Cricket Betting Site Betway

View Poll Results: Who was the better Test match all-rounder?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ian Botham

    40 78.43%
  • Andrew Flintoff

    4 7.84%
  • Adam Hollioake

    7 13.73%
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 82
Like Tree36Likes

Thread: Botham vs Flintoff?

  1. #16
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    10,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Seems maybe they do, judging by results so far.

    Never would've expected Adam Hollioake to have two more votes than Flintoff mind!

    Hollioake is closer to Flintoff than Flintoff will ever be to Botham.

  2. #17
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    67,248
    Botham easily.

    Roebuck's comment on Flintoff last summer were illustrative "He's half the cricketer Botham was, but twice the man".

    Not sure of the context of Peter's comment tbh.
    Last edited by Burgey; 01-04-2008 at 07:08 PM.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    - JK Galbraith
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**** over your head and get a woolly bull to f**** some sense into you.

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

  3. #18
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    WoW, 16-0 so far. I mean, I was expecting (certainly damn well hoping) Both was going to come-out on top, but this is remarkable. Flintoff to surely get a vote at some point, but it now seems incredible that three years ago people were talking that Flintoff could not merely emulate but some even claimed better Botham.

    I guess about the only thing Flintoff has over Botham is that he stood astride a series against and helped his team to stuff the best side going around. West Indies 1980 and 1981 (and probably 1984 and 1986 too) fairly comfortably > Australia of 2005, however.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  4. #19
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    WoW, 16-0 so far. I mean, I was expecting (certainly damn well hoping) Both was going to come-out on top, but this is remarkable. Flintoff to surely get a vote at some point, but it now seems incredible that three years ago people were talking that Flintoff could not merely emulate but some even claimed better Botham.

    I guess about the only thing Flintoff has over Botham is that he stood astride a series against and helped his team to stuff the best side going around. West Indies 1980 and 1981 (and probably 1984 and 1986 too) fairly comfortably > Australia of 2005, however.

    I think Flintoffs batting just hasnt gone on to the heights that a few years ago suggested. I think though he has the ability to turn a corner with his batting...we shall see.

    Flintoff (when healthy) does exhibit more consistancy than Botham showed through much of his career, just not quite with that killer instinct that Botham seemed to turn on when required
    Fred Tetanus likes this.
    rave down, hit the ground


    MSN: djjacksono@hotmail.com


  5. #20
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    10,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Yeah I tried to convey with "caused overwhelmingly by" that that was the main, rather than exclusive, cause. Wasn't actually aware of the thing about the specialist tho, so thanks for that.

    It wasn't caused by his weight, overwhelmingly or otherwise, he had a deformity of the spine which wasn't diagnosed until he felt a twinge when bowling in cold weather in 1980. From that moment on he never bowled free from pain.

  6. #21
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    It had nothing whatsoever to do with his weight?
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  7. #22
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy View Post
    I think Flintoffs batting just hasnt gone on to the heights that a few years ago suggested. I think though he has the ability to turn a corner with his batting...we shall see.

    Flintoff (when healthy) does exhibit more consistancy than Botham showed through much of his career, just not quite with that killer instinct that Botham seemed to turn on when required
    I've never really believed myself that Flintoff had it in him to score runs consistently against particularly good bowling-attacks. He's done well, IMO, to score the number of runs he has against South Africa (2003), Australia (2005) and India (2005/06). Even that is almost beyond what I generally expected of him.

    The only other occasions (New Zealand 2001/02, New Zealand and West Indies 2004) he's scored have been against woefully poor attacks.

    Had he played against India last summer and Sri Lanka and New Zealand this winter, I'd not have expected him to score very many. He just doesn't have the game for it, for my money. Even after 2005, I never expected him to kick-on with the bat - if he had, it'd have been a bonus.

    I've obviously only seen highlights packages of Botham's (proper) batting, but it always struck me as more convincing than Flintoff's. Always.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  8. #23
    Cricket Web Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    27,193
    Sympathy vote.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  9. #24
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    Botham easily.

    Roebuck's comment on Flintoff last summer were illustrative "He's half the cricketer Botham was, but twice the man".

    Not sure of the contect of Peter's comment tbh.


    Been dying to beat Volty to one.

    Anyway, no contest, Both. Far better batter and significantly better with the ball over a long period of time. Flintoff is/was quicker and more accurate, though.

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Strange poll and thread.

    Its maybe possible that for a short period that Botham was one of the best couple of cricketers ever to have played the game.

    A genuine, very good batsman and a genuine World class bowler.

    Flintoff is certainly comparable to a later Botham in terms of effectiveness but to compare them anywhere near their respective peaks and its like comparing Bradman to Kallis.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

  11. #26
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230

  12. #27
    International Debutant iamdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,112
    I think this is a fair enough question to ask. As at his very best in 2005 Flintoff was playing as well in all likelyhood as Botham (or Imran Khan) ever did.

    However due to the chronic injuries and the collapse of his batting, it ended there.

