Was Imran Khan a severe and regular ball tamperor?

[Marut]

might be you are true...also these are speculations on which we can never fully rely upon. and that is why i always was a bit reluctant in this theory of 'had Kapil been in England he would have done better with ball etc etc'. but one thing i believed in was that Kapil was at a fairly bit disadvantage with lack of proper bowling support.here i think Botham was more at benefit because of the company of a better bowler in Bob willis. a strong partner at other end means you are always at fair advantage.if we check Bob's record we can see that he was a perfect partner to Botham. and when he struggled in his only failure place WI ' date= Botham too struggled.another thing is that had Botham bowled the same no: of balls as Kapil did(27740 : 21815 that is Kapil bowled a whopping 5925 more balls than Botham) would he have been able to keep the same avg: of 28.40? i doubt. these are the 2 prime reasons as to why i place Kapil a slightly better bowler too than any other reasons.

He surely would have - just check how he fared in WI and Oz where he enjoyed friendlier conditions. Kapil did not however taste much success in England, NZ etc as a bowler because from my memory he used to bowl a bit too short like he does in India - adjusting to the lengths is a difficult thing to do in foreign conditions even if conditions are friendly for bowling. Again, Kapil used to swing the ball viciously and was often unlucky to get the edges, Binny and Madanlal with less swing/seam were some times able to outperform Kapil even when Kapil bowled better and looked more threatening. But Botham was a good player of Kapil dev's bowling, and he almost toyed with Kapil ( and Kapil toyed botham in reverse) at Manchester and Oval, and was single handedly responsible for Kapil's poor show in England in 1982. Kapil was also at the receiving end of Gooch triple ton, and these three tests ( with Kapil going for 1/400 in these three tests) completely destroyed Kapil's figures in England. Most of the later tests played by Kapil outside the SC yielded very poor returns, averaging over 50 in his last four or five years in Eng, NZ and SA.

[rtmohanlal]

those 1/400 definitely had the effect.that is why i am of the firm opinion that atleast a 'very good' stable partner at the other end could have helped Kapil immensely. i some days back made an exercise of calculating the combined average of all the bowlers played along with Imran Khan and those who played along with Kapil dev. what i could gather was that the value in Imran's case was slightly better than Kapil's bowl avg: himself !.the respective value in Kapil's case differed by around 11. you can see how much Kapil was at a disadvantage all thru out his career. when we think along in practical situations we can see how disadvantageous this can be.Here in Gooch's case itelf if a very good bowler was there ,wkts would have fallen more often than not in lot more frequent time intervals.that means Kapil would have got lot more oppertunities to bowl at fresh batsmen there by getting cheap wkts created by the pressure of the situation. the recently concluded ashes was a prime example of what i said. all AUS bowlers could reap cheap wkts created by the pressure of that Jhonson factor. several ENG wkts fell thru rash stupid shots because of this pressure it self.another example of what i said is the career bowl: avg: of Pollock. When Donald was there he averaged 20.72 in 63 of the total 108 matches he played. but with out Donald he could avg: only 27.02 in mere 45 remaining matches.you can see as to how immense was the help he obtained from Donald's presence at the other end.that is exactly the main reason i rate Kapil slightly above Botham as a test bowler.

[Temujin Khaghan]

hadlee's batting was as good as stuart broad's... he was not exactly an allrounder. but his bowling average is so good that it puts him in a nice position when you see the net difference b/w bowling and batting averages.

[Temujin Khaghan]

Kapil Dev was a great athlete and was fitter than his younger teammates.

Sachin defeated Kapil in arm wrestling when he first came into the team :D

[Marut]

Sachin defeated Kapil in arm wrestling when he first came into the team :D

And all others in the team too. But that proves only strength, which is only one of the elements of fitness. Overall fitness cannot be judged on the basis of upper body strength alone.

