TOP 5 all rounders of all time

[gazza]

32 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

When 2 contemporary players  play in 2 different formats, it is only natural to take  the performances in both the formats  into account for comparing   & evaluating these players.One format might be carrying a little more weightage(test cricket in this case) , but that doesn't mean

we can't dismiss the performance in  the other format as 'nothing happened'. Yes... it would be even more a difficult & complex task to evaluate performances of players based on 'both formats combined'. But with out taking both formats into account , i don't think there is  meaning in these comparisons because of the real truth that the plyers have indeed played both the formats.And for all rounders, since the term itself points to brilliance in 'more than one discipline' of the game fielding  & captaincy too comes into account.

Did I any where say that Kapil was greater a bowler  than bowlers like Hadlee,Roberts,Marshall, Lillee,Willis, Holding etc etc ? All i said was that 

he was  much better than his career end avg: of 29.64 because of three factors namely  longevity,work density & weak support bowling unit adversely affecting his bowling stats considerably. In one dayers too those 3 factors affected his bowling stats, but he  was a convincingly  better  one day bowler than test bowler himself.

First of all i have no problem comparing players in the various formats but i think its naive to combine them all, of course if it's just a fun exercise you want then that's no big deal but if you legitimately want to rate players properly I think it's a must to seperate formats. I don't see any problem with comparing two players solely in tests, then solely in ODIs then in t20Is. I think that gives a better more detailed evaluation of each player rather than combining all formats. This is not ignoring another format as if 'nothing happened', it is actually a more detailed analysis.

 

fielding of course should be considered, I think captaincy is a different thing. Great bowlers and great batsmen are compared for their bowling and batting not those things plus their captaincy so I don't think it's fair to add it in when talking about all rounders.

 

you may not have specifically said Kapil was a great bowler but you consistently imply that he was, especially since you rate him above others who are all time greats in a particular part of the game, Kapil is not and that is a negative for him just like it is for botham.

 

yet again another side step. Yet to get an answer to why Kapil's bowling average is exactly that, very average to poor in his home conditions when others who also didn't have support e.g. Hadlee who have considerably better records in India where it is foreign conditions for them and Kapil played most of his cricket and where he learnt his trade.

 

if you are saying Kapil is a better all rounder than these guys then he has to trump them no? He can't just be better just because you say so there has to be proper fair analysis on the topic.

 

I'm sorry but strike rate (batting) and lack of bowling support don't deserve enough weightage to put him above these guys. you've got no proof that if he batted higher he'd average more and would've been a better batsman, and no proof that more support would've seen him have better bowling statistics. That is opinion on your part not factual evidence. Just like when you said I couldn't rate procter or rice above these guys and I had no problem saying that that is a fair and valid point at least in terms of statistical analysis.

 

going by your logic Hadlee should've had a much better bowling average than he ended up with, but I don't see you giving him extra credit for that. So it's not really fair is it?

Edited July 6, 2017 by gazza

[rtmohanlal]

7 hours ago, Vijy said:

Most of those who avg >48 were very top-notch batsman. Probably Compton was there too, and maybe May as well.

Yes ...  but what i meant was that it only indicates that batting in general those times was not difficult at all.And that trait would have been the case with Miller too. Inversely bowling in general  would not have been that much an easy task.But yet  the support bowling strength of Miller being  such a very high avg:ed 26 indicates that Australia was such a great bowling powerhouse during those times with bowling not that much extremely tough in general.If bowling in general was that much tougher then we wouldn't have witnessed that much no: of high avg:ing batsmen those days.All in all Miller benefitted a lot from being a part of very strong Australian team of those days.

