How good was Imran Khan as a batsman in Tests?

[Hitman]

I don't care about ODI cricket. We all know that he is one the greatest bowlers ever, and certainly the best bowler from Asia, even better than the 'great' Wasim Akram. But I'd like to know how good was Imran Khan as a Test batsman.

Looking at his batting average of almost 38 in Test cricket, it can be compared with specialist Test batsmen like Michael Atherton, Nasser Hussain and Allan Lamb (although Imran averaged better than him with the bat).

I'm asking this because I missed Imran's era. I have no doubts in my mind that he was the best all rounder of his time and among the top 3 all rounders ever along with Sobers and Miller.

But what I want to know from people who saw him bat is that how good of a Test batsman he was? I've heard a lot of fans say that Ian Bothan was the most talented batsman out of all the all rounders of his time, followed by Kapil Dev. Maybe they were better at dominating attacks. But for those who saw Imran bat, how good was he?

Even Sehwag was a destroyer of attacks, yet someone superior like Dravid used to grind bowling attacks.

Once again, like Jeff Thomson once said in around 2005/06, ODI cricket is a joke! I'm asking about Imran as a Test batsman. Any opinion would be highly appreciated.

 

[Slog]

Sobers, Botham were better than him.

Kapil prolly same level but prolly had more impact with bat in Tests

 

[Hitman]

The 'Lion of Pakistan'

 

[Hitman]

Sobers, Botham were better than him.

Kapil prolly same level but prolly had more impact with bat in Tests

Sobers, being an all rounder, is widely considered the greatest batsman since Bradman. Of course Sobers was a better batsman than Imran. But Botham was pathetic against the best team of his time, the West Indies. He loses points for that. Despite the fact that he was probably the most talented batsman out of all the all rounders of his time. Kapil was a destroyer of attacks, but like the example I mentioned above, even Sehwag was a true destroyer of attacks, yet someone like Dravid was better than him.

 

[Bilal7]

He averaged 50+ during the last ten years of his career. He was also, arguably, Pakistan's second or third best batsman during his peak.

Botham was slightly better as a batsman, during his peak because he scored more centuries but I don't see why Kapil is rated higher than Imran. Like you said, Sehwag was more devastating but that doesn't mean that he was better than Dravid. In this case, Kapil averaged significantly lower than Imran too.

So all in all, a good batsman, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Hitman]

He averaged 50+ during the last ten years of his career. He was also, arguably, Pakistan's second or third best batsman during his peak.

Botham was slightly better as a batsman, during his peak because he scored more centuries but I don't see why Kapil is rated higher than Imran. Like you said, Sehwag was more devastating but that doesn't mean that he was better than Dravid. In this case, Kapil averaged significantly lower than Imran too.

So all in all, a good batsman, nothing more, nothing less.

Maybe that's because of Kapil's ability to dominate attacks during his time, and a lot of people look at natural talent rather than hard work. Anyways, I'd rate Botham and Kapil equal in batting, both of them were aggressive batsmen. Add to that, I'd also rate Imran along with them. Why? While Imran was not as talented as them with the bat, he made up for it with his temperament, someone who didn't destroy bowling attacks like they did, but was much more reliable for his team than both Botham and Kapil with his patience and temperament.

 

[Hitman]

He averaged 50+ during the last ten years of his career. He was also, arguably, Pakistan's second or third best batsman during his peak.

Botham was slightly better as a batsman, during his peak because he scored more centuries but I don't see why Kapil is rated higher than Imran. Like you said, Sehwag was more devastating but that doesn't mean that he was better than Dravid. In this case, Kapil averaged significantly lower than Imran too.

So all in all, a good batsman, nothing more, nothing less.

During his peak as a batsman, he was the second best batsman of his team after Javed Miandad.

 

[Hitman]

It's not a joke for one of the greatest fast bowler ever, to realize that he was losing his brilliant pace in his later years, and then finally decide to give up bowling and become the 2nd best batsman of his team. It's simply EXTRAORDINARY!!!!

 

[Chrish]

Decent bat.. Nothing more or less. His stats do flatter him

 

[Hitman]

Like Sheikh Hasina once said that Sachin is the pride of the subcontinent. I'd like to say something, and I bet most fans from Asia would agree that Imran Khan is not just the lion of Pakistan, but he is the 'Lion of Asia'.

 

[Hitman]

Decent bat.. Nothing more or less. His stats do flatter him

Don't you think one of the best Test bowlers ever who is also a desent Test bat makes him a true 'LEGEND'?

 

[Bilal7]

Like Sheikh Hasina once said that Sachin is the pride of the subcontinent. I'd like to say something, and I bet most fans from Asia would agree that Imran Khan is not just the lion of Pakistan, but he is the 'Lion of Asia'.

Yes, definitely. I'm sure the players themselves would love to be appreciated by the whole of Asia, instead of just their own countrymen.

Maybe that's because of Kapil's ability to dominate attacks during his time, and a lot of people look at natural talent rather than hard work. Anyways, I'd rate Botham and Kapil equal in batting, both of them were aggressive batsmen. Add to that, I'd also rate Imran along with them. Why? While Imran was not as talented as them with the bat, he made up for it with his temperament, someone who didn't destroy bowling attacks like they did, but was much more reliable for his team than both Botham and Kapil with his patience and temperament.

Interesting. There was little to separate them so you can rank them whichever way you want without people getting displeased.

 

[Chrish]

Don't you think one of the best Test bowlers ever who is also a desent Test bat makes him a true 'LEGEND'?

He became decent with bat in later part of his career (when he was far less active with the ball )

 

[Sachin136]

He averaged 50+ during the last ten years of his career. He was also, arguably, Pakistan's second or third best batsman during his peak.

Botham was slightly better as a batsman, during his peak because he scored more centuries but I don't see why Kapil is rated higher than Imran. Like you said, Sehwag was more devastating but that doesn't mean that he was better than Dravid. In this case, Kapil averaged significantly lower than Imran too.

So all in all, a good batsman, nothing more, nothing less.

Sehwag is not better than Dravid because he did not do much overseas in the latter half of his career. Average wise they are very close.

Kapil did well against the best teams and was much more devastating, but averaged less (but not by too much).

 

[Slog]

He became decent with bat in later part of his career (when he was far less active with the ball )

he did average 50 with the bat and 19 with the ball for good 7-8 years though

 

[Sachin136]

he did average 50 with the bat and 19 with the ball for good 7-8 years though

With 18 not outs out of 67 innings (27% not out).

 

[Bilal7]

Sehwag is not better than Dravid because he did not do much overseas in the latter half of his career. Average wise they are very close.

Kapil did well against the best teams and was much more devastating, but averaged less (but not by too much).

How much did Kapil average during his peak? I'm curious. Imran averaged 50+.

Six/seven points is a big difference.

 

[Bilal7]

With 18 not outs out of 67 innings (27% not out).

Which means he was extremely hard to dismiss. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Feroz Rawther]

Imran was a descent bat. that's all.his bat avg: was hugely inflated by notouts.to be frank , his very low str: rate of 47.52 combined with his avg: bat position of 7 enabled him to get such high no: of notouts which inflated his bat avg: .Kapil's avg: bat position too was around 7 but his str: rate of 84 in his first 127 inns(Imran played 126 inns) was too high which negated all the advantages of 7th position.Keep in mind 5th down or 7nth bat position is the most easiest to earn a not out among top 7 batsmen(think of that in practical terms). So i won't value Imran's bat avg: at more than 35.5 at the most.Kapil's bat avg: in first 127 inns was 32.56.More over their runs/inns value was around 30.So little to chose between them, if only Imran
slightly ahead .

But, after taking all other small factors that may exist upon which either player can have slight adv: one over the other, i feel there are 3 distinct factors that place Kapil a convincingly better bat than Imran.

1. His str: rate of 84(Imran's was 47.52 . only 5 more than half that of Kapil).

2. performance vs WI in WI, The undoubted best team of their era

3. quality of big inns played on the avg:

i think the above 3 factors are vital even in one to one specialist batsmen comparison. isn't it?

 

[Sachin136]

Which means he was extremely hard to dismiss. Thanks for pointing that out.

That's great, but it still boosts his average significantly.

Also in that 10 year period 9 of his 18 not outs were when he scored below 50 in that innings. So it wasn't like he made a good score and stayed not out because he ran out of partners.



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...an;template=results;type=batting;view=innings

 

[Sachin136]

Imran was a descent bat. that's all.his bat avg: was hugely inflated by notouts.to be frank , his very low str: rate of 47.52 combined with his avg: bat position of 7 enabled him to get such high no: of notouts which inflated his bat avg: .Kapil's avg: bat position too was around 7 but his str: rate of 84 in his first 127 inns(Imran played 126 inns) was too high which negated all the advantages of 7th position.Keep in mind 5th down or 7nth bat position is the most easiest to earn a not out among top 7 batsmen(think of that in practical terms). So i won't value Imran's bat avg: at more than 35.5 at the most.Kapil's bat avg: in first 127 inns was 32.56.More over their runs/inns value was around 30.So little to chose between them, if only Imran
slightly ahead .

But, after taking all other small factors that may exist upon which either player can have slight adv: one over the other, i feel there are 3 distinct factors that place Kapil a convincingly better bat than Imran.

1. His str: rate of 84(Imran's was 47.52 . only 5 more than half that of Kapil).

2. performance vs WI in WI, The undoubted best team of their era

3. quality of big inns played on the avg:

i think the above 3 factors are vital even in one to one specialist batsmen comparison. isn't it?

Kapil did well in South Africa against Allan Donald and in England against Bob Willis, Ian Botham and Michael Hendrick as well.

 

[Bilal7]

That's great, but it still boosts his average significantly.

Also in that 10 year period 9 of his 18 not outs were when he scored below 50 in that innings. So it wasn't like he made a good score and stayed not out because he ran out of partners.

View attachment 62362

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...an;template=results;type=batting;view=innings

Well, the point of batting average is to determine how many runs you score before being dismissed. If a player is hard to dismiss, he absolutely deserves that high average.

Dhoni's ODI average is also hugely inflated but that is because he is also tough to dismiss and deserves that 50+ average, like Imran in tests.

 

[Amjid Javed]

With 18 not outs out of 67 innings (27% not out).

Yeah and so what if he had loads of not outs! means the opposition couldnt get him out, sign of good batsmen.

 

[Ironcat]

That's great, but it still boosts his average significantly.

Also in that 10 year period 9 of his 18 not outs were when he scored below 50 in that innings. So it wasn't like he made a good score and stayed not out because he ran out of partners.

Yes, but then by definition, those low-scoring notouts wouldn't contribute much to his average. Taken together those 9 notouts probably take ~3 runs from his average.

 

[Sachin136]

Well, the point of batting average is to determine how many runs you score before being dismissed. If a player is hard to dismiss, he absolutely deserves that high average.

Dhoni's ODI average is also hugely inflated but that is because he is also tough to dismiss and deserves that 50+ average, like Imran in tests.

Yes and not outs are fine if they boost your average as long as you made a decent score in that innings. But if you made 10* and stayed not out very often then your average doesn’t “deserve” to be boosted.

Dhoni’s case is different. It is in ODIs where staying not out is more frequent (because of the 50 over limitation). Also mostly when he stayed not out, he made a decent contribution. In Dhoni’s entire ODI career he stayed not out 67 times. Out of those 67, in roughly 40 innings he made at least 40+ runs. In Imran’s test career however that is not the case, as his not out innings between 1982 and 1992 in my last post show. If you take Imran’s entire career and see his not out innings, there is a similar trend.

 

[MMHS]

He became decent with bat in later part of his career (when he was far less active with the ball )

In 80s, there are 5 batsmen with 2,500+ runs & 49+ average - Viv Richards. Gavasker, Gower, Grineedge, Gooch, MCrowe & Vengsarker weren't one of them, Imran Khan was (along with Border, Javed, Jones & Azhar); that too after losing best 3 years of career. And, this 2,500+ runs were scored @ an average of
50+ in AUS
50+ in ENG
~65 in IND
~53 in PAK
140 in NZ
12 in SRL &
23 in WI

I put that 2,500 runs cap for someone playing 52 Tests (& losing 3 great years at peak), so that some genius doesn't come with "Not Out" theory.

Along with that, this man had 234 wickets at 19 average & 47 SR, with 5 of these 52 Tests played simply as batsman & 23 after double fracture of left fimer, which kept him out of the game from the age of 30 to 32, when he was scoring at 55 average & taking ~7 wickets/Test at 15, bowling 50 overs/Test - fast, hostile, mean & relentless.

Imran Khan was the unluckiest cricketer ever, for that to be born for a country with very little media power - otherwise we would have still hearing the barkings even after 25 years of his retirement.

 

[leg-side-flick]

Keeping stats aside, Imran always had a mentality of fast bowler... He did not want to be a medium fast bowler, he wanted to be fast and also the best, he wanted to be like Dennis Lillie ( everyone in 70's wanted to be)...

He was mentally a very very strong character, the Pak fans of today have no frigging clue as to how this man competed with others ( apart from his 92 wc win ) and actually formed a team that could win and also believe they could win... A very inspirational man and a leader...

Coming to his batting, he was a average batsman and not a great fielder either, but as i said he was mentally far tougher than others and could grind himself, he could block good balls and hoick a few over long on, long off, midwicket... His batting would not please you but he was ready to grind it out.. To be honest I don't think he even took it seriously in early years, but did so in later years...

Both Kapil and Botham were better batsmen, had more shots, could take on bowling better but if my team was 70/5, batting first and I wanted at least 160 on board, I would always choose Imran to bat amongst the three...

 

[Ironcat]

LOL at somoene throwing a test batting strike rate in the mix for "greatness".

Imran was a very good batsman in those last 10-some years. Yes, second best in his team, but that was due to his smarts and mental strength. He understood the test game just as Misbah does today - i.e. grind out the bowlers and then go after the weak links. He did place a very high value on his own wicket. As a batsman, he was a little underwhelming away from the subcontinent, but his bowling then would more than make up for it. in the last few years of his game, he played mainly as a battle-hardened batsman - and as a brilliant captain.

 

[Convict]

not as good as some here like to believe

 

[Sachin136]

LOL at somoene throwing a test batting strike rate in the mix for "greatness".

Imran was a very good batsman in those last 10-some years. Yes, second best in his team, but that was due to his smarts and mental strength. He understood the test game just as Misbah does today - i.e. grind out the bowlers and then go after the weak links. He did place a very high value on his own wicket. As a batsman, he was a little underwhelming away from the subcontinent, but his bowling then would more than make up for it. in the last few years of his game, he played mainly as a battle-hardened batsman - and as a brilliant captain.

So should we stop considering Viv a great, since you believe test batting strike rate is not a factor of greatness?

 

[leg-side-flick]

Imran Khan was the unluckiest cricketer ever, for that to be born for a country with very little media power - otherwise we would have still hearing the barkings even after 25 years of his retirement.

He was lucky to be born in a cricketing family and that's how easily walked into side and played for English universities as well....

Also among the four all rounders, he is still talked about the most and also compared with Sobers, even if other three boards have better media...

 

[Feroz Rawther]

Kapil did well in South Africa against Allan Donald and in England against Bob Willis, Ian Botham and Michael Hendrick as well.

on a parallel note if Kallis can be only placed at the most at 93% against King Viv as batsman(despite Kallis scoring 5000 more runs, having +5 more bat avg: and 20 more 100s), then i can't place Imran at more than 90% against Kapil as batsmen.

Kapil was a murderer of quality attacks.to score 5248 tests runs( 61.45% as that of Viv) at 80.91 str: rate was no joke(Viv's was only 69.28)

 

[Chrish]

he did average 50 with the bat and 19 with the ball for good 7-8 years though

There are two line of arguments here

1) Imran was a terrific batsman because he averaged 50 for certain time period

2) Imran's average is highly inflated and only due to not ours

My view is somewhere in the middle. My opinion is similar to Feroz on this one

I rate Imran the bowler highly (top bowler from Asia) but Imran the batsman would be classified as "decent" by me

 

[Sachin136]

Yes, but then by definition, those low-scoring notouts wouldn't contribute much to his average. Taken together those 9 notouts probably take ~3 runs from his average.

Getting less than 50 runs added to your total without being counted for as an innings can change the average significantly.

If you calculate his average over 1982 to 1992 completely ignoring the innings where he stayed not out and scored less than 50:

Runs scored = 2516-24-39-32-13-15-5-10-43-28 = 2307
Innings = 67 - 18 = 49
Average = 47

That is still good, but lower than his actual average by about 5.

 

[Ironcat]

Getting less than 50 runs added to your total without being counted for as an innings can change the average significantly.

If you calculate his average over 1982 to 1992 completely ignoring the innings where he stayed not out and scored less than 50:

Runs scored = 2516-24-39-32-13-15-5-10-43-28 = 2307
Innings = 67 - 18 = 49
Average = 47

That is still good, but lower than his actual average by about 5.

Sure, and my estimate was a back-of-the-envelop 200 runs/67 innings.

The point is, the argument cuts both ways. Low-scoring not outs do boost the average but - by definition - not in any meaningful way, esp. if you do it to everyone.

 

[Suleiman]

Daal mein kuch kaala hay, something is not right with this thread... not sure of OP's true intentions

On topic he was the glue that held our team together in the 80s. It is quite fascinating that he went from someone not even good enough to be a fast bowler to a fast bowler and then to a batsman.

He does get overrated from time to time by kids who've never seen him play, but gets underrated at times by other kids who've never seen him play too.

 

[leg-side-flick]

On topic he was the glue that held our team together in the 80s. It is quite fascinating that he went from someone not even good enough to be a fast bowler to a fast bowler and then to a batsman.
.

Of all his traits I just loved his mental strength, the ability to work hard with a focus and then try and be the best...

Mind you he had a lot distractions as Women drooled over him because he looked very good and was famous but it never stopped him from practising hard and performing...

Aajkal koi ek century bhi kar leta hain tou people put him on a pedestal and he never keeps a foot on ground

 

[Suleiman]

Of all his traits I just loved his mental strength, the ability to work hard with a focus and then try and be the best...

Mind you he had a lot distractions as Women drooled over him because he looked very good and was famous but it never stopped him from practising hard and performing...

Aajkal koi ek century bhi kar leta hain tou people put him on a pedestal and he never keeps a foot on ground

Yeah he balanced his education, social life, and ofc his passion of cricket very well. He is that rare breed of kids you may see in high school who get straight As, are good looking so get with the girls, but are the captain of the school's cricket team as well - very well balanced lifestyle.
Usually you get nerds who get good grades but suck at everything else or the douchebags who are good at sports and attract girls but are duffers in class.

 

[Ironcat]

So should we stop considering Viv a great, since you believe test batting strike rate is not a factor of greatness?

Viv is considered a 'plunderer of attacks' due to his strike rate. His batting greatness, on the other hand, comes from having averaged 50 in an era of bowlers. A test batting strike rate - when you have 450 overs of game possible - is meaningless if there aren't any runs to show for it.

 

[Belawal2014]

Yeah he balanced his education, social life, and ofc his passion of cricket very well. He is that rare breed of kids you may see in high school who get straight As, are good looking so get with the girls, but are the captain of the school's cricket team as well - very well balanced lifestyle.
Usually you get nerds who get good grades but suck at everything else or the douchebags who are good at sports and attract girls but are duffers in class.

Which breed are you [MENTION=136729]Suleiman[/MENTION]?

 

[Sachin136]

Viv is considered a 'plunderer of attacks' due to his strike rate. His batting greatness, on the other hand, comes from having averaged 50 in an era of bowlers. A test batting strike rate - when you have 450 overs of game possible - is meaningless if there aren't any runs to show for it.

There are many others who average around 50. Some of those aren’t regarded as good as Viv because of how devastating he was. This is similar to Sehwag. You may not consider strike rate as a factor of greatness in tests, but most others do.

 

[Ironcat]

There are many others who average around 50. Some of those aren’t regarded as good as Viv because of how devastating he was. This is similar to Sehwag. You may not consider strike rate as a factor of greatness in tests, but most others do.

Most others who? I can only see the T20 crowd drooling over the test strike rates. Viv and Sehwag are not even on the same scale of batting skills let alone considered in the same breath for batting greatness.

When was the last time a team won a test by a margin of deliveries? When was the last time a team lost a test because it ran out of deliveries but still had wickets in hand? When was the last time Bradman and Tendy were quoted for their batting achievements due to the strike rates? When was the last time Shahid Afridi was considered a test batting great?

 

[Chrish]

Viv didn't have any glaring apparent weakness that Sehwag did..

 

[Suleiman]

Which breed are you [MENTION=136729]Suleiman[/MENTION]?

I was like Imran, started off as handsome nerd, then became too caught up with parties and girls and became a douchebag, and then finished as an allrounder giving equal time to parties/girls and studies

 

[Sachin136]

Most others who? I can only see the T20 crowd drooling over the test strike rates. Viv and Sehwag are not even on the same scale of batting skills let alone considered in the same breath for batting greatness.

When was the last time a team won a test by a margin of deliveries? When was the last time a team lost a test because it ran out of deliveries but still had wickets in hand? When was the last time Bradman and Tendy were quoted for their batting achievements due to the strike rates? When was the last time Shahid Afridi was considered a test batting great?

There are not many people in the world who would rate Viv just as highly if he had the same statistics in the same era but with an SR of 40.

Strike rate in tests has a major influence on the momentum of the match. Scoring a quick 60 against the new ball gives the team momentum and drags down the bowlers. But even if it did not have any effect on the match, it doesn’t mean it is irrelevant when it comes to batting greatness. For example, scoring 300s and 400s are rarely helpful for teams (usually a 150 gives the team more chance to win) but it still shows batting ability. Similarly being able to attack good bowlers like that while maintaining consistency is a very rare skill.

 

[Pak Warrior]

I don't give strike rate the same importance in test as I do in odi and especially in t20, so I wouldn't use that as a negative against imran. I rate imran the all rounder as the best all rounder of his time among the other top all rounders of his time. Now adays we don't have any all rounders that are as good as those from his era, and he was easily the best overall. As a bowler easily the best, as a captain easily the best. As a batsman he was more than good enough, I would describe him as a hard hitter of the ball in his bowling days (as many bowlers are), and a proper batsman in the end of his playing days. He was able to reinvent himself and place focus on different things thru his career. That's something that not ALL great players can do, only the truly rare and EXCEPTIONAL ones manage doing this and still being effective for their team.

 

[Ironcat]

There are not many people in the world who would rate Viv just as highly if he had the same statistics in the same era but with an SR of 40.

You mean to say Gavaskar is rated low because of his strike rate - when at times it was his inning's endurance and longevity (= low SR) that either won the game or prevent it from being lost?

Strike rate in tests has a major influence on the momentum of the match. Scoring a quick 60 against the new ball gives the team momentum and drags down the bowlers. But even if it did not have any effect on the match, it doesn’t mean it is irrelevant when it comes to batting greatness. For example, scoring 300s and 400s are rarely helpful for teams (usually a 150 gives the team more chance to win) but it still shows batting ability. Similarly being able to attack good bowlers like that while maintaining consistency is a very rare skill.

In theory, if nothing else changes about your batting with a higher SR, then by all means go for a higher SR. If you can drive from home to work in half the time by blasting through all speed limits, please do it all day long - as long as there are no accidents.

In reality, it is quite the opposite.

When you have a higher SR, it means you are looking to score off deliveries much more often. It means that you are looking to put your bat on the ball much more often. It means you are going to keep chasing those shaping deliveries outside off when there is a full slip cordon and gully in place. It means you are going to dramatically reduce the odds of a high score simply by providing the opposition opportunity after opportunity of a dismissal. Why on earth would you want to do it when there are 450 overs possible in a game and hardly any clock ticking?

The only case for a high SR is where all of the following is true: (A) you have a flat track where chances of your dismissal are very minimal; (B) your bowling sucks such that having a much higher score relative to that of the opposition is your only chance; and (C) there are other proper test batsmen in the team who can step in to build an inning if your high-risk strategy blows in your face.

Viv is considered a great test batsman for his batting skills, but he would have averaged higher if he had not played a high-risk game. He just didn't need a higher average, as his bowling attack was more than capable of defending the totals the batsmen put up.

 

[AlphaFighter]

I am not sure how many bowling all rounders who were regarded as pure strike bowlers in the their teams could manage to stay in the team on the basis of improved batting once they lost their primary asset i.e. their bowling in their last 4 years in International Cricket.

 

[IndianWillow]

Sehwag vs Dravid analogy works in the case of Kapil vs Imran.

Imran was technically sounder than Kapil but Kapil was more destructive. Kapil was extraordinary early in his career, but for some reason he never became a reliable batsman like Imran. Kapil could play a few outstanding knocks in tests and had outstanding ability with the bat, but he could never become a reliable test batsman. His strike rate does not mean much in tests (it means a lot in ODIs), and those quick and frequent cameos are rarely match defining knocks in tests.

Perhaps if Kapil had played in this batsmen friendly age, he would have been a very dangerous player like Sehwag and Warner. But in the 80s, batting conditions were tougher and Kapil's undisciplined approach to batting often made him susceptible to cheap dismissals. Imran with better technique made more useful runs for his team.

 

[Pak Warrior]

Sehwag vs Dravid analogy works in the case of Kapil vs Imran.

Imran was technically sounder than Kapil but Kapil was more destructive. Kapil was extraordinary early in his career, but for some reason he never became a reliable batsman like Imran. Kapil could play a few outstanding knocks in tests and had outstanding ability with the bat, but he could never become a reliable test batsman. His strike rate does not mean much in tests (it means a lot in ODIs), and those quick and frequent cameos are rarely match defining knocks in tests.

Perhaps if Kapil had played in this batsmen friendly age, he would have been a very dangerous player like Sehwag and Warner. But in the 80s, batting conditions were tougher and Kapil's undisciplined approach to batting often made him susceptible to cheap dismissals. Imran with better technique made more useful runs for his team.

Well written, and logical post. Good analysis brother

 

[ExplicitAI]

From best to worst I'd say:
Sobers
Botham
Imran
Kapil
Hadlee

 

[Abdul]

Ian Botham was a undistinguished batsman - Great bowler, but shouldn't be acknowledged as a batsman!

Not sure why so many people rate him here.

 

[Haroon786]

Botham > Imran > Kapil in batting.

Imran >>>>>> Botham and Kapil in bowling.

 

[Bilal7]

Yes and not outs are fine if they boost your average as long as you made a decent score in that innings. But if you made 10* and stayed not out very often then your average doesn’t “deserve” to be boosted.

Dhoni’s case is different. It is in ODIs where staying not out is more frequent (because of the 50 over limitation). Also mostly when he stayed not out, he made a decent contribution. In Dhoni’s entire ODI career he stayed not out 67 times. Out of those 67, in roughly 40 innings he made at least 40+ runs. In Imran’s test career however that is not the case, as his not out innings between 1982 and 1992 in my last post show. If you take Imran’s entire career and see his not out innings, there is a similar trend.

Your average does not get boosted by 10*, as others have said.

In your other post you used a 50+ cutoff for Imran but used 40 for Dhoni. Keep it the same for both.

Besides, an average of 48 after removing these not-outs is phenomenal.

 

[Sachin136]

Your average does not get boosted by 10*, as others have said.

In your other post you used a 50+ cutoff for Imran but used 40 for Dhoni. Keep it the same for both.

Besides, an average of 48 after removing these not-outs is phenomenal.

I used a 50+ cutoff for Imran because that is in tests, while Dhoni’s not outs are in ODIs.

 

[Buffet]

A bit overrated in this forum for his batting and a bit underrated in this forum for his bowling.

 

[OS_89]

A bit overrated in this forum for his batting and a bit underrated in this forum for his bowling.

This.

Better bowler than Wasim for me, and arguably one of the top 5 ever.

As a batsman though, he was solid and stubborn and a very gritty player, but quite limited. Purely as batsmen, I rate the likes of Botham and Kapil higher, although as an overall cricketer, Imran is definitely ahead.

 

[Robert]

He was a solid #6 batsman in an era of very good fast bowling. Worth his place in the Pakistan side purely as a batter, and sometimes played in that role alone. He was good off his front and back foot.

The very high percentage not-outs flatters to deceive him, so this meme about averaging fifty for a decade is propagated by people who never saw him play. People who averaged fifty in that period scored twenty test centuries, while Imran scored six.

Those not-outs indicate that he was good at protecting Pakistan's rather weak tail, stopping it getting blown away, which is another reason for his low overall scoring rate.

Interesting fact - he could not close his left hand all the way due to a childhood injury, so had to roll lots of rubber sleeves onto his bats so he could grip them.

 

[Haroon786]

Probably the only cricketer other than Miller that would be picked in the team solely on the strength of his 2nd discipline, not even Sobers can boast that!

 

[leg-side-flick]

Sehwag vs Dravid analogy works in the case of Kapil vs Imran.

Imran was technically sounder than Kapil but Kapil was more destructive. Kapil was extraordinary early in his career, but for some reason he never became a reliable batsman like Imran. Kapil could play a few outstanding knocks in tests and had outstanding ability with the bat, but he could never become a reliable test batsman. His strike rate does not mean much in tests (it means a lot in ODIs), and those quick and frequent cameos are rarely match defining knocks in tests.

Perhaps if Kapil had played in this batsmen friendly age, he would have been a very dangerous player like Sehwag and Warner. But in the 80s, batting conditions were tougher and Kapil's undisciplined approach to batting often made him susceptible to cheap dismissals. Imran with better technique made more useful runs for his team.

I dont think Imran was technically sounder than Kapil, he was however willing to grind it out and score " not so good looking runs " whereas Kapil could not be bothered about it. so yes, i would take Imran over Kapil in a test match but Dravid Vs Sehwag suggests otherwise.... I think Mark Waugh / Steve Waugh might be better

 

[leg-side-flick]

Botham > Imran > Kapil in batting.

Imran >>>>>> Botham and Kapil in bowling.

Nope, Beefy was a better batsmen, in fact the best of all 4 all rounders

 

[leg-side-flick]

Probably the only cricketer other than Miller that would be picked in the team solely on the strength of his 2nd discipline, not even Sobers can boast that!

Nobody will pick Imran purely as a batsman, and almost everyone will pick him as a bowler / captain / AR

 

[Haroon786]

Nope, Beefy was a better batsmen, in fact the best of all 4 all rounders

Read my post again.

 

[Haroon786]

Nobody will pick Imran purely as a batsman, and almost everyone will pick him as a bowler / captain / AR

Did I say that ?

No, I said he could get into a team at #6 or #7 as a batsman only, he wouldn't need to bowl or captain. The fact that he can makes him a GOAT candidate.

 

[Justcrazy]

Nobody will pick Imran purely as a batsman, and almost everyone will pick him as a bowler / captain / AR

True.

Imran was not that good as a batsman , as a captain he should more grit and worked hard on his batting but not the same impact as Bottham or kapil

 

[Junaids]

Imran Khan was extremely similar to Misbah as a batsman.

Sound, classical technique, hard working, knew his game inside out but of average ability.

Botham was much more gifted, as was Mike Procter, but Botham was lazier and took too many risks.

In Australia we saw that Imran was fine at Adelaide, but not on quicker, bouncier tracks. He also struggled in the West Indies.

In terms of batting, my 70s/80s ranking is:

1) Procter
2) Rice
3) Imran
4) Botham
5) Kapil Dev
6) Hadlee

 

[IndianWillow]

I dont think Imran was technically sounder than Kapil, he was however willing to grind it out and score " not so good looking runs " whereas Kapil could not be bothered about it. so yes, i would take Imran over Kapil in a test match but Dravid Vs Sehwag suggests otherwise.... I think Mark Waugh / Steve Waugh might be better

Willing to grind is part of a test batsman's technical soundness. You can't average high in tests without the willingness to grit it out. Kapil was definitely very capable as a batsman (otherwise he would not be able to score run a ball hundreds and fifties against very good bowlers) but he didn't do himself a lot of justice with his test batting. Kapil could have averaged 40 with the bat if he had applied himself, but he didn't do this. Kapil provided entertainment all the while he was at the crease, but Kapil also irritated fans by getting out cheaply playing a flamboyant shot when he was required to play a solid innings for the team's cause. In test matches these 50(120) knocks are usually more valuable than 30(30) knocks.

 

[leg-side-flick]

Willing to grind is part of a test batsman's technical soundness. You can't average high in tests without the willingness to grit it out. Kapil was definitely very capable as a batsman (otherwise he would not be able to score run a ball hundreds and fifties against very good bowlers) but he didn't do himself a lot of justice with his test batting. Kapil could have averaged 40 with the bat if he had applied himself, but he didn't do this. Kapil provided entertainment all the while he was at the crease, but Kapil also irritated fans by getting out cheaply playing a flamboyant shot when he was required to play a solid innings for the team's cause. In test matches these 50(120) knocks are usually more valuable than 30(30) knocks.

So what is your point now ?

 

[leg-side-flick]

Imran Khan was extremely similar to Misbah as a batsman.

Sound, classical technique, hard working, knew his game inside out but of average ability.