[rtmohanlal]

hadlee's batting was as good as stuart broad's... he was not exactly an allrounder. but his bowling average is so good that it puts him in a nice position when you see the net difference b/w bowling and batting averages.

yes, if allround ability = batting ability + bowling ability then Hadlee is comparable to any all rounder .other wise his batting ability lacks bowling by so much that he can't be called a genuine all rounder in the true sense

[rtmohanlal]

yes' date=' if allround ability = batting ability + bowling ability then Hadlee is comparable to any all rounder .other wise his batting ability lags bowling by so much that he can't be called a genuine all rounder in the true sense[/quote']

[undisputed chap]

Sachin defeated Kapil in arm wrestling when he first came into the team :D

evil bambis paid them to lose

[thongale]

Not disagreeing with what you're saying per se' date=' but would you also call Dale Steyn a one-trick pony?[/quote']Steyn has somethin Kapil and Botham can only have in their wet dreams. Express pace that is. Not only he's express, he knows when to give it the full to and when to cut down the pace and work on angles, line and length. Sorry, it's a disgrace for Steyn to be mentioned with these two.

[undisputed chap]

Steyn has somethin Kapil and Botham can only have in their wet dreams. Express pace that is. Not only he's express' date=' he knows when to give it the full to and when to cut down the pace and work on angles, line and length. Sorry, it's a disgrace for Steyn to be mentioned with these two.[/quote'] how do u rate vass , steyn& imran

[thongale]

how do u rate vass ' date=' steyn& imran[/quote']Imran > Steyn >> Vaas as test bowlers. Imran > Vaas > Steyn as ODI bowlers. Kapil is a better ODI bowler than Steyn, but Botham has no chance is what ever format. I know that was a fish, but probably you've got an unexpected answer.

[Temujin Khaghan]

And all others in the team too. But that proves only strength' date=' which is only one of the elements of fitness. Overall fitness cannot be judged on the basis of upper body strength alone.[/quote'] just saying some trivia man... how can anyone think arm wrestling = athleticism:giggle:

[keith]

Only pakis consider him the greatest allrounder or captain. He is at best a top 5 test allrounder, above average odi allrounder and a decent captain. As far as professionalism goes, he aint fit to shine tendy's shoes. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

Pretty much everyone in the world considers him the greatest bowling allrounder of all time. During the period between 1980-1987, he was the best bowler in the world - better even than Malcolm Marshall, and possibly the best bowler the world has ever seen. As for professionalism, he was a fast bowler who's career lasted nearly as long as Tendulkar's. I'm not sure how you can get more professional than that. The reason Imran is associated with ball tampering is because of comments he made in the media in which he objected to the extent that other great bowlers were taking ball tampering - notably, lifting and raising the seam and the use of oils and moisturisers on the ball was something he strongly objected to. He did not name any names but it's been well documented that the likes of Lillee et al were also ball tampering. The only difference is that Imran had the honesty and sincerity to admit to scratching the ball - somewhat minor in comparison with lifting the seam, IMO. As recently as last year we have seen Faf Du Plessis scratching the ball with his zipper. Are we now prepared to re-write Dale Steyn's record? I should hope not.

[Muloghonto]

Pretty much everyone in the world considers him the greatest bowling allrounder of all time. During the period between 1980-1987, he was the best bowler in the world - better even than Malcolm Marshall, and possibly the best bowler the world has ever seen. As for professionalism, he was a fast bowler who's career lasted nearly as long as Tendulkar's. I'm not sure how you can get more professional than that. The reason Imran is associated with ball tampering is because of comments he made in the media in which he objected to the extent that other great bowlers were taking ball tampering - notably, lifting and raising the seam and the use of oils and moisturisers on the ball was something he strongly objected to. He did not name any names but it's been well documented that the likes of Lillee et al were also ball tampering. The only difference is that Imran had the honesty and sincerity to admit to scratching the ball - somewhat minor in comparison with lifting the seam, IMO. As recently as last year we have seen Faf Du Plessis scratching the ball with his zipper. Are we now prepared to re-write Dale Steyn's record? I should hope not.

