When Imran was better bowler, Kapil was significantly better batsman.Was talking about his batting.
Agreed Imran had two different parts to his career.
So are you going to judge him until 88/89, at which point he averaged the same as Kapil with the bat but was a notably better bowler?
Or do you judge him by the entirety of his career, by which their bowling was close but he was a significantly better bat?
Either way, Imran was just obviously a better ODI allrounder than Kapil.
Klusner's batting was not that superior, his average was boosted by huge number of not outs. Especially compared to Kapil's peak 9 years ( entire length of Klusner career )Klusener is a least as much better than Kapil with the bat, than Kapil is better with the ball, probably more.
But no.7 in most strong teams I would prefer a finisher like Klusener who can also bash the ball to a pinch-hitter like Kapil who is a better bowler.
Klusener blows Kapil away on RPI too. No one got quick fire cameos as consistently as Klusener. Klusener >>> Kapil as a finisher.Klusner's batting was not that superior, his average was boosted by huge number of not outs. Especially compared to Kapil's peak 9 years ( entire length of Klusner career )
Both are wrong.When Imran was better bowler, Kapil was significantly better batsman.
When Imran became better batsman, Kapil's bowling was easily Better. ( Kapil's batting was no more effective by then.. Though )
Thats because he averaged 47 in 1989.Both are wrong.
Let us compare their peaks.
Imran was a quality bowler until 1989, averaging 32 with the bat and 23 with the ball.
Kapil was a quality bowler until 91, averaging only 25 with the bat, and 25 with the ball.
So Imran clearly was better than Kapil in his peak, regardless of batting SR.
In the last 3 years of each of their careers though, Imran's bowling fell away but his batting improved, where Kapil got much worse with both bat and ball.
Still there are today. Since turn of the millenium there are 893 instances as such batting 1 - 7. Even if we say 25% of them would be pinch hitters, still there is a massive number of top order players who average less than 30.Yet there was specialist batsmen with 30 or below avg in 80s.
I think it depends on the lineup. If you have a side with green/stoinis + marsh and part time overs from head and marnus you can afford to have a #7 like maxwell who's bowling is much less of a factor. If I've got bowling in the top 6 i'de rather who's gonna turn those 30 odd balls the #7 faces into 40-45 runs like maxwell tends to rather than somoene like marco jansen who SA use at the moment who may give you a genuine 5th bowling option.Not only is Kapil vs Imran a boring debate that's been done to death, it's also irrelevant to this thread.
The overall discussion about strike rate vs reliability is more interesting. Plus the relative importance of bowling and batting. I don't want Maxwell bowling or Afridi batting from my #7.