Players who overcame prolonged poor starts to be rated really highly during their playing careers.

[Bolo.]

Imran Khan is another great example. After his first 20 Tests, he averaged:

Bowling: 31.84
Batting: 23.92

From that point until the end of his career, he averaged:

Bowling: 19.99
Batting: 42.97

A remarkable transformation that turned him into one of the finest all-rounders in Test history.

I'm not sure Imran ever overcame the poor start in terms of perception. Compare to Botham, for example. He had a better career by a stupid margin. But Botham was rated higher for the vast majority of career, and you still find the occasional (moron) arguing for Botham on the basis of how fast he started.

 

[DrWolverine]

Compare to Botham, for example. He had a better career by a stupid margin. But Botham was rated higher for the vast majority of career,

Reasons for this in my opinion :
1. Early peak
2. English media bias
3. Attacking batting style

 

[Burgey]

Anderson is rated lower than he should be

No

 

[Coronis]

Reasons for this in my opinion :
1. Early peak
2. English media bias
3. Attacking batting style

Yeah I don’t rate Imran’s batting cos of a low strike rate

 

[Johan]

Imran was widely seen as a cheat in Australia, England, New Zealand, likely India and I don't know about West Indies, of course he wasn't rated that highly when people doubted the legitimacy of his career. It is what it is.

 

[DrWolverine]

Imran was widely seen as a cheat in Australia, England, likely India

Not in India.

Most India cricketers who played with him respected him immensely.

Kapil Dev called him a genuine match winner.

Today’s birthday “boy” Sunil Gavaskar has often praised him for having a heart of lion and said he could rip through batting lineups.

Infact Sunil Gavaskar took the suggestion of Imran Khan for his specially designed skull cap. There was immense mutual respect between both

Sanjay Manjrekar praised him in his autobiography calling him an extraordinary bowler and captain.

Ravi Shastri praised Imran Khan for getting the best from Pak team.

Vengsarkar, Vishwanath, Srikanth, Kirmani etc have often praised him for his bowling and his legendary leadership.

 

[smash84]

Imran was widely seen as a cheat in Australia, England, New Zealand, likely India and I don't know about West Indies, of course he wasn't rated that highly when people doubted the legitimacy of his career. It is what it is.

Lol, seems like a lot of historical revisionism going on there.

He was actually fairly well respected among his peers.

The cheating controversy only really got going strongly once he talked about using a bottle top in a county game to Ivo Tennant (who was in the process of writing a book on him) and he talked about it in the context of where exactly does one draw the line between on ball tampering (which itself really picked up steam when Wasim and Waqar destroyed England in the 92-93 series using reverse swing).

So yeah, no.

 

[DrWolverine]

Sunil Gavaskar. Imran Khan. Javed Miandad

The Aussies & English had an issue with these 3 brilliant Asian cricketers. Not sure why.

 

[Johan]

Lol, seems like a lot of historical revisionism going on there.

He was actually fairly well respected among his peers.

The cheating controversy only really got going strongly once he talked about using a bottle top in a county game to Ivo Tennant (who was in the process of writing a book on him) and he talked about it in the context of where exactly does one draw the line between on ball tampering.

So yeah, no.

immediately after the 1982-83 series, multiple indian players claimed not only tampering, but one (Amarnath) even claimed he overstepped constantly, and even took the ball to the dressing room when he wanted to. Clearly an attempt to discredit his heroics in that series.

We all know the Botham/Imran case of the 1990s so that is a matter I don't want to touch upon here for no reason.

New Zealanders constantly claimed accused the Pakistanis of Ball Tampering as well, and mutilating the ball too.

Being blunt, it's obvious what many thought, and it's not me saying I agree that Imran was a cheat, I don't think he really did anything that others weren't doing, Holding and Hadlee more or less admitted to ball tampering, Sandpaper gate, Murray Mints and so forth, it's obvious everyone did but it's not unfair to say Wasim, Imran and sometimes Waqar were a bit unfairly ostracized for ball tampering in a way others weren't.