1. I have known far more people who give the tag of 'greatest bowling allrounder' to Keith Miller. And that is true for most cricketing articles as well. 2. I've seen Imran live, through the 80s. he was *not* in the same class as Marshall. Unlike Marshall, Imran always bowled when conditions were optimal for him: either new ball overs only or the old ball that he can reverse. he was mostly invisible in the 'hard overs' - the ones between 25-45 when the ball isnt old enough to do much reversing and not new enough to seam a lot. In his last few years, Imran almost exclusively bowled with the new ball only, as he lost pace to generate reverse swing. I assure you, every fast bowler would be averaging a few points less if all they ever did was bowl 6-7 overs with the new ball first up and got 7-2-20-1 kind of figures every innings, then didn't bowl at all till the new ball arrived again. Don't get me wrong- Imran was a great bowler. But so was Sylvester Clarke. But i can think of atleast 5 fast bowlers in the 70s and 80s who were easily better than Imran. That is not a diss on Imran, thats just how good the pool was back then. 3. Professionalism is a lot more than playing for 20 years. Professionalism is how you conduct yourself. Imran was a cocky git who thrived on a dictator mode. As i said, his captaincy skills came predomiantly from rotating his bowlers well and picking the right team. That is more than half of the equation, which makes him a good captain. But he was not a man-manager or have the professional no-nonsense outlook that is common to the ilk of professional minded sportsmen. 4. Imran was one of the worst ball tamperers. That is a known fact. Saying that there are other murderers out there, why are we targetting ted bundy, the answer would be, because he is the baddest of them all. Same goes with Imran. FYI, lifting the seam is nowhere as conductive to fast bowling as scratching up a side is. The ball moves far, far more when there is unequal air flow over its hemespheres than the marginally greater amount of revs you can impart to a raised seam for deviation after pitching ( raising the seam, by definition, limits swing in the air and increases seam off the pitch).

[keith]

1. I have known far more people who give the tag of 'greatest bowling allrounder' to Keith Miller. And that is true for most cricketing articles as well. 2. I've seen Imran live, through the 80s. he was *not* in the same class as Marshall. Unlike Marshall, Imran always bowled when conditions were optimal for him: either new ball overs only or the old ball that he can reverse. he was mostly invisible in the 'hard overs' - the ones between 25-45 when the ball isnt old enough to do much reversing and not new enough to seam a lot. In his last few years, Imran almost exclusively bowled with the new ball only, as he lost pace to generate reverse swing. I assure you, every fast bowler would be averaging a few points less if all they ever did was bowl 6-7 overs with the new ball first up and got 7-2-20-1 kind of figures every innings, then didn't bowl at all till the new ball arrived again. Don't get me wrong- Imran was a great bowler. But so was Sylvester Clarke. But i can think of atleast 5 fast bowlers in the 70s and 80s who were easily better than Imran. That is not a diss on Imran, thats just how good the pool was back then. 3. Professionalism is a lot more than playing for 20 years. Professionalism is how you conduct yourself. Imran was a cocky git who thrived on a dictator mode. As i said, his captaincy skills came predomiantly from rotating his bowlers well and picking the right team. That is more than half of the equation, which makes him a good captain. But he was not a man-manager or have the professional no-nonsense outlook that is common to the ilk of professional minded sportsmen. 4. Imran was one of the worst ball tamperers. That is a known fact. Saying that there are other murderers out there, why are we targetting ted bundy, the answer would be, because he is the baddest of them all. Same goes with Imran. FYI, lifting the seam is nowhere as conductive to fast bowling as scratching up a side is. The ball moves far, far more when there is unequal air flow over its hemespheres than the marginally greater amount of revs you can impart to a raised seam for deviation after pitching ( raising the seam, by definition, limits swing in the air and increases seam off the pitch).

