Better batsman : Ian Botham vs Imran Khan

[subshakerz]

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.

Ok fair enough.

 

[subshakerz]

Engaging with salty is never a good idea

Why do you care?

 

[ankitj]

Engaging with salty is never a good idea

Bruh they are having a fairly civil discussion as far as I can see.

 

[Johan]

Subzy always getting bullied.

 

[kyear2]

Thanks. For now I just told myself I wouldn't engage him on any topic of Imran but it gets hard since he is persistent even though I have asked him not to bring it up with me.

It doesn't affect me personally frankly I enjoy calling out his consistently contradictory takes but if the forum finds it redundant and diversionary I would avoid him altogether. I never put anyone on ignore, even on X I never blocked anyone.

So I'll translate.

You would like me to be quite when you blatantly misrepresent facts.

You prefer to be unchallenged when you say silly things like a few days ago about him being a 6 / 7 batsman in the '80's, or the claim that he was an above average middle order batsman.

Stop making up stupid **** and I'll ignore you as well.

And the bad faith argument goes no further than to say I refuse to agree with you.
And then you try to present it as you and the forum against me, when it's evident that it's clearly not the case.

You're just being self righteous at this point.

 

[subshakerz]

So I'll translate.

You would like me to be quite when you blatantly misrepresent facts.

You prefer to be unchallenged when you say silly things like a few days ago about him being a 6 / 7 batsman in the '80's, or the claim that he was an above average middle order batsman.

Stop making up stupid **** and I'll ignore you as well.

And the bad faith argument goes no further than to say I refuse to agree with you.
And then you try to present it as you and the forum against me, when it's evident that it's clearly not the case.

You're just being self righteous at this point.

How long do you want to keep debating Imran? Why not just let this topic go for both of us?

 

[kyear2]

How long do you want to keep debating Imran? Why not just let this topic go for both of us?

I genuinely done car what you do, but if you continuously misrepresent facts, I'll dispute them.

And the thing is that Imran is more than a great enough cricketer that you don't have to.

He's a top 10 bowler who for the era was a test standard no. 7.

I don't know why you see the need to embellish further.

Did he had his drawbacks, yes, but we've done those and no need to rehash.

 

[subshakerz]

I genuinely done car what you do, but if you continuously misrepresent facts, I'll dispute them.

And the thing is that Imran is more than a great enough cricketer that you don't have to.

He's a top 10 bowler who for the era was a test standard no. 7.

I don't know why you see the need to embellish further.

Did he had his drawbacks, yes, but we've done those and no need to rehash.

Ok on this thread then, Imran as an overall bat was a test standard specialist bat for the era.

Virtually every side in the era had a no.5/6, mid 30s averaging bat with a similar record.

The most notable was Gus Logie who played 52 tests with the WI but was a worse bat IMO than Imran.

Others include guys like Ravi Shastri, Gatting, Steve Waugh, etc. All around the same level.

 

[kyear2]

Ok on this thread then, Imran as an overall bat was a test standard specialist bat for the era.

Virtually every side in the era had a no.5/6, mid 30s averaging bat with a similar record.

The most notable was Gus Logie who played 52 tests with the WI but was a worse bat IMO than Imran.

Others include guys like Ravi Shastri, Gatting, Steve Waugh, etc. All around the same level.

No he wasn't.

Was Guy Logie a legitimate test standard bat? No, the same way, as some have pointed out, neither is Crawley today.

The west Indies is full of batsmen averaging in the 30's and 20's, matching that doesn't make one test standard.

An RPI of 27 does not remotely qualify you as a test standard batsman in any era.

Why do you push this?

 

[subshakerz]

No he wasn't.

Was Guy Logie a legitimate test standard bat? No, the same way, as some have pointed out, neither is Crawley today.

The west Indies is full of batsmen averaging in the 30's and 20's, matching that doesn't make one test standard.

An RPI of 27 does not remotely qualify you as a test standard batsman in any era.

Why do you push this?

Imran had an overall RPI of 30. I am talking overall bat. Not referencing bowling.

Logic played over 50 tests for the WI. No way he could play that many in the best team of the world if he was not test standard.

And I gave other examples.