 

[Rightarmfast]

 

                                           m                                                   avg

in Australia	1976-1990	13	20	3038	1283	45	6/63	12/165	28.51	2.53	67.5	3	1
in England	1971-1987	12	19	2919	1158	47	7/40	10/77	24.63	2.38	62.1	4	1
in India	1979-1987	10	15	1653	757	27	5/63	9/130	28.03	2.74	61.2	2	0
in New Zealand	1979-1989	4	7	1283	453	17	5/106	6/109	26.64	2.11	75.4	1	0
in Pakistan	1976-1992	38	59	7673	3131	163	8/58	14/116	19.20	2.44	47.0	10	3
in Sri Lanka	1986-1986	3	6	696	270	15	4/69	6/125	18.00	2.32	46.4	0	0
in West Indies	1977-1988	8	16	2196	1206	48	7/80	11/121	25.12	3.29	45.7	3	1

 

 

Ok, I am not sure if others are already aware of this, but I just checked these stats, thanks to Gazza's post about Kapil's poor record. Well, as far as I see, Imran seems to have improved his overall record through his performance in Pakistan and Sri lanka ( a minnow side then ). And going by the umpiring standards in Pakistan then, and ball tampering issues, well, I would leave the rest for others to imagine!

 

Going by these stats, well I dont anymore think that Imran was all that he is made out to be. He was pretty average in other countries which does take a lot of credibility off. Actually, I wouldnt even put him in the 'great' list anymore! But that's just me and the Pakistani posters can now start to target me with their hate posts :)

[rtmohanlal]

6 hours ago, gazza said:

First of all i have no problem comparing players in the various formats but i think its naive to combine them all, of course if it's just a fun exercise you want then that's no big deal but if you legitimately want to rate players properly I think it's a must to seperate formats. I don't see any problem with comparing two players solely in tests, then solely in ODIs then in t20Is. I think that gives a better more detailed evaluation of each player rather than combining all formats. This is not ignoring another format as if 'nothing happened', it is actually a more detailed analysis.

 

fielding of course should be considered, I think captaincy is a different thing. Great bowlers and great batsmen are compared for their bowling and batting not those things plus their captaincy so I don't think it's fair to add it in when talking about all rounders.

 

you may not have specifically said Kapil was a great bowler but you consistently imply that he was, especially since you rate him above others who are all time greats in a particular part of the game, Kapil is not and that is a negative for him just like it is for botham.

 

yet again another side step. Yet to get an answer to why Kapil's bowling average is exactly that, very average to poor in his home conditions when others who also didn't have support e.g. Hadlee who have considerably better records in India where it is foreign conditions for them and Kapil played most of his cricket and where he learnt his trade.

 

if you are saying Kapil is a better all rounder than these guys then he has to trump them no? He can't just be better just because you say so there has to be proper fair analysis on the topic.

 

I'm sorry but strike rate (batting) and lack of bowling support don't deserve enough weightage to put him above these guys. you've got no proof that if he batted higher he'd average more and would've been a better batsman, and no proof that more support would've seen him have better bowling statistics. That is opinion on your part not factual evidence. Just like when you said I couldn't rate procter or rice above these guys and I had no problem saying that that is a fair and valid point at least in terms of statistical analysis.

 

going by your logic Hadlee should've had a much better bowling average than he ended up with, but I don't see you giving him extra credit for that. So it's not really fair is it?

I shall stick with my conclusions based on my  logic & you shall stick with yours. No regrets.

[gazza]

TBH Kapil's record isn't poor in India as such, that's probably a poor choice of words on my part but reading some posts in this thread the way Kapil's bowling is talked about it's rather missleading compared with other top bowlers of that time in India and the point I was trying to makes was that if Kapil was as good as these bowlers or better then his stats should reflect that at least in his home conditions. If you look at the averages of guys like Willis, Botham, holding, Marshall, hadlee in India, especially over the period of kapil's career then you see that a lot of them did at least as well as Kapil if not better. they all pretty much average 25 or less in India so was it really that bad of a place for a pacer to bowl in during that time? And should Kapil really get points for it being such a difficult place for a pacer to bowl in? (Stats would suggest otherwise)

[gazza]

13 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

I shall stick with my conclusions based on my  logic & you shall stick with yours. No regrets.