1. Keith Miller was an exceptional player but he doesn't have the record of Imran. Many people would select him as a true all rounder over Imran, but not as a bowling all rounder batting 8. 2. When you are a strike bowler, you bowl when conditions are favourable. That's true of every strike bowler around the world. That's why Australia selects Peter Siddle to do the donkey work, NZ selects Wagner, England went for the likes of Bresnan etc etc. It's unfair to the support bowlers, but it's the best and most efficient way to take wickets. During the 80s, the Windies didn't need to worry about this so much since they pretty much always had 4 amazing pace bowlers. I don't think that's been true of any other team in history. 3. How Imran conducts himself? Well let's see. He answers truthfully and sincerely about ball tampering. He fosters a legacy of fast bowlers resulting in the likes of Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib. He stayed fit over 20 years of cricket. He is happy to answer controversial questions about ball tampering even when these questions are very much direct attacks on his person. We've seen those videos on youtube of him talking about it. How many other players in the world even said anything more explicit than "no comment"? Actually, you're probably correct here. It is more professional to say "no comment". But I'd rather listen to someone who actually has the balls to be honest rather than hide behind a wall of "professionalism". 4. If you're going to go after murderers, you go after them all, not one. Have you ever tried facing a ball with a damaged seam? It's almost impossible. The ball either bounces to your head from a full pitch or shoots through at ankle height from a bouncer length. Completely unplayable, and frankly, extremely dangerous. Add in horizontal deviation off the pitch and you'll see how impossible it is to play. While reverse swing at good pace can be difficult to play, it is not unplayable. I'd rather go to Pakistan and play against reverse swing on the flat wickets over there than play on green seamers in NZ or weird variable bounce in other countries. At least with reverse swing the ball is moving before it pitches. With seam deviation and variable bounce you have know way of predicting where the ball will go.

[Muloghonto]

Records of miller and imran are similar. Yes, miller was more of a batsman than imran but he was also just as good a bowler. While it is teue that strike bowlers bowl less in 25 to 40 over mark than when the ball is new, nobody cherry picked the optimal time to bowl like imran. After early 80s imran never bowled in those overs. Everyone else did. That gives imrans record an extra boost that others dont get. Imran was not very profesaional, the clashes berween him anf miandad are legendary. He was average at managing people, aveeage at tactics. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

[keith]

Well I've already disagreed on all those points and given my reasons, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

[rtmohanlal]

Pretty much everyone in the world considers him the greatest bowling allrounder of all time. During the period between 1980-1987, he was the best bowler in the world - better even than Malcolm Marshall, and possibly the best bowler the world has ever seen. As for professionalism, he was a fast bowler who's career lasted nearly as long as Tendulkar's. I'm not sure how you can get more professional than that. The reason Imran is associated with ball tampering is because of comments he made in the media in which he objected to the extent that other great bowlers were taking ball tampering - notably, lifting and raising the seam and the use of oils and moisturisers on the ball was something he strongly objected to. He did not name any names but it's been well documented that the likes of Lillee et al were also ball tampering. The only difference is that Imran had the honesty and sincerity to admit to scratching the ball - somewhat minor in comparison with lifting the seam, IMO. As recently as last year we have seen Faf Du Plessis scratching the ball with his zipper. Are we now prepared to re-write Dale Steyn's record? I should hope not.

When Imran took six for six from 23 deliveries, including a hat-trick, for Sussex against Warwickshire in 1983, umpire Don Oslear voiced his suspicions. Although Alvin Kallicharran, who saw the destruction from the non-striker’s end, deemed it the best bowling he had ever seen, others were not that effusive. England seamer Chris Old told the Daily Mirror, “I saw the ball [imran] had tampered with, and it looked like a dog had chewed it.” According to Oslear, “This was the first time I had seen one side of the ball scratched and torn with pieces of leather ripped out. The quarter seam had been opened up at a point where it meets the stitched seam and it appeared that some of the stitches had been cut. This allowed a triangle of leather to be pulled up from the surface of the ball, it was a piece large enough to be gripped between forefinger and thumb, and by which the ball could be suspended.”A report was sent to Lord’s. - these are events that point to not just scratching the ball or lifting the seam

[keith]

