Kapil vs Botham as batsman

[rtmohanlal]

Ian Botham and Kapil dev 2 champion all rounders from 80s.Almost similar in their styles of play. Of these Ian is conventionally believed to be the best batsman of the 2.Let us go into details. test batting inns n.outs runs highest avg: 100s 50s runs/inns str:rate Kapil : 184 15 5248 163 31.05 8 27 28.52 80.91 Ian : 161 6 5200 208 33.54 14 22 32.30 60.71 They do not differ much in no: of +50 scores.But Ian has better conversion rate.But if we go thru a little deeper we can see some of Botham's 100s are in the range 100-108 where as Kapil has 2 90s. So taking 75 as a relatively big score then, inns n.o runs highest avg: 100s 50s runs/inns str: rate Kapil : 15 3 1578 163 131.50 8 7 105.2 96.45 Ian : 16 2 1971 208 140.78 14 2 123.19 76.45 from the above data it is crystal clear that though Botham has 6 more 100s than Kapil it is not that much a difference between the 2 because in >75 scores they differ by only one, i.e 15 :16 .And this data typically reflects the 2 players efficiency. only a difference of 9.28 in avg: but difference of 20 w.r.t str: rate in favour of Kapil. that means Botham took 184.15 balls to score 140.78 runs where as Kapil took only 136.34 balls to score 131.5 runs. Both of these players have some great inns too. Botham Ashes 100s and his Jubilee test 100 vs India are well known.Kapil too had great inns. His twin 98s against WI as catpain in WI were crucial in India managing a descent 0-2 defeat in a 5 test series.Other wise the record would easily have been 5-0 in WI favour.So all in all Ian could score a few more runs in impact inns while Kapil scored his runs at a completely different aggressiveness level. W.R.T >35 Kapil has 58 against Ian's 52.if we go thru Kapil's >35 scores he scored 58 of them, that is one in every 3.15 inns at str: rate of 88.39 and avg: runs/inns of 64.43.....88.39 means he completely created havoc among the bowlers.but unfortunately India was a side which lied 2nd from bottom those days to take complete advantage of Kapil's exploits.naturally all his such inns didn't make an impact on the result of the match but some of them did indeed.and Kapil did all these inns in the company of tailenders.i feel it as a huge disadvantage when compared to higher order batsman because tail enders are much less technically sound, more prone to getting out quickly, can't rotate str: like normal batsman etc etc.yet Kapil scored 58 >35 inns, he did bulk of the scoring by murdering bowl attacks , he did that even to Marshall and company. yes by conventional thinking his huge str: rate is just another normal thing, but for me this factor makes Kapil a sligthly better test bat than Botham because in bat avg: there is not much of a difference . One day batting: nO CONTEST.Kapil with his advantages in avg:,str: rate,impact inns, longevity etc wins hands down .So Kapil is clearly the better batsman of the two over all.

[gazza]

botham was better at converting plus better at making bigger scores. botham's highest is 208 to kapil's 163. kapil's next highest is 129, botham to go with his 208 has 149*, 142, 138, 138 and 137, he also has a 128. let's take 120 as the cut off point, botham has 7 scores higher than 120, kapil has 3 (and 2 of them are below 130). from 100 to 119 botham has 7 scores, kapil has 5. shows that botham was more capable of getting those big scores, maybe because kapil batted lower that's why he didn't make big scores as often but why didn't kapil bat higher more often if he was so good? besides for the majority botham batted at 6 (65 matches and his next most is batting at #7 (29 matches) whereas kapil did bat more at #7 (79 matches) and not so much at #6 (13 matches) but it's only one batting spot difference. also botham actually averaged 40 batting at #7 in his 36 innings and scored 6 tons and 3 half tons. so in botham's 36 innings batting at #7 he equalled kapil's career ton statistic, so i don't think kapil batting at #7 can be used as a tool to say well he batted lower more and that's why he scored less tons. maybe batting 1 position lower meant kapil wasn't able to score those bigger tons as often like botham but let's just go and be lenient and include kapil's 90s into the ton category, we then say he scored 7 tons batting at #7 in 98 innings, botham's 6 tons batting at #7 from 36 innings is still more impressive. ok so then if you think of it as kapil being at a disadvantage for batting lower and if they have only 1 difference in 75+ scores and kapil has just 2 scores in the 90s and botham has 4 hundreds in the range of 100-108 (not to mention his other 10 centuries) and the fact that botham scored more tons at #7 than kapil did in his whole career then how is it that kapil is the better bat? one thing to think about, kapil has 7 scores between 75 and 100 and only 1 is a not out. botham only has 2 scores between 75 and 100, but they have the same amount of 75+ scores. quite obvious that kapil had an issue with converting and making big scores, so i'd suggest that his batting position wasn't so much the issue for why he didn't make more centuries but rather it was more of a mental thing. kapil did have a ridiculous strike rate and it meant he could take the game away from the opposition but only for so long, he could sustain a long innings whereas botham could and did more often. if kapil's strike rate was such a great thing then it should have aided him in scoring a number of tons closer to what botham achieved but there is still a vast difference (he batted lower but scored faster so it kind of balances things out a bit).