As usual not addressing points others bring up. You see you are completely happy to give extra points to Kapil for having no support but not Hadlee. How about this, Hadlee averaged 22 in India, in foreign conditions, with no support. If Kapil gets so many points for averaging 26 in home conditions without support then Hadlee must get even more points, in fact the amount of points he'd get just on his bowling should more than compensate for his lesser contribution with the bat compared to Kapil. That's using your own logic.

[the don]

Ok so Asia's greatest ever cricketer is being compared to a pretty average all rounder like kapil . I mean i respect kapil for what he did for Indian cricket and for being the first Indian military medium pacer of note but to compare of him to the lion of Lahore is laughable .

Imran was a beast . He is rated everywhere . He was a legend with newsouthwales at sheffield shield . The australians are in awe of him . An absolute GOAT in the english cricket circles . The westindian legends like sir viv and holding rate him as the best allrounder . Even kapil's countrymen wouldnt dare mention him in the same sentence as Imran such was the class difference . Kapil was a decebt cricketer the likes of whom we have seen before and after while Imran is an undisputed alltime greats . A legend for the ages . Unmatched skill and easily the most charismatic cricketer of all time . 

Excluding sir Gary the only allrounder who deserves to be compared to Imran is keith Miller( also a flamboyant individuao who was a hit with the ladies) not the average Dev who nobody rates outside some deluded Indian fans.

Edited July 6, 2017 by the don

[Rightarmfast]

12 minutes ago, the don said:

Ok so Asia's greatest ever cricketer is being compared to a pretty average all rounder like kapil . I mean i respect kapil for what he did for Indian cricket and for being the first Indian military medium pacer of note but to compare of him to the lion of Lahore is laughable .

Imran was a beast . He is rated everywhere . He was a legend with newsouthwales at sheffield shield . The australians are in awe of him . An absolute GOAT in the english cricket circles . The westindian legends like sir viv and holding rate him as the best allrounder . Even kapil's countrymen wouldnt dare mention him in the same sentence as Imran such was the class difference . Kapil was a decebt cricketer the likes of whom we have seen before and after while Imran is an undisputed alltime greats . A legend for the ages . Unmatched skill and easily the most charismatic cricketer of all time . 

Excluding sir Gary the only allrounder who deserves to be compared to Imran is keith Miller( also a flamboyant individuao who was a hit with the ladies) not the average Dev who nobody rates outside some deluded Indian fans.

The aussies are in awe of a bowler who averages close to 29 in australia! hilarious stuff

[gazza]

Well I certainly don't think Kapil was an average all rounder, a team would be very lucky to have a quality all rounder like Kapil.

[rtmohanlal]

4 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

 

                                           m                                                   avg

in Australia	1976-1990	13	20	3038	1283	45	6/63	12/165	28.51	2.53	67.5	3	1
in England	1971-1987	12	19	2919	1158	47	7/40	10/77	24.63	2.38	62.1	4	1
in India	1979-1987	10	15	1653	757	27	5/63	9/130	28.03	2.74	61.2	2	0
in New Zealand	1979-1989	4	7	1283	453	17	5/106	6/109	26.64	2.11	75.4	1	0
in Pakistan	1976-1992	38	59	7673	3131	163	8/58	14/116	19.20	2.44	47.0	10	3
in Sri Lanka	1986-1986	3	6	696	270	15	4/69	6/125	18.00	2.32	46.4	0	0
in West Indies	1977-1988	8	16	2196	1206	48	7/80	11/121	25.12	3.29	45.7	3	1

 

 

Ok, I am not sure if others are already aware of this, but I just checked these stats, thanks to Gazza's post about Kapil's poor record. Well, as far as I see, Imran seems to have improved his overall record through his performance in Pakistan and Sri lanka ( a minnow side then ). And going by the umpiring standards in Pakistan then, and ball tampering issues, well, I would leave the rest for others to imagine!