    All things considered Botham the better cricketer. Certainly a better batsman, I agree somewhat with Richard that Flintoff's batting has always looked a little overhyped, he certainly had the talent and the power, however technically he leaves a bit to be desired with glaring weaknesses against balls moving into him. And he's imo a pretty poor player of spin (although his huge hitting power can hide this when luck goes his way, as it tended to against Warne in '05).

    With the ball its much tighter though, I know Bothams record early on was remarkable, however the general opinion on his bowling (and he owns up to it himself in his autobiography), is that he had a knack of taking wickets with unspectacular deliveries and being able to pull a wicket out of nowhere against the run of play.
    Flintoff on the other hand I think for a large part of his test career has been very unlucky with the ball, very often bowling superb spells which go unrewarded (I'm thinking particularly in '03 v South Africa and at times in '05).

    Flintoff did as has been mentioned have more pace and better control, however Botham probably had a few more tricks up his sleeve (although Flintoff showed, particularly in '05 that he has plenty aswell)

  13. #28
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Quote Originally Posted by iamdavid View Post
    I think this is a fair enough question to ask. As at his very best in 2005 Flintoff was playing as well in all likelyhood as Botham (or Imran Khan) ever did.
    Flintoff was pretty average with the bat in 2005, very good with the ball but nowhere close to Botham's bowling at his best.

  14. #29
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    Quote Originally Posted by iamdavid View Post
    With the ball its much tighter though, I know Bothams record early on was remarkable, however the general opinion on his bowling (and he owns up to it himself in his autobiography), is that he had a knack of taking wickets with unspectacular deliveries and being able to pull a wicket out of nowhere against the run of play.
    Flintoff on the other hand I think for a large part of his test career has been very unlucky with the ball, very often bowling superb spells which go unrewarded (I'm thinking particularly in '03 v South Africa and at times in '05).

    Flintoff did as has been mentioned have more pace and better control, however Botham probably had a few more tricks up his sleeve (although Flintoff showed, particularly in '05 that he has plenty aswell)
    I've always thought Botham was being a bit self-deprecating with his bowling, though. I've seen footage of his bowling early in his career and although there were a lot of balls where he got wickets just through trying something crazy, there were some genuinely good balls taking wickets. Hooping out-swingers and all that. Botham was a genuine Test wicket-taking swing bowler in his early days. Flintoff bowled with a heavy ball and tried to hit the seam most of the time so they were different bowlers. That, I reckon, is why he often gave little away but pre-2004, didn't take huge bags. That said, when Flintoff tried pitching the ball up more and swinging it, as he did in the Ashes 2005, he was absolutely world-class and I find it difficult to believe Botham could have bowled any better. But overall, Freddie was hard to get away but didn't take many bags of wickets, much like Jason Gillespie pre 2005.

    With the bat, there's a larger gap. Even when batting well as he did in 2005, I never thought Flintoff should have been in the English top-6. His ton in that series was the knock of a top-6 batsman (it really was a class knock), given, but his other knocks were your more counter-punching types, perfect for a Test number 7. At Edgbaston, for example, had England batted him at 7 and had a true number 6 in the line-up, I reckon they'd have scored even more in their first dig and totally put Australia out of the match.

    Botham, on the other hand, was a genuine top 6 option without his bowling. Solid technique, orthodox shots, etc.

  15. #30
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    League One
    Posts
    60,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    I've always thought Botham was being a bit self-deprecating with his bowling, though. I've seen footage of his bowling early in his career and although there were a lot of balls where he got wickets just through trying something crazy, there were some genuinely good balls taking wickets. Hooping out-swingers and all that. Botham was a genuine Test wicket-taking swing bowler in his early days. Flintoff bowled with a heavy ball and tried to hit the seam most of the time so they were different bowlers. That, I reckon, is why he often gave little away but pre-2004, didn't take huge bags. That said, when Flintoff tried pitching the ball up more and swinging it, as he did in the Ashes 2005, he was absolutely world-class and I find it difficult to believe Botham could have bowled any better. But overall, Freddie was hard to get away but didn't take many bags of wickets, much like Jason Gillespie pre 2005.

    With the bat, there's a larger gap. Even when batting well as he did in 2005, I never thought Flintoff should have been in the English top-6. His ton in that series was the knock of a top-6 batsman (it really was a class knock), given, but his other knocks were your more counter-punching types, perfect for a Test number 7. At Edgbaston, for example, had England batted him at 7 and had a true number 6 in the line-up, I reckon they'd have scored even more in their first dig and totally put Australia out of the match.

    Botham, on the other hand, was a genuine top 6 option without his bowling. Solid technique, orthodox shots, etc.
    Agree with this whole post, and the bolded bit I think that's what I was trying to say

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Botham At It Again
    By Goughy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 13-10-2006, 05:47 PM
  2. Flintoff v Botham the better allrounder - poll
    By JASON in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 23-05-2006, 01:32 PM
  3. 50 not out for Botham
    By BoyBrumby in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-12-2005, 09:24 AM
  4. Botham vs Flintoff
    By sledger in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 280
    Last Post: 16-09-2005, 03:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •