Hassett not to overbowl him.
the data you put forward here is simply quoting plain stats which is not difficult to comprehend. My whole point has been that Kapil's stats were adversely affected a lot by the circumstances like heavy workload, lack of adequate bowling support, longevity etc etc. This implies the stats you put here too would have improved in varying proportions if things happend to him in the exactly opposite way. Is it difficult to understand.
As with the bolded part of yours, I assume what you meant is that ' had Kapil belonged to a better bowling group his stats would have worsened'.Right??
Let me make it clear.Garner had only 7 '5wkt hauls'(least of those 4 bowlers) despite bowling more number of balls than Holding & Roberts .Yet he ended up with a far better bowling average of 20.97 when compared to both of these.Only Marshal with 20.94 was better by a fraction. This proves the benefit in stats of belonging to strong bowling group.
Another very important point in belonging to a strong bowling unit is as follows. Suppose a bowler belongs to a team where he is the only quality bowler and that the other 3 bowlers in the team are very mediocre. Suppose they take on another team which has more or less the same batting strength, but far stronger bowling unit.Suppose the bowlers' team bats first.Because of the opposition bowling unit being so stronger, this bowler's team gets all out for 250.Then the opposition bats and scores 400 because of the poor bowling unit of the first team.Now keep in mind here that if the first team had a bowling strength which is almost equal to that of the 2nd team, they too could have bundled out 2nd team for maximum of say 300 instead of the actual 400.Now the first team(concerned bowler's team) again bats and puts 250 again. So the 2nd team requires only to chase down 100 in the last inns.Imagine the scenario where the first team too had more or less the same bowling strength as that of the 2nd team.Then the 2nd team would only have scored 300 instead of 400 in the first inns.Quiet naturally this would have forced the 2nd team to chase 200 instead of the mere 100 they are actually chasing. This means the lone quality bowler in the first team would have more chances of taking wickets in the 2nd inns of 2nd team because of having 200 runs to defend instead of mere 100. And, when that bowler has a comparatively long career, this disadvantage can accumulate into a 'huge one of denying lots of chances for him'. Hope you got my point.