Better All Rounder Pair

[Johan]

Definitely won't. Doesn't justify them totally though.

Yeah but I don't see how Botham's WI numbers translate to much when being compared to someone who didn't have to face a superteam like that of Windies or peak Australia

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah but I don't see how Botham's WI numbers translate to much when being compared to someone who didn't have to face a superteam like that of Windies or peak Australia

Well, Botham sucked hard. That's a negative. If him averaging 42 odd would had been a big mark up, him doing 21 is an equally down.

 

[Johan]

Well, Botham sucked hard. That's a negative. If him averaging 42 odd would had been a big mark up, him doing 21 is an equally down.

compared to the other three all rounders it's a downmark yes but in general compared to people who didn't have to face super teams consistently I don't think so.

 

[capt_Luffy]

compared to the other three all rounders it's a downmark yes but in general compared to people who didn't have to face super teams consistently I don't think so.

Well, I think sucking hard is always a downer.

 

[subshakerz]

It's significantly better yes, but you can't really say Botham was a top order level batsman significantly better than Jadeja and hand wave that he averages 21 against and 14 in WI over 20 and 9 games. It's just poor by all standards.

Failing against the greatest attack in history doesn't disqualify you as a test standard specialist bat.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Botham best of the lot and his outstanding record puts him so far ahead of Kapil that even though Jadeja is a better package than Stokes the gap doesn't get closed enough.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Failing against the greatest attack in history doesn't disqualify you as a test standard specialist bat.

It doesn't. But it's a minus and pretending otherwise is incorrect.

 

[subshakerz]

You also don't seem to understand my point.

Again, Jadeja doesn't just have a higher average but also a much healthier spread of runs and significantly better performance than Botham to and in WI, which is disgraceful. Again, all things we use regularly. Accounting for more not outs is good, but going by purely RPI, when those not outs those indeed often comes in situations where the batsman could have added decently more runs (eg, all 4 games in England 4th innings) in dumb as well.

Aus and Eng mostly yes. Those are ones that really counts. And he performed there unlike Botham in WI. Something we definitely account for.

And no, measuring by tons is silly metric. Fleming has 9 in 111 games for instance. Jadeja also has 5 more 50s. Last 7 years he averages 44.

Let's see.

Jadeja didn't play any attack comparable to WI. Comparing Aus and Eng to Bothams WI and Aus doesn't make sense then.

The NOs are fine but Jadeja had an unusually large number of them and we have to account for that in average. It's clear RPI matters more than average in this case.

You just admitted earlier that using tons as one metric is fine.

 

[subshakerz]

It doesn't. But it's a minus and pretending otherwise is incorrect.

Sure as long as you don't say let's compare it to a Jadeja away country.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Let's see.

Jadeja didn't play any attack comparable to WI. Comparing Aus and Eng to Bothams WI and Aus doesn't make sense then.

The NOs are fine but Jadeja had an unusually large number of them and we have to account for that in average. It's clear RPI matters more than average in this case.

You just admitted earlier that using tons as one metric is fine.

Jadeja played better Aus. And I won't have complaint had Botham did 27 to WI. 21 and 14 away in 20 games is definitely a major hole.

Taking RPI at face value is much dumber than Average really. You can take a mean of them, as Botham's NOs are also abnormally low, not necessarily a good thing.

It's fine and useful, but I don't think it's the most useful metric.

 

[Randomfan]

Congrats you excluded when Jadeja and Imran batting higher than 6 for pretty much no stated reason because you know it will make Imrans average lower because you just want Jadeja to look better. Imran has a worldclass ton at no.5 better than any Jadeja has scored and you just ignore it entirely in determining who is better bat

If you want to just have Jadeja over Imran because of conversion, fine, just dont exclude stats you don't like. But it hardly makes him a level ahead as a bat if their average and RPI are the same.


Good finally some common sense.

I don't mind those claiming Jadeja is better than Imran but they are clearly near each other and Botham is just better.than both notably so.

Stats simply shows that Jadeja is far better bat than IK when both have batted 6 or lower. Nothing more and nothing less. Statement was the same.

Not sure why are you getting upset over it. Not every discussion is meant to be putting IK up or down. Jusr before that post, I was simply looking at frequencies of 50+ scores for anyone who had batted at 6 or lower.

 

[Al Salvador]

Botham best of the lot and his outstanding record puts him so far ahead of Kapil that even though Jadeja is a better package than Stokes the gap doesn't get closed enough.

Correct

 

[capt_Luffy]

Correct

It literally is poop. Kapil is 2 runs behind in batting average and 1 run ahead in bowling.

 

[Al Salvador]

botham averages better with the ball too right with more wickets per match and better away record, more 5 fer, more ten fers etc. he also averages more and scores 4 runs more per innings, scores much more hundreds, averages better overseas, scores hundreds more often. kapil has wi record which is great point for him but in every other metric botham beats him. people say kapil had a harsh workload but so does botham and infact botham batted up the order more which is again a tougher challenge. kapil has a great longevity so that's a point for him but botham till 1985 was god level cricketer.

i don't think gap between botham/kapil is any less than one between jadeja/stokes. anyway it comes to how people see it as well

 

[Coronis]

It literally is poop. Kapil is 2 runs behind in batting average and 1 run ahead in bowling.

Oh cool, blindly looking at average time for the kids

 

[capt_Luffy]

Oh cool, blindly looking at average time for the kids

No, it's time for someone to bring in how much Botham was than his numbers I feel

 

[subshakerz]

Oh cool, blindly looking at average time for the kids

Yes it's quite annoying. There isn't much that can be debated with this approach.

But I get it, Jadeja just had a great series so that's clearly coloring folks opinions.

 

[subshakerz]

Stats simply shows that Jadeja is far better bat than IK when both have batted 6 or lower. Nothing more and nothing less. Statement was the same.

Not sure why are you getting upset over it. Not every discussion is meant to be putting IK up or down. Jusr before that post, I was simply looking at frequencies of 50+ scores for anyone who had batted at 6 or lower.

You are taking scored from 6 and lower and then in your post made a declaration of who is better as an overall bat. Obviously it's a poor approach.

 

[subshakerz]

You can take a mean of them, as Botham's NOs are also abnormally low, not necessarily a good thing.

Wow so now we penalise less NOs. It's like you are literally inventing new rules to get your argument to win.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Wow so now we penalise less NOs. It's like you are literally inventing new rules to get your argument to win.

If like you have 6 NOs ever, that just means you had a habit of throwing your wicket at the end. Especially given you are a lower middle order batsman. It definitely means Botham wasn't unbeaten often with a 50 or 60, like Jadeja was 4 times just in this Series as he ran out of partners or the match ended in a draw.