• 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.

Best of the big 4?

BlackCap_Fan

BlackCap_Fan

State Vice-Captain
By the "big 4" I mean Khan,Kapil,Botham and Hadlee.I reckon that Hadlee is the best,but I am biased.

But from an unbiased view I beleive Hadlee is the best bowler of the 4.

whats your opinion?
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Well, seeing as I personally rate him equal of Sobers at number 1 of all time, I had to pick him.

For me Kapil and Hadlee didn't have the batting that was anywhere near Imran, and Botham never did it year in year out, he could turn a match in his day with either bat or ball, but not consistently.

Imran to me was the main man, and captaincy actually improved him no end!
 
BlackCap_Fan

BlackCap_Fan

State Vice-Captain
He definately wasn't as good of a bowler as the other 3 (maybe kapil,though)

I rate them:

1.Hadlee (biased view,but best bowler)
2.Khan(batting best,but bowling...)
3.Botham(on his day could really show the opposing team how to bowl and bat)
4.Kapil(he played almost 50 tests more than hadlee,and pick up 3 more wickets,and batting wasn't in the class of Khan and Botham)

theres my biased 2 cents.
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Interestingly enough, Hadlee took 431 wickets at 5 per match for an average of 22.29. Imran Khan took 362 @ 4.11 and an average of 22.81, which is not a huge difference. I just can't see how the gap is so huge between Imran Khan and Hadlee as bowlers then. IMO Marc is right. I rate Imran Khan as the best of the big four, when you factor in his batting.

Hadlee was a better bowler, but only marginally and Imran Khan was definitely the better batsman.
 
M

Mr. P

International Vice-Captain
marc71178 said:
Well, seeing as I personally rate him equal of Sobers at number 1 of all time, I had to pick him.

For me Kapil and Hadlee didn't have the batting that was anywhere near Imran, and Botham never did it year in year out, he could turn a match in his day with either bat or ball, but not consistently.

Imran to me was the main man, and captaincy actually improved him no end!
Click to expand...
number 1 allrounder, or cricketer?
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sobers was undoubtedly the number one cricketer in my mind, so I'm fairly certain that he mean allrounder.
 
M

Mr. P

International Vice-Captain
You really rate Sobers higher then Bradman.

Sobers is certainly No. 2, but I can't see how he can compare to a man with a batting average 40 more than him.

Remember Sobers bowling was not at all as good as his batting and I just can't see how they compare.:yawn:
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I personally rate him equal of Sobers at number 1 of all time
Click to expand...
Insane.
Sobers was one of the best batsmen of all-time alone (IMO had he played in the '80s his batting average would be over 60) and could bowl everything, however disappointing his record was.
Imran might have been a much more fulfilled bowler, but he only bowled one thing, however well.
Sobers was undoubtedly the number one cricketer in my mind, so I'm fairly certain that he mean allrounder.
Click to expand...
You really rate Sobers higher then Bradman.

Sobers is certainly No. 2, but I can't see how he can compare to a man with a batting average 40 more than him.

Remember Sobers bowling was not at all as good as his batting and I just can't see how they compare
Click to expand...
I do.
Bradman's status as best batsman of all-time is beyond question IMO, but what Sobers could do with a ball, while being 6th or 7th ish, is quite phenominal.
Sobers' talents are way beyond comprehension and I doubt there will ever be any better cricketers.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
furious_ged said:
Remember, Mr. Ponting, that Sobers would have made the team for his bowling alone.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be so sure of that - although versatile, it wasn't as effective as it might have been.
 
Rik

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
To be fair Sobers was much more effective when he bowled fast-medium in his early days, but his batting soon took priority and he started messing around with other styles, a sort of more effective Tendulkar. It's almost impossible to be a top-class all-rounder with both bat and ball because, after all, we are only human! Batting takes a lot of concentration and having to bowl afterwards was an added strain, so he started bowling spin which was less tiring. I have no doubt that just as a seamer he would have got a place in the side, but he tended to bat so long it put too much of a strain on him and he had to adapt, even though his seam bowling was more effective. People tend to work on one side of their game more than the other, take Kallis who is the best all-rounder in the world at the moment, his batting has taken off and he's bowling less now and is mainly less effective than he was a few years ago, but you don't want to wear him out. Also if you have just batted for a long time you find it hard to focus on bowling, and also having less overs than normal can affect your performance, since it's harder to get into the swing of things when you are only on for short spells.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Good points.

Maybe that's why I rate Imran up with him - his bowling was so good, and his runs just added to his usefullness.
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
At his peak,Botham in my opinion was the best of the lot (from 1977 to 1982)..the thing is Botham wasnt at his peak for a lot of his career mainly due to a back injury,but even in the World Cup in 92 his bowling was instrumental in Englands success in that tournament.

Imran got better as he got older,his batting came on big time when he wasnt bowling as much (due again to injuries)...but when he was bowling at his peak he was amazing, very fast,good swing.

Dev was just a bit below Botham and imran in both bowling and batting.

Hadlee was easily the best bowler of the four (although he didnt have a brilliant record for the first few years),and he could bat brilliantly occassionally,but wasnt consistant enough.

As an all rounder,I would choose Botham (best swing bowler England have had for 30 years, on his day the most destuctive batsman in the world bar Richards,and an outstanding slip fielder,could change a game in the space of a few overs either with his batting, bowling or fielding).

As for Sobers,I never saw him play (apart from odd bits of film).He obviously was an incredible batsman,and a talented bowler.

Many commentators on the game have said that Botham at his peak was as good as Sobers,and I am not going to argue against that.
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
Rik said:
To be fair Sobers was much more effective when he bowled fast-medium in his early days, but his batting soon took priority and he started messing around with other styles, a sort of more effective Tendulkar. It's almost impossible to be a top-class all-rounder with both bat and ball because, after all, we are only human! Batting takes a lot of concentration and having to bowl afterwards was an added strain, so he started bowling spin which was less tiring. I have no doubt that just as a seamer he would have got a place in the side, but he tended to bat so long it put too much of a strain on him and he had to adapt, even though his seam bowling was more effective. People tend to work on one side of their game more than the other, take Kallis who is the best all-rounder in the world at the moment, his batting has taken off and he's bowling less now and is mainly less effective than he was a few years ago, but you don't want to wear him out. Also if you have just batted for a long time you find it hard to focus on bowling, and also having less overs than normal can affect your performance, since it's harder to get into the swing of things when you are only on for short spells.
Click to expand...
very true...that is one reason why Botham was so good, the number of times he played brilliantly in a match with both bat and ball is unparalleled
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The reason I consider Sobers to be the best cricketer the game has known is because he was a superb batsman, a more than useful bowler and a brilliant fielder.
 
T

The Argonaut

State Vice-Captain
I still have a soft spot for Botham. He could single handedly win a game for his side. The others were not as good at this. In his prime he was the best of the 4. I would agree with others though that his consistency let him down.

Hadlee was the best bowler of the group IMO even if the statistics say that there is not much between him and Imran.

Overall when taking batting and bowling into account I would pick Imran as well. Consistency in both disciplines makes him the best.

Sobers was definitely the best all rounder the world has seen. I would still pick Bradman as the top player but that is just my opinion. There is daylight between these two and the rest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top