 

[Johan]

Sunil Gavaskar. Imran Khan. Javed Miandad

The Aussies & English had an issue with these 3 brilliant Asian cricketers. Not sure why.

Gavaskar made it an issue after threatening to stop a Cricketing match over a bad decision.

 

[smash84]

immediately after the 1982-83 series, multiple indian players claimed not only tampering, but one (Amarnath) even claimed he overstepped constantly, and even took the ball to the dressing room when he wanted to. Clearly an attempt to discredit his heroics in that series.

We all know the Botham/Imran case of the 1990s so that is a matter I don't want to touch upon here for no reason.

New Zealanders constantly claimed accused the Pakistanis of Ball Tampering as well, and mutilating the ball too.

Being blunt, it's obvious what many thought, and it's not me saying I agree that Imran was a cheat, I don't think he really did anything that others weren't doing, Holding and Hadlee more or less admitted to ball tampering, Sandpaper gate, Murray Mints and so forth, it's obvious everyone did but it's not unfair to say Wasim, Imran and sometimes Waqar were a bit unfairly ostracized for ball tampering in a way others weren't.

Yeah, so? The whole point of Wolverine's post and mine too was that your claim that he was "widely" seen as a cheat is just silly.

A few players here and there doesn't mean "widely" to most people (maybe it does to you).

 

[Johan]

Yeah, so? The whole point of Wolverine's post and mine too was that your claim that he was "widely" seen as a cheat is just silly.

A few players here and there doesn't mean "widely" to most people (maybe it does to you).

Let me ask you a straight question, no home umpiring arguments, no tampering claims, no nothing – Do you think Imran would be rated higher under the completely clean slate if he had the same career as he had in reality?

If Yes, then we agree the thing that affected his rep wasn't Cricket.

 

[smash84]

Let me ask you a straight question, no home umpiring arguments, no tampering claims, no nothing – Do you think Imran would be rated higher under the completely clean slate if he had the same career as he had in reality?

Rated higher by whom? For the handful of people who docked him points for these issues? Sure, they might have rated him higher.

Would he be rated higher by others who never considered these issues big ones, no, he wouldn't.

 

[Johan]

Rated higher by whom? For the handful of people who docked him points for these issues? Sure, they might have rated him higher.

Would he be rated higher by others who never considered these issues big ones, no, he wouldn't.

so in other words he would be rated higher on average as there would be less detractors overseas?

 

[smash84]

so in other words he would be rated higher on average as there would be less detractors overseas?

Sure, but that has nothing to do with being "widely" seen as a cheat which you were claiming.

 

[Johan]

Sure, but that has nothing to do with being "widely" seen as a cheat which you were claiming.

widely as in players and critics from multiple other countries having that opinion, which in turn has influence on media and fanbases.

 

[smash84]

widely as in players and critics from multiple other countries having that opinion

Lol, What do you mean? Does your definition of widely would mean even if one critic each from multiple countries had that opinion?

 

[Johan]

Lol, What do you mean? Does your definition of widely would mean even if one critic each from multiple countries had that opinion?

Eh, it would mean about enough to influence the general opinion on him to a degree. One isn't enough.

 

[smash84]

Eh, it would mean about enough to influence the general opinion on him to a degree. One isn't enough.

Yes, and there weren't enough of those (especially in his playing days) to influence the general opinion. In fact he was quite well respected among his peers and you can go and read the books of his peers to get an understanding of how highly they rated him.

 

[Johan]

Yes, and there weren't enough of those (especially in his playing days) to influence the general opinion. In fact he was quite well respected among his peers and you can go and read the books of his peers to get an understanding of how highly they rated him.

I just generally think Imran would be rated higher overseas had it not been for the accusations thrown toward his way, do you think I'm incorrect in that viewpoint? if so, why?