 

Going by these stats, well I dont anymore think that Imran was all that he is made out to be. He was pretty average in other countries which does take a lot of credibility off. Actually, I wouldnt even put him in the 'great' list anymore! But that's just me and the Pakistani posters can now start to target me with their hate posts :)

yes ... a point which  i am already aware of  thoroughly and it is  only sensible that you have mentioned it .In a Kapil-Imran comparison w.r.t bowling(even with out taking ball tampering  into acount), if we remove from the equation  Kapil's terminal decline  due to 'longevity' itself, we can see that  after first 21000 balls(the entire ball count of Imran is about 19500) his avg; was 28.86.And at this milestone point, suppose that  we take  Kapil's  avg:es in individual countries.And then categorise into abroad,home & minnow avg:s. Here as we always does give  weightage to abroad , home  & minnow in that order(means avg:S in abroad countries have the   maximum weightage, then avg:  in home country & then only in minnow country. This is the same yardstick by which a batsman like Sehwag is evaluated.Isn't it? If  performances in home conditions  were rated at the same level as those to abroad conditions then Sehwag would have been regarded as GOAT batsman)

Now  for both Kapil & Imran, sort their  avg:S in 5 non minnow abroad countries (which  carries the most weightage)  in ascending order of the numerical values of avg;s.Now make an one one comparison of these 5 values of both players. You can see that it is Kapil  who comes out on top with the first 2 values.And what not his best value  of 23.11 is in West Indies(best team of their times which carries the most weightage).

Imran's over all avg: is 22.81

Kapil's  is 28.86

Means at this point of comparison Kapil  is 22.81/28.86  = 79% a bowler as that of Imran. And  it is worth lot more than that if we take that weightage factor in individual countries into account. Now assume that Kapil got  the  advantages in 'work density factor(which is most emphatically  reflected in the fact that Kapil's wkts/test ratio of 4 in his first 62 tests fell to 2.6 in his next 26 tests.Had Kapil taken adequate rest after his knee injury & further surgery at this time  & turned out  to play again  only after his injury getting fully healed, his stats wouldn't have dropped by such margin ) & support bowling unit factor in  the levels Imran benefitted.Then for me his avg: would have been at the least lowered by 2. Means 26.86 which takes it to 22.81/26.86 = 85% as that of Imran.Naturally the avg:s in individual countries too would have been improved in varying degree.Then this weightage factor getting added into mix  takes this efficiency a lot more than 85.

This is based on bowl avg: factor which was 28.86 (79%).But if we split this again into str: rate & econ:(both str:rate & econ: are byproducts of bowl avg: . Keep in mind str: rate carries a bit more weightage in tests and in that Kapil was  at 54.1/59.3 =91.23 efficiency as that of Imran after 21000 balls. )   and do the exercise  by mixing work density & support bowling factor into it , the gap  with Imran reduces even more than what was the case with plain avg:.  

These all ,with out taking tampering into mix.      

I myself had roughtly done this exercise some times back and that is why I am so assured of this

Edited July 6, 2017 by rtmohanlal

[Rightarmfast]

6 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

yes ... a point which  i am already aware of  thoroughly and it is  only sensible that you have mentioned it .In a Kapil-Imran comparison w.r.t bowling(even with out taking ball tampering  into acount), if we remove from the equation  Kapil's 'longevity' due to terminal decline itself, we can see that  after first 21000 balls(the entire ball count of Imran is about 19500) his avg; was 28.86.And at this milestone point, suppose that  we take  Kapil's  avg:es in individual countries.And then categorise into abroad,home & minnow avg:s. Here as we always does give  weightage to abroad , home  & minnow in that order(means avg:S in abroad countries have the   maximum weightage, then avg:  in home country & then only in minnow country. This is the same yardstick by which a batsman like Sehwag is evaluated.Isn't it? If  performances in home conditions  were rated at the same level as those to abroad conditions then Sehwag would have been regarded as GOAT batsman)

Now  for both Kapil & Imran, sort their  avg:S in 5 non minnow abroad countries (which  carries the most weightage)  in ascending order of the numerical values of avg;s.Now make an one one comparison of these 5 values of both players. You can see that it is Kapil  who comes out on top with the first 2 values.And what not his best value  of 23.11 is in West Indies(best team of their times which carries the most weightage).

