• 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.

Stokes, Ashwin or Shakib?

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
What's truly mind boggling is he had hit 11 of those 100s and taken 19 of those 5-fers by just his 51st Test.

It's insane and I can only imagine how highly regarded he must've been at that time.
 

cnerd123

likes this
What's truly mind boggling is he had hit 11 of those 100s and taken 19 of those 5-fers by just his 51st Test.

It's insane and I can only imagine how highly regarded he must've been at that time.
After his 25th Test he was averaging 40 with the bat (1336 runs with 6 centuries) and 18.5 (139 wickets) with the ball lol.

Both his averages went the wrong way after that.
 

Slifer

International Captain
What's truly mind boggling is he had hit 11 of those 100s and taken 19 of those 5-fers by just his 51st Test.

It's insane and I can only imagine how highly regarded he must've been at that time.
Really?? That's fking insane.
 

Gob

International Coach
What's truly mind boggling is he had hit 11 of those 100s and taken 19 of those 5-fers by just his 51st Test.

It's insane and I can only imagine how highly regarded he must've been at that time.
And add the whole 81 ashes in to the mix
 

Arachnodouche

International Captain
Pre and post-weight gain Botham are two separate cricketers for all intents and purposes. You look at pics of him from 1982 onwards where the gut's started to grow out along with the mullet and find there's a corresponding decline in his numbers. Insane stats before '82 though. His bowling action while he was at his leanest was tailormade for swinging English conditions but also something he could bowl fairly briskly with when needed.
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
After his 25th Test he was averaging 40 with the bat (1336 runs with 6 centuries) and 18.5 (139 wickets) with the ball lol.

Both his averages went the wrong way after that.
The issue with the peaks is that;

1. It is arbitrary
2. It hides the crap

IIRC there was a period where Imran averaged 40+ with the bat and 19 with the ball.

And then Mushtaq Mohammed is there who scored a hundred and took five wickets in the same match against WI. Beat that for a peak. (As I said, length of the peak is arbitrary, even can be one match).

My take: Peaks are way, way, way overrated.
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Or Shaun Pollock. Pollock took 16 five fors in like 108 tests and I consider Pollock a great cricketer....
He is great because he hardly had crap performances. He was very consistent with occasional peaks of brilliance.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
The issue with the peaks is that;

1. It is arbitrary
2. It hides the crap

IIRC there was a period where Imran averaged 40+ with the bat and 19 with the ball.

And then Mushtaq Mohammed is there who scored a hundred and took five wickets in the same match against WI. Beat that for a peak. (As I said, length of the peak is arbitrary, even can be one match).

My take: Peaks are way, way, way overrated.
Strong disagree with all of this.

Absolutely a player should be rated on his entire career, not Cherry picked highlights. I've got no problem with that at all. But when a peak is 50 odd test matches (a full career in past eras) there's nothing wrong at all with looking at those stat's and thinking fmd, that's a seriously good cricketer for a prolonged period of time.

To say a peak can be one test is just ridiculous and no one can be rated on a sample size that meaningless. Id say 30+ tests IMO as that gives enough sample to say a player not only reached those heights but maintained them.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah depending on the decade they were playing in, 30-50 tests is more than decent enough sample size as I guess it usually covers upto 5 years. Botham is just such an enigma though. Wonder if it was just the fame and the lifestyle that caught up with him.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Strong disagree with all of this.

Absolutely a player should be rated on his entire career, not Cherry picked highlights. I've got no problem with that at all. But when a peak is 50 odd test matches (a full career in past eras) there's nothing wrong at all with looking at those stat's and thinking fmd, that's a seriously good cricketer for a prolonged period of time.

To say a peak can be one test is just ridiculous and no one can be rated on a sample size that meaningless. Id say 30+ tests IMO as that gives enough sample to say a player not only reached those heights but maintained them.
Jimmy Anderson's peak has lasted >12 years

still just a peak tho :ph34r:
 

Teja.

Global Moderator
Yes, that Botham peak is absurd in terms of centuries and 5-fers. Sobers had an incredible peak as well in his prime bowling years.

In 8 years from 1961 to 1968, Sobers played 33 tests and took 125 wickets @ 27.9 (5 5-fers) and scored 3106 runs @ 63.38 (9 centuries).

Finally, in 9 years from 1982 to 1991, Imran Khan played 51 tests and took 218 wickets @ 19.16 (15 5-fers) and scored 2494 runs @ 53.06 (5 centuries)!
 

Top