[gazza]

as far as batting in ODI cricket a couple of things do put kapil ahead, those are his massive 175* and his high strike rate. otherwise kapil only scored 6 more 50+ scores than botham but he batted in 92 more innings. and other than the 175* kapil's next highest was only 87 and his third highest score was only 75. botham's highest was 79 so kapil only has 2 scores better than botham's highest (botham actually scored a 50+ score more often than kapil).

[Roshanrocks]

digging old graves :asleep: Only old timers like lurker etc can tell you, we can only go by stats..

[rtmohanlal]

botham was better at converting plus better at making bigger scores. botham's highest is 208 to kapil's 163. kapil's next highest is 129, botham to go with his 208 has 149*, 142, 138, 138 and 137, he also has a 128. let's take 120 as the cut off point, botham has 7 scores higher than 120, kapil has 3 (and 2 of them are below 130). from 100 to 119 botham has 7 scores, kapil has 5. shows that botham was more capable of getting those big scores, maybe because kapil batted lower that's why he didn't make big scores as often but why didn't kapil bat higher more often if he was so good? besides for the majority botham batted at 6 (65 matches and his next most is batting at #7 (29 matches) whereas kapil did bat more at #7 (79 matches) and not so much at #6 (13 matches) but it's only one batting spot difference. also botham actually averaged 40 batting at #7 in his 36 innings and scored 6 tons and 3 half tons. so in botham's 36 innings batting at #7 he equalled kapil's career ton statistic, so i don't think kapil batting at #7 can be used as a tool to say well he batted lower more and that's why he scored less tons. maybe batting 1 position lower meant kapil wasn't able to score those bigger tons as often like botham but let's just go and be lenient and include kapil's 90s into the ton category, we then say he scored 7 tons batting at #7 in 98 innings, botham's 6 tons batting at #7 from 36 innings is still more impressive. ok so then if you think of it as kapil being at a disadvantage for batting lower and if they have only 1 difference in 75+ scores and kapil has just 2 scores in the 90s and botham has 4 hundreds in the range of 100-108 (not to mention his other 10 centuries) and the fact that botham scored more tons at #7 than kapil did in his whole career then how is it that kapil is the better bat? one thing to think about, kapil has 7 scores between 75 and 100 and only 1 is a not out. botham only has 2 scores between 75 and 100, but they have the same amount of 75+ scores. quite obvious that kapil had an issue with converting and making big scores, so i'd suggest that his batting position wasn't so much the issue for why he didn't make more centuries but rather it was more of a mental thing. kapil did have a ridiculous strike rate and it meant he could take the game away from the opposition but only for so long, he could sustain a long innings whereas botham could and did more often. if kapil's strike rate was such a great thing then it should have aided him in scoring a number of tons closer to what botham achieved but there is still a vast difference (he batted lower but scored faster so it kind of balances things out a bit).

see .. when we analyse Ian and Kapil, we must keep in mind that they were not genuine batsman. this is quite evident from the fact that in the list of batsmen with over 5000 runs these 2 belongs to those handful with bat avg:s in early 30s.also i am sure most of the specialist bats in the list with that much longevity as these 2 woud have quite a number of >150 scores.based on this only we can analyse these 2. and it is not difficult to understand that Botham could put a few more runs, while Kapil scored runs at much rapid pace because it is evident from the stats itself. hence it concentrates to which of these 2 performnces was better to the team cause. "only a difference of 9.28 in avg: but difference of 20 w.r.t str: rate in favour of Kapil. that means Botham took 184.15 balls to score 140.78 runs where as Kapil took only 136.34 balls to score 131.5 runs".- to me this sums up the whole thing. and based on this Kapil is the better test bat. w.r.t one dayers you are speaking as if had Botham played 225 matches as that of Kapil he would have maintained his numbers. all cricket world know that Botham was in terminal decline even in tests.so even in half number of matches as that of Kapil ,Ian couldn't catch up with him in any of avg:, str: rate, 50s, impact inns etc etc.still you feel there is not much of a difference in one dayers , so be it

[Austin 3:!6]

New disease in town - 'Chronically Hyperactive Harsh Thakor Syndrome' Symptoms - Write an essay by comparing some random old cricketers. Diagnosis - Ignorance is bliss :winky:

[rtmohanlal]

New disease in town - 'Chronically Hyperactive Harsh Thakor Syndrome' Symptoms - Write an essay by comparing some random old cricketers. Diagnosis - Ignorance is bliss :winky:

comparing old random cricketers is worthy because of the high standards and integrity of the matches these players were involved. definitely better than IPL thrash, sub standard 20-20 match fixing cheats of these days

[Austin 3:!6]

comparing old random cricketers is worthy because of the high standards and integrity of the matches these players were involved. definitely better than IPL thrash' date=' sub standard 20-20 match fixing cheats of these days[/quote'] Atleast IPL is better than that Kerry Packer World series thing where these oldies played :vroam:

[Gollum]

Ian Botham in tests, Kapil Paaji in ODIs.