Imran's over all avg: is 22.81

Kapil's  is 28.86

Means at this point of comparison Kapil  is 22.81/28.86  = 79% a bowler as that of Imran. And  it is worth lot more than that if we take that weightage factor in individual countries into account. Now assume that Kapil got  the  advantages in 'work density factor(which is most emphatically  reflected in the fact that Kapil's wkts/test ratio of 4 in his first 62 tests fell to 2.6 in his next 26 tests.Had Kapil taken adequate rest after his knee injury & further surgery at this time  & turned out  to play again  only after his injury getting fully healed, his stats wouldn't have dropped by such margin ) & support bowling unit factor in  the levels Imran benefitted.Then for me his avg: would have been at the least lowered by 2. Means 26.86 which takes it to 22.81/26.86 = 85% as that of Imran.Naturally the avg:s in individual countries too would have been improved in varying degree.Then this weightage factor getting added into mix  takes this efficiency a lot more than 85.

This is based on bowl avg: factor which was 28.86 (79%).But if we split this again into str: rate & econ:(both str:rate & econ: are byproducts of bowl avg: . Keep in mind str: rate carries a bit more weightage in tests and in that Kapil was  at 54.1/59.3 =91.23 efficiency as that of Imran. )   and do the exercise  by mixing work density & support bowling factor into it , the gap  with Imran reduces even more than what was the case with plain avg:.  

These all ,with out taking tampering into mix.      

I kind of lost you there with so much of calculation. but a simple fact that Imran averages almost 29 in Aus; 28 in India, Almost 25 and 27 in England NZ, well the stats dont look so impressive to me. He is an equivalent of a Home track bully to me. Not to be forgotten the notorious umpiring in Pakistan during then, and all the cheating and tampering done by players. I was genuinely not aware of these stats of Imran. And hence was in awe of him!

 

Lolz, and some of the deluded posters here mention him as lahori lions. Lolz, lions are not cheaters!

[the don]

^Lol those averages are still better than the career averages of anyone india has ever produced . Inspite of the notoriously bad Indian home umpires who cheated every step of the way kapil still remained a decent military medium stock bowler at best .

 

Imran was reverred the world ever . A true great of the game . Kapil was the weakest of the allrounders at the time . A bowler slower than razzaq at his prime and a good strokemaler but an  irresponsible batsman who fans on this forum romaticise as some viv richards wannabe. 

Again 99 percent of the experts including indian former cricketers rate imran ahead of kapil because they realise paaji wasnt fit to tie the Khan's shoelaces .

 

Also lol at rtmohanlal including the first 21000 balls of Kapil's career to prove that he was some sort of special bowler . Give it a rest mate . Dont rewrite history . Kapil was nothing more than a poor man's imran at the world level . Obviously has a high stature in India for being the first Indian medium pacer and all but the world really doesnt rate him.

 

Edited July 6, 2017 by the don

[Rightarmfast]

6 minutes ago, the don said:

^Lol those averages are still better than the career averages of anyone india has ever produced . Inspite of the notoriously bad Indian home umpires who cheated every step of the way kapil still remained a decent military medium stock bowler at best .

 

Imran was reverred the world ever . A true great of the game . Kapil was the weakest of the allrounders at the time . A bowler slower than razzaq at his prime and a good strokemaler but an  irresponsible batsman who fans on this forum romaticise as some viv richards wannabe. 

Again 99 percent of the experts including indian former cricketers rate imran ahead of kapil because they realise paaji wasnt fit to tie the Khan's shoelaces .

 

Also lol at rtmohanlal including the first 21000 balls of Kapil's career to prove that he was some sort of special bowler . Give it a rest mate . Dont rewrite history . Kapil was nothing more than a poor man's imran at the world level . Obviously has a high stature in India for being the first Indian medium pacer and all but the world really doesnt rate him.