When Imran took six for six from 23 deliveries' date=' including a hat-trick, for Sussex against Warwickshire in 1983, umpire Don Oslear voiced his suspicions. Although Alvin Kallicharran, who saw the destruction from the non-striker’s end, deemed it the best bowling he had ever seen, others were not that effusive. England seamer Chris Old told the Daily Mirror, “I saw the ball [imran'] had tampered with, and it looked like a dog had chewed it.†According to Oslear, “This was the first time I had seen one side of the ball scratched and torn with pieces of leather ripped out. The quarter seam had been opened up at a point where it meets the stitched seam and it appeared that some of the stitches had been cut. This allowed a triangle of leather to be pulled up from the surface of the ball, it was a piece large enough to be gripped between forefinger and thumb, and by which the ball could be suspended.â€A report was sent to Lord’s. - these are events that point to not just scratching the ball or lifting the seam

Look at the scorecard. The ball in question was 50 overs old. It was the second innings on a flat track in which runs were being scored readily. i.e. perfect conditions for reverse swing. Notably, most of the dismissals were bowled, which involves a leather ball hitting hard wooden stumps. Wood tends to be harder than fingernails, in my experience. Seeing that 6 wickets were taken in 23 deliveries, the umpire would have had plenty of opportunity to change the ball. Did ball tampering occur in that match? It may have. Did anyone accuse Imran Khan, the captain, or anyone in the fielding side of ball tampering? no. Was the ball changed at any point during that spell? no. Have there been other instances of an old ball suddenly taking reverse swing and a great bowler being able to take advantage of it? Yes. Most recently, Dale Steyn in the second test vs Australia. Now if we look back in 20 years time at some of the comments made by the notoriously stupid David Warner, we might have reason to suspect the South Africans of ball tampering. But because the rest of us actually know what we saw - a great bowler in perfect rhythm generating reverse swing - we don't. Similarly, comments from the likes of Allan Lamb and Ian Botham on some of these instances have been just as stupid. They have subsequently been sued. It's sad that these comments are still tarnishing some superb careers.

[rtmohanlal]

Look at the scorecard. The ball in question was 50 overs old. It was the second innings on a flat track in which runs were being scored readily. i.e. perfect conditions for reverse swing. Notably, most of the dismissals were bowled, which involves a leather ball hitting hard wooden stumps. Wood tends to be harder than fingernails, in my experience. Seeing that 6 wickets were taken in 23 deliveries, the umpire would have had plenty of opportunity to change the ball. Did ball tampering occur in that match? It may have. Did anyone accuse Imran Khan, the captain, or anyone in the fielding side of ball tampering? no. Was the ball changed at any point during that spell? no. Have there been other instances of an old ball suddenly taking reverse swing and a great bowler being able to take advantage of it? Yes. Most recently, Dale Steyn in the second test vs Australia. Now if we look back in 20 years time at some of the comments made by the notoriously stupid David Warner, we might have reason to suspect the South Africans of ball tampering. But because the rest of us actually know what we saw - a great bowler in perfect rhythm generating reverse swing - we don't. Similarly, comments from the likes of Allan Lamb and Ian Botham on some of these instances have been just as stupid. They have subsequently been sued. It's sad that these comments are still tarnishing some superb careers.

Oslear and Chris Old the 2 persons who are testimony to these events would have been more experienced than you or I to comment on this regard.they would have gone thru a lot w.r.t conditions of the ball and all these things you said.when such people say that they are witnessing such a pathetic condition of the ball for the first time shall i believe you or them? w.r.t your comment of 'wood hitting the balls' i am sorry but can't laugh because i have never heard such senseless comments while defending something for a long time.did you ever thought of the blunder involved in it?it is a 50 0ld ball means a lot of runs were scored by batsmen by hard hitting the ball. more over we have seen even 400 runs scored in a single day and at the end of it the ball remains far less out of shape than what Oslear and Chris Old witnessed. so you are saying just because the ball hit the stumps 6 times, its shape went badly out of sorts.come on maan... get a life. the umpire did'nt expect such damage was being done to the ball.hence he didn't bother to check it. Leave aside Lamb and Botham , what about Aamer Soahail, what about the 4 or 5 Indians during that 82-83 tour to Pakistan(infact the entire team had doubts), what about he himself admitting to it?