[gazza]

nothing wrong with comparing retired players, these players helped create the cricket legacy.

[rtmohanlal]

Ian Botham in tests' date=' Kapil Paaji in ODIs.[/quote'] in tests too from what i got from cricinfo site and clearly described in detail in my msg: , Kapil with his slightly inferior avg: and vastly superior str: rate is the better for me. just curious....reasons for your conclusion?

[Gollum]

in tests too from what i got from cricinfo site and clearly described in detail in my msg: ' date=' Kapil with his slightly inferior avg: and vastly superior str: rate is the better for me. just curious....reasons for your conclusion?[/quote'] Botham was more reliable, more consistent and for the 1st 10 years of his career was probably among the top batsmen in the world. English pitches are tougher to bat on than Indian pitches. Botham has won more matches with the bat than Kapil. Kapil was the better bowler though.

[rtmohanlal]

Botham was more reliable' date=' more consistent and for the 1st 10 years of his career was probably among the top batsmen in the world. English pitches are tougher to bat on than Indian pitches. Botham has won more matches with the bat than Kapil. Kapil was the better bowler though.[/quote'] if he was more reliable at least there should have been more difference in their bat av: than only +2.49 in his favour.Kapil also shone in English pitches, WI pitches and SAF pitches .winning and loosing is clearly dependent on the over all strength of the team.If Botham has played some crucial inns so has Kapil

[rtmohanlal]

Atleast IPL is better than that Kerry Packer World series thing where these oldies played :vroam:

so much for your cricketing knowledge:pray:

[singhprakash72]

I think 1982 series summed up the fierce competition between the two. Ian Botham was at his peak and came up with top notch performance but Kapil matched him with second highest scorer behind Botham. In bowling he was just above Ian Botham. But to put things in perspective Botham had much inferior attack to face (except Kapil) and the bowling Kapil faced was comprised of Botham,Allot & Bob Willis.

[Muloghonto]

kapil. as i said b4, its hard to rate botham as much more than a minnow basher who failed against quality opposition.

[rtmohanlal]

"I think 1982 series summed up the fierce competition between the two. Ian Botham was at his peak and came up with top notch performance but Kapil matched him with second highest scorer behind Botham. In bowling he was just above Ian Botham. But to put things in perspective Botham had much inferior attack to face (except Kapil) and the bowling Kapil faced was comprised of Botham,Allot & Bob Willis." - definitely, India was the team which was 2nd from bottom thru out 80s.Indian bowling barring Kapil was nothing special even in home conditions.So though Botham's performances vs India was great statistically , it takes the glow off some what due to relatively weak bowling attack he faced. "kapil. as i said b4, its hard to rate botham as much more than a minnow basher who failed against quality opposition." - he faced Lillee,Hadlee, Kapil and came emergent.any way it has to be said that Kapil faced superior attacks thru out in Marshall & co,Imran(with made up ball), Akram, Donald, Bob Willis, Botham etc. so with one dayers combined with these , it is not difficult to understand that Kapil was the clearly better batsman.yet it is so surprising to see a lot of people supporting Botham as the winner. Conventional thinking might be the reason.

[gazza]

Because most people separate test and one-day performance. Botham the better test batsman and allrounder (imo of course) but kapil the better ODI allrounder. Kapil is the better cricketer overall though due to his captaincy (which botham completely failed at).

[rtmohanlal]

Because most people separate test and one-day performance. Botham the better test batsman and allrounder (imo of course) but kapil the better ODI allrounder. Kapil is the better cricketer overall though due to his captaincy (which botham completely failed at).

but then as i always believed, what is wrong in comparing players who played even one day world cups by combining both their test and one day performances? for me it is a must because it is a measure of a player's adaptability.

[gazza]

but then as i always believed' date=' what is wrong in comparing players who played even one day world cups by combining both their test and one day performances? for me it is a must because it is a measure of a player's adaptability.[/quote'] That would certainly make a player a better cricketer but that doesn't mean they are better in every format and the formats are very different, some players are test specialists, some ODI specialists (bevan).