No he wasn't. Can you suggest some of the series where Imran excelled as allrounder and compare it to Botham's.Imran Khan was 1.5 times the allrounder Ian Botham Botham was& trust me I'm a huge Botham fan(and rate him is the 2nd best allrounder ever).
Nobody is criticizing Imran, we are just stating that we believe he was not better than Botham as an allrounder.
Huh ? I just did that. In the 8 matches(82, 87) they played together (on Bothams territory), Imran excelled as all-rounder over Botham.
Why should one consider the support system when we discuss his skills as a cricketer and on that logic Kapil should be the greatest allrounder to have ever walked on the earth. Flat wickets of Pakistan shouldn't be a question here because Imran grew as a bowler on those pitches and was much more accustomed to bowling on them than other bowlers from world.
Its true in the case of Wasim,Waqar,Shoaib,Asif,Fazal etc but not in this case as Imran Khan hardly played any domestic cricket in Pakistan.Imran Khan's ability to consistenty succeed on flat Pakistani wickets was a god gifted thing.
Yes Imran Khan was averaging 26 in last 4 or 5 years but u must consider he was still way better than Ian Botham.Imran retired at the age of 40 whereas Botham retired at 36.If u expect genuine fast bowlers of over 35 to perform like what they used to do in 20s/esrly 30s,then what can one say?.............redefine bias please!
From what I know of both,Imran was 31,26,58,117*3,42,,23,41,0,54,83,46,12,131 type of batsman where as Botham was 23,3,5,21,7,0,12,143,58,102,56,61,11,7, type of batsman.At anyday of the week,I'll pick Imran
If it were a god gift, Imran wouldn't have sat out of the national team for 5-6 years. Imran was an average bowler at the time of his debut, even in 1976 he was a decent bowler and not a great one, as he became regular he learnt to ball on those pitches he started to shine on those pitches and some of his best performances came in the subcontinent. Not to forget that Imran also played lot of cricket in England too where he had the opportunity to hone his skills too.
If there is a biased individual on this forum, it is you who shows his blatant bias in pretty much every post he makes.
Courtney Walsh, Ambrose, Mcgrath to name a few. Imran was a poor bowler in 1986-87 itself when I watched him in India. And I watched him again in 1989-90 series against India, needless to say he was pedestrian.
If Statsguru is your only basis to make any kind of aargument as it is fairly obvious then I dont blame you, because Statsguru doesn't tell anything more than that.
Then I must say you dont know well enough and it is apparent in your posts.From what I know of both,Imran was 31,26,58,117*3,42,,23,41,0,54,83,46,12,131 type of batsman where as Botham was 23,3,5,21,7,0,12,143,58,102,56,61,11,7, type of batsman.At anyday of the week,I'll pick Imran
Pah! That's nothing! Beefy might've played stoned once or twice (although, that said, I once put together one of my most destructive-ever innings, a ten-ball 26, in a real Gibbs-in-the-Caribbean disposition, so it's possible that the effects aren't actually all that injurious.)
Imran played only 4 tests in first 5 years(1971-1975) of international & was just a teenager when he made his debut.And improving skills in bowling friendly conditions of England helps you to take wickets on dead wickets of Pakistan?
If that was the case then people like Azhar Mahmood,Yasir Arafat & some others would've been world beating bowlers.Its not Imran's fault that England played a lot more test cricket than Pakistan in those years.Also,playing less games makes it much more difficult for genuine fast bowlers as they need time to get into rhythm as compared to medium pacers/spinners.
Imran was 38 years old then & the pitches in the series were such that Waqar Younis said "I was very lucky to have been dropped in one of the tests to be replaced by Shahid Mehboob otherwise my international career woul've been over",as it happened to Mehboob.I remember the wickets were so flat that there was no third innings played in one or 2 maches.Walsh,Ambrose & McGrath akk retired at 37 whereas Imran played till he was 40.
Then what tells you more.What makes you rank Bradman & W.G.Grace as the greatest batsmen of alltime?I agree that stats are not ideal but when analyzed properly they are the best possible way of judging a player.
Yes,you are the greatest source of cricket knowledge in the world & all others are not even as good to tie your shoe laces.
Aww, This is the worst argument you have put up here. There is another thread about Dennis Lillee and you should see what people think about Lillee and what you think about him. Are they all idiots ? Then there is a thread on Sobers and we all know your view on his all rounder skills as opposed to forum members. So please next time dont make those arguments because you dont have a feet to stand on that basis/
I dont know about others but you certainly are not.
Yes, Imran was a teenager when he first made his debut, but he also was an ordinary cricketer, between 1971 and 78. He certainly was not a teen in 1978-79. In 1978-79 Botham who was 4 years younger to Imran was smoking the hell out of cricketers all over the world.Imran played only 4 tests in first 5 years(1971-1975) of international & was just a teenager when he made his debut.And improving skills in bowling friendly conditions of England helps you to take wickets on dead wickets of Pakistan?
Botham, IMO, was the first international cricketer who became a victim of too much cricket. So Shahid Mehboob's career was over because he played on those flat pitches and not because he was a very ordinary cricketer, What Nonsense ? Wickets were always flat in Pakistan during the 80s and Imran used very successful there on early tours.
So Stats tell you that WG Grace was the greatest batsman of all time ?
You're not asserting, surely, that the stats don't make The Don and W.G. the greatest-ever?
Better even than Bradman, yes.So Stats tell you that WG Grace was the greatest batsman of all time ?
Bless you, Jack. You know full well that I was referring only to what the statistics, those utterly redundant and contrived mechanisms for retrospective judgement, try to inform me. Statistics mean about as little to yours truly as they once did to George Gunn; indeed, they are as female fans to Will Young, fidelity to whores and democracy to any world leader of the present epoch. They mean nowt, Jack, nowt whatsoever.
Averaging upto 60+ in a season when others were averaging in 20s & 30s,that makes him statistically almost as good as Bradman was.So Stats tell you that WG Grace was the greatest batsman of all time ?