 

Hahahahaha! Dude, I think the stand up comedy scene in pakistan must be great, coz u really know how to make us laugh! heehehehe... Imran was revered the world over by being called a cheater and tamperer, yeah thats true :)

 

 

[the don]

23 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Hahahahaha! Dude, I think the stand up comedy scene in pakistan must be great, coz u really know how to make us laugh! heehehehe... Imran was revered the world over by being called a cheater and tamperer, yeah thats true :)

 

 

Well its funny because you accused pakistani umpires of cheating whereas youtube is full of indian umpires at their best  ;) . imran called for neutral umpires because he was a champion . 

When was the last time India produced a half decent umpire . None in my lifetime i suppose ?

Yes if that makes you sleep at night . Imran still remains best of the allrounders in the eyes of the world while kapil lies at the bottom of the pile .

[Rightarmfast]

3 minutes ago, the don said:

Well its funny because you accused pakistani umpires of cheating whereas youtube is full of indian umpires at their best  ;) . imran called for neutral umpires because he was a champion . 

When was the last time India produced a half decent umpire . None in my lifetime i suppose ?

Yes if that makes you sleep at night . Imran still remains best of the allrounders in the eyes of the world while kapil lies at the bottom of the pile .

Pakistani umpires and honest? Thats even better. I told you, you must be one of the best stand up comedians in Pakistan :) When is your next show?

[gazza]

Wrt Imran-kapil if you're going to bring up declines and injuries etc you have to also factor it in for imran, he missed some of his peak years, where he would've lost out on taking wickets etc. Wasim started earlier but waqar didn't debut until 89', late 89 so it was tail end of imran's career, imran had to do the bulk of the work for his team for most of his career.

 

but thats the thing, it's speculation that he missed out because of that, just like it's speculation with kapil that less support was a factor and injury etc was a factor. 

 

I haven't delved into it fully and can't at current but didn't imran also decline as a bowler? I mean he played until he was 40, well past a fast bowlers physical prime.

Edited July 7, 2017 by gazza

[SUMO]

Best allrounder was Ian Botham. He had 13 100's in his first 65 odd test match but added just 1 in next 35 :(
At his peak he could have made it to english team either as a batsman or bowler.

[rtmohanlal]

9 hours ago, gazza said:

Wrt Imran-kapil if you're going to bring up declines and injuries etc you have to also factor it in for imran, he missed some of his peak years, where he would've lost out on taking wickets etc. Wasim started earlier but waqar didn't debut until 89', late 89 so it was tail end of imran's career, imran had to do the bulk of the work for his team for most of his career.

 

but thats the thing, it's speculation that he missed out because of that, just like it's speculation with kapil that less support was a factor and injury etc was a factor. 

 

I haven't delved into it fully and can't at current but didn't imran also decline as a bowler? I mean he played until he was 40, well past a fast bowlers physical prime.

If you go thru series wise avg:es of Imran , you would notice one thing .Till  81 NOv , he  didn't play at the rate of  atleast 6 tests/year  .From that period he played 16 tests non stop  in a matter of just  13 months or so. Along with his evil ally 'bottle top' & of course with his genuine improvement as a fast bowler , he reaped the maximum benefit one can ever get. He avg:ed around 13 or so in these 16 tests.16 tests on the trot in just 13 months means intense workload. As a result of this heavy work load  & there by putting great strain on shins,  he suffered  severe shin injury.Basically this means Imran put severe strain on his body, reaped the maximum benefit from that in the form of bucket load of wkts and as a result  suffered from the nasty injury.  So  there is no point in saying 'he missed some of his peak years, where he would've lost out on taking wickets etc'. To be more  precise, even if he lost a few years due to injury, he also benefitted  in the form  of 'bucket loads of wkts like never before in his career' from  the immense strain he put on his shins that resulted in injury. You can't have it both ways.Is it?

 

And the 'injury & further rest period' is the major difference  between  the cases of both Imran & Kapil.Imran took adequate rest of almost  2 years & 8 months  before turning out to bowl in test cricket again.Since his injury got completely healed,  he could start again with the same effectiveness after a gap of 2 years  & 8 months. Kapil on the other hand just neglected this 'adequate rest matter' and hence his stats suffered  in the immediate 26 tests after his' injury-surgery' period.And i contribute this fall in level of performance to 'heavy work load' factor.A matter of placing country before self.

