Page 3 of 3

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:04 pm
by D/L
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:Several of these options are/were better bowlers than Botham.

we tend to forget that quite a few of the world's best batsmen were playing for Packer when Botham took many of his wickets.

Any road up, Gough, Caddick, Anderson, Hoggard.

No they weren't. Botham made his test debut in the same season when it all kicked off with Packer. Within three years most of those players were back. Botham hadn't even had his Headingley moment by then.

Three years when he wasn't up against the best in the world then.

Out of a test career that spanned 15 years. You will also note that during those 3 years England didn't have a test against the West Indies so when he faced them it was always the strongest possible side that also happened to be the best test side by far at the time.

A significant chunk, then.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:09 pm
by Aidan11
D/L wrote:
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:Several of these options are/were better bowlers than Botham.

we tend to forget that quite a few of the world's best batsmen were playing for Packer when Botham took many of his wickets.

Any road up, Gough, Caddick, Anderson, Hoggard.

No they weren't. Botham made his test debut in the same season when it all kicked off with Packer. Within three years most of those players were back. Botham hadn't even had his Headingley moment by then.

Three years when he wasn't up against the best in the world then.

Out of a test career that spanned 15 years. You will also note that during those 3 years England didn't have a test against the West Indies so when he faced them it was always the strongest possible side that also happened to be the best test side by far at the time.

A significant chunk, then.


No

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:13 am
by D/L
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:
Aidan11 wrote:
D/L wrote:
Aidan11 wrote:No they weren't. Botham made his test debut in the same season when it all kicked off with Packer. Within three years most of those players were back. Botham hadn't even had his Headingley moment by then.

Three years when he wasn't up against the best in the world then.

Out of a test career that spanned 15 years. You will also note that during those 3 years England didn't have a test against the West Indies so when he faced them it was always the strongest possible side that also happened to be the best test side by far at the time.

A significant chunk, then.

No

And a significant difference in the stats...

Average during Packer (2274/118) = 19.27

Average after Packer (8604/265) = 32.46

Suggesting quite strongly that Botham's career may not have been the best yardstick to use.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:36 am
by DiligentDefence
D/L wrote:And a significant difference in the stats...

Average during Packer (2274/118) = 19.27

Average after Packer (8604/265) = 32.46

Suggesting quite strongly that Botham's career may not have been the best yardstick to use.

Basing arguments on statistics D/L? ;)

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:38 am
by Gingerfinch
Was Willis better than Beefy? Anyone?

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:45 am
by Arthur Crabtree
Very different kinds of bowlers. I'd say for about his first three years, Botham was the best England bowler I've seen, but Bob sustained his quality over a long career. They're both in my lifetime XI. Bob was quite a dedicated pro, Botham put on a lot of weight early in his career, which can't have helped his back problem.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:51 am
by Gingerfinch
That's what I was thinking, Arthur. I saw Bob bowl in the 1984 series, but he was in his last season as a test player, and took a bit of stick from Greenidge and co.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:54 am
by sussexpob
Caddick
Gough
Si Jones
Tremlett

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:00 pm
by Arthur Crabtree
Dr Robert wrote:That's what I was thinking, Arthur. I saw Bob bowl in the 1984 series, but he was in his last season as a test player, and took a bit of stick from Greenidge and co.


He was pretty wrecked with injury towards the end. A great trier, quite quick and nasty. I only saw him from 1977, so he may have been faster earlier on. His career average is the nearest pace bowler we've got to world class since the fifties. Maybe with Snow who was before my time.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:08 pm
by Arthur Crabtree
sussexpob wrote:Caddick
Gough
Si Jones
Tremlett


Should have included Tremlett ahead of Dev. I just selected the top wicket takers.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:50 pm
by D/L
DiligentDefence wrote:
D/L wrote:And a significant difference in the stats...

Average during Packer (2274/118) = 19.27

Average after Packer (8604/265) = 32.46

Suggesting quite strongly that Botham's career may not have been the best yardstick to use.

Basing arguments on statistics D/L? ;)

Career statistics, which will never be quite as skewed as those from just a few matches, which seem to take on quite a lot of importance with some, DD.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:19 pm
by sussexpob
Arthur Crabtree wrote:
sussexpob wrote:Caddick
Gough
Si Jones
Tremlett


Should have included Tremlett ahead of Dev. I just selected the top wicket takers.


If anything the list itself is a "what if" list.... so many bowlers who were wrecked by crap selection policy and coaches over complicating an easy process.

Dev should be on the list... if only because the 1994 test at the Oval is possibly the most aggressive spell in test cricket history. The mood he was in that day, you could have had 11 Bradman's in and most wouldn't of had the stomach to hang around.

His career was also the most representative of mis-management. England tried to mess with his action, mess with his head, and when he just went out and acted on raw emotion, there are few bowlers who looked as capable of being threatening.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:27 pm
by Arthur Crabtree
He had a great action. Alan Donald said that when he had bowling troubles, he'd look at tape of DM. Ian Healy described him as frighteningly quick, but of course, inconsistent and wayward.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:39 pm
by sussexpob
Arthur Crabtree wrote:He had a great action. Alan Donald said that when he had bowling troubles, he'd look at tape of DM. Ian Healy described him as frighteningly quick, but of course, inconsistent and wayward.


An action so good, Peter Lever decided he needed to change it.... hence the inconsistency. It was harsh on Malcolm, they treated him a bit like dirty with Illingworth's negative comments, and the coaches trying to mess him around. He was a guy you just threw it too and told him to hurl it.

Re: Best since Botham?

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 3:54 pm
by Aidan11
Dr Robert wrote:That's what I was thinking, Arthur. I saw Bob bowl in the 1984 series, but he was in his last season as a test player, and took a bit of stick from Greenidge and co.


The series in 1981 could quite easily have been his last. His knees were shot. At Headingley in the second innings Brearley asked him to give it all he had and the rest is history. Went on for a few more seasons and even captained the side.

Bit of daft trivia - he released a song under the name of Bob Willis and the Wickets. Sadly I can't get hold of a copy anywhere.