• 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.

Better batsman : Ian Botham vs Imran Khan

Better test batsman


  • Total voters
    40

ataraxia

International Coach
Yes, and it would have been reflected in his higher average. "All else equal" can't mean same average with higher rpi, that's distorting reality.
I would have commented this but I've tried to ask similar hypotheticals to OS's in the past and if you ask "in general" or ask about a specific player don't say "all else equal" you're going to get the cop-out answer "it depends". So I'm willing to suspend disbelief and answer the core, perfectly reasonable hypothetical of whether higher RPI at the expense of not outs is better.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You not out nut-huggers honestly ****ing disgust me. Making more runs is better. End of. You can keep sucking off players who regularly end up with wimpy little scores of 60* and **** while actual impactful batsmen will simply score more runs. Because that's literally what it comes down to. Players with similar averages and drastically different RPI are not of equal quality , or equal value or equal important to the team. Runs are the currency of test batsmen. Every dumb post defending low RPI high not out batsmen comes from this cloud ****oo land where the actual number of runs you make as a batsmen don't matter. Hypothetically , if there was a batsman who made a string of unbeaten 20s in his "prime" batting at number 8 and frauded his way to a career average of 75 these zero iq mother****ers would call him better than bradman. **** off. Not outs are ****ing useless and so are you.
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Players with similar averages and drastically different RPI are not of equal quality , or equal value or equal important to the team.
Who is arguing that though?

Hypothetically , if there was a batsman who made a string of unbeaten 20s in his "prime" batting at number 8 and frauded his way to a career average of 75 these zero iq mother****ers would call him better than bradman. **** off.
Sure hypothetically but that is never happening. But there is no way in hell you would rate that bat the same as a 20s averaging bat and we all know.

Not outs are ****ing useless and so are you.
That's so obviously not true.
 

ankitj

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hypothetically , if there was a batsman who made a string of unbeaten 20s in his "prime" batting at number 8 and frauded his way to a career average of 75 these zero iq mother****ers would call him better than bradman. **** off.
That's either not possible or the team management will realise the potential and promote such a batsman. See Steve Smith.
 

bagapath

International Captain
Explain to me how Kapil is a better bat than Imran, much less Jadeja.
hahaha I know you dont want me to explain. but you just disagree with me, and thats ok...

Still, if I took your words literally and actually tried to build a case, I would start with the fact that kapil has played more meaningful knocks in test cricket than Imran. He has scored runs when it mattered - like in the tied test/ in the Chennai test vs Windies two years later/ in South Africa vs Allan Donald - preventing follow on, or setting up a winning position for his team or giving his team a fighting chance when everyone else was crumbling around him.

he has decimated tough attacks with audacious stroke play (knocks in the West Indies versus the pace battery/ 89 off 55 balls in England) or just had fun playing cameos (4 Sixers to prevent follow on at Lords in 1990).

He has also played Imran-esque knocks (his highest score versus Sri Lanka in Kanpur in 1986) when he has piled on runs with nothing at stake in pointless games.

He scored fast. He scored all around the wicket. He didnt rely on not outs to boost his average. Imran was better than him at steadying the inning in the sheet anchor role (not that he cant hit big). But he was insipid as a batsman. He was useful for his team, perhaps. But he never changed the course of any game with his batsmanship (while winning the world with his bowling).

In terms of raw batting talent, they are closer. In temperament Imran was better. As for impact, Kapil was miles ahead.
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
hahaha I know you dont want me to explain. but you just disagree with me, and thats ok...

Still, if I took your words literally and actually tried to build a case, I would start with the fact that kapil has played more meaningful knocks in test cricket than Imran. He has scored runs when it mattered - like in the tied test/ in the Chennai test vs Windies two years later/ in South Africa vs Allan Donald - preventing follow on, or setting up a winning position for his team or giving his team a fighting chance when everyone else was crumbling around him.

he has decimated tough attacks with audacious stroke play (knocks in the West Indies versus the pace battery/ 89 off 55 balls in England) or just had fun playing cameos (4 Sixers to prevent follow on at Lords in 1990).

He has also played Imran-esque knocks (his highest score versus Sri Lanka in Kanpur in 1986) when he has piled on runs with nothing at stake in pointless games.

He scored fast. He scored all around the wicket. He didnt rely on not outs to boost his average. Imran was better than him at steadying the inning in the sheet anchor role (not that he cant hit big). But he was insipid as a batsman. He was useful for his team, perhaps. But he never changed the course of any game with his batsmanship (while winning the world with his bowling).

In terms of raw batting talent, they are closer. In temperament Imran was better. As for impact, Kapil was miles ahead.
Ah I see. Your issue is you might be unfamiliar with a series of Imran's knock when he saved Pakistan so you assume his runs are mostly just in meaningless runfests. I would suggest you look at this first ton against the WI quartet and last ton in Adelaide when he saved Pakistan in tough situations against tough teams. And plenty of other knocks besides that both home and away against top attacks saving games, including Lillee and Marshall.

Remove not outs and Imran still has a comfortably better average than Kapil.

I would agree Kapil was more destructive but I don't think it matters as much in tests at no.7/8 as much as saving games for relatively weaker teams.
 

bagapath

International Captain
Ah I see. Your issue is you might be unfamiliar with a series of Imran's knock when he saved Pakistan so you assume his runs are mostly just in meaningless runfests. I would suggest you look at this first ton against the WI quartet and last ton in Adelaide when he saved Pakistan in tough situations against tough teams. And plenty of other knocks besides that both home and away against top attacks saving games, including Lillee and Marshall.

Remove not outs and Imran still has a comfortably better average than Kapil.

I would agree Kapil was more destructive but I don't think it matters as much in tests at no.7/8 as much as saving games for relatively weaker teams.
I am old enough to have actually followed both their careers as they unfolded. my admiration for Imran's bowling and my opinion on his batting both come from following his exploits series by series. you shall stick to your opinion. I will stick to mine.
 

Top