W.R.T support bowling unit , I have already  detailed it.

Imran played as a full bowler only till just over 37 years old.After that, he bowled occasionally only as  his series wise stats reveal.Till his age of 36 years and 2 months he performed  at his ususal best.That means, if any ,this old age factor you indicated could have affected him in only the 4 tests  that he played  in 1989 NOV  against IND in PAK.But Imran can't complain for that even because  after his age of  36 years  & 2 months  he played only 13 tests in a period of  almost 3 months. That means work density was a lot  lower even by his own normal standards.And that isn't enough, Kapil played as a rookie  in his first 13 tests  till  his age of  just 20 years & 6 months(means he was still a teenager) .So as per your  claim  if Imran's stats suffered   due to the 4 tests  against IND in 89 due to old age   & his single test as a teenager  in 1971(total 5 tests), so have Kapil's due to the  first 13 tests he played as a rookie in  a period of  just 10 months. So things goes even more in favour of Kapil there.

Edited July 7, 2017 by rtmohanlal

[gazza]

1 hour ago, rtmohanlal said:

If you go thru series wise avg:es of Imran , you would notice one thing .Till  81 NOv , he  didn't play at the rate of  atleast 6 tests/year  .From that period he played 16 tests non stop  in a matter of just  13 months or so. Along with his evil ally 'bottle top' & of course with his genuine improvement as a fast bowler , he reaped the maximum benefit one can ever get. He avg:ed around 13 or so in these 16 tests.16 tests on the trot in just 13 months means intense workload. As a result of this heavy work load  & there by putting great strain on shins,  he suffered  severe shin injury.Basically this means Imran put severe strain on his body, reaped the maximum benefit from that in the form of bucket load of wkts and as a result  suffered from the nasty injury.  So  there is no point in saying 'he missed some of his peak years, where he would've lost out on taking wickets etc'. To be more  precise, even if he lost a few years due to injury, he also benefitted  in the form  of 'bucket loads of wkts like never before in his career' from  the immense strain he put on his shins that resulted in injury. You can't have it both ways.Is it?

 

And the 'injury & further rest period' is the major difference  between  the cases of both Imran & Kapil.Imran took adequate rest of almost  2 years & 8 months  before turning out to bowl in test cricket again.Since his injury got completely healed,  he could start again with the same effectiveness after a gap of 2 years  & 8 months. Kapil on the other hand just neglected this 'adequate rest matter' and hence his stats suffered  in the immediate 26 tests after his' injury-surgery' period.And i contribute this fall in level of performance to 'heavy work load' factor.A matter of placing country before self.

W.R.T support bowling unit , I have already  detailed it.

Imran played as a full bowler only till just over 37 years old.After that, he bowled occasionally only as  his series wise stats reveal.Till his age of 36 years and 2 months he performed  at his ususal best.That means, if any ,this old age factor you indicated could have affected him in only the 4 tests  that he played  in 1989 NOV  against IND in PAK.But Imran can't complain for that even because  after his age of  36 years  & 2 months  he played only 13 tests in a period of  almost 3 months. That means work density was a lot  lower even by his own normal standards.And that isn't enough, Kapil played as a rookie  in his first 13 tests  till  his age of  just 20 years & 6 months(means he was still a teenager) .So as per your  claim  if Imran's stats suffered   due to the 4 tests  against IND in 89 due to old age   & his single test as a teenager  in 1971(total 5 tests), so have Kapil's due to the  first 13 tests he played as a rookie in  a period of  just 10 months. So things goes even more in favour of Kapil there.

I didn't make any claims, if you read my post I said it was speculation, same as this stuff with Kapil.

[rtmohanlal]

5 minutes ago, gazza said:

I didn't make any claims, if you read my post I said it was speculation, same as this stuff with Kapil.

yes .... for you  such matters are speculations,but for me they are different contexts Kapil & Imran played in and matters that counts to evaluate them.Any way each  to their own.