Agree with this But Misbah has more shots, he does not play them enough though

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

OK having the benefit of years behind me, I do remember watching on TV or listening to radio - particularly from dreadful 83 India/Pakistan series onwards - everything to do with Pakistan team. I was an avid reader of "The Cricketer" and "Akhbare Watan" in those days and used to calculate every match what Imran's bowling average and Miandad's batting average would be if they scored such and such. I see the same passion now in later generation about Pakistan's cricket last couple of decades.

Here is the thing with Imran's batting that I saw - Mid 80's onwards. He was a fighter - but also in a very odd way - an entertainer. The crowd used to buzz when he came to bat.

When fighter, his batting was almost like Misbah's - tuk tuk but a big stroke was never far away - especially again the spinners. I would say the circumstances were almost the same as well. The top order in helpful conditions would whither away just like today (unless you have rose tinted glasses) - Mohsin and Modassar on helpful tracks were cannon fodder and would only come into their own on more sedate surfaces. Malik was new. You would only breathe a sigh of relief when Miandad came to the crease and almost always delivered - much like Imran when he bowled. Imran's role then used to be marshaling the tail (unless batting with Miandad when he would be a bit more free.) Therefore you will see low strike rates - because a score needed to be put on. That's where Imran outshone Botham/Kapil etc. He could be relied upon to score 30's, 40's, 50's or 60's under any circumstance to see the team through. He led many rearguard when the top order couldn't play the conditions. Imran was an all conditions man - not especially gifted in stroke making - but easily amongst the elite in dogged determination to see his side through. I remember couple of 72's (one of them not out) he played against Australia in Australia when the rest of the team (with Zaheer etc in the side) couldn't put bat on ball. At that time he was suffering from groin injury so was playing as a batsman - and Captain. Also his batting contribution in the test win in India (Sunny Gavaskar 96*) is a footnote but was crucial in Pakistan putting up decent totals on a track turning square.

Imran was also extremely unselfish - declared on himself when on 96* against Sri Lanka to have enough time to win the game. He was single minded about winning that way.

He differed from Misbah in that he was prepared to take on the fast bowlers. That's where his entertainer part came in. Very good on the bouncer and happy to give any fast bowler the charge. I remember a six on Defraitas in England when Imran was batting on 30 odd and Pakistan had made a sub 150 score on quite a good batting track (sigh...some things don't change!) Against the run of play he charged and hit a straight straight down the ground in the second tier. In those days sixes used to be on the charge and usually straight - I think a lot to do with the bats they used to have. Give Imran today's bat and his scoring rate with rise as well. He was also great against the spinner - playing the ball very late (great late cuts) but sometimes coming down the track. He really didn't get to bat much on dead pitches like Faisalabad because our top order did very well on them.

Imran was a full on package as a batsman and Strike Rate is a narrow way of looking at what his batting meant to the team (just like Misbah's.) I remember in those days, thinking of Imran as our best bet after Miandad to get us to a good score - everyone else was a bit of a hit and miss.

dTalent wise, his batting range was definitely less than some of the leading batsmen of his time. However, every team needs someone they can rely on to lead them to a competitive total - and for Pakistan it was Imran down the order (much like Waugh or Larry Gomes.) Later in his career he started to come up the order - but his powers of batting had waned somewhat so he never posted big scores - or maybe he just got bored with batting, not sure!

I think his batting is underrated for three reasons - he didn't post 200+ score, he did not have expansive strokes but I feel, most importantly, his bowling was so monstrous his batting contributions were outshone - a bit like Sobers in reverse.)

Having seen him in action, Imran, for me can walk into any team in the world in any era based on his bowling or his Captaincy. For his batting, I will say no - but I won't dismiss him either - because no bowler could!

 

[flotsam jetsam]

I too had the fortune of watching Imran on TV against Windies, England and India. More than the records, he always brought that fearlessness to his batting. And those talking about his strike rate, remember he played against some of the most fearsome bowlers. In ODIs even spabked someone like Garner for 3 sixes in an over!

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

OK having the benefit of years behind me, I do remember watching on TV or listening to radio - particularly from dreadful 83 India/Pakistan series onwards - everything to do with Pakistan team. I was an avid reader of "The Cricketer" and "Akhbare Watan" in those days and used to calculate every match what Imran's bowling average and Miandad's batting average would be if they scored such and such. I see the same passion now in later generation about Pakistan's cricket last couple of decades.

Here is the thing with Imran's batting that I saw - Mid 80's onwards. He was a fighter - but also in a very odd way - an entertainer. The crowd used to buzz when he came to bat.

When fighter, his batting was almost like Misbah's - tuk tuk but a big stroke was never far away - especially again the spinners. I would say the circumstances were almost the same as well. The top order in helpful conditions would whither away just like today (unless you have rose tinted glasses) - Mohsin and Modassar on helpful tracks were cannon fodder and would only come into their own on more sedate surfaces. Malik was new. You would only breathe a sigh of relief when Miandad came to the crease and almost always delivered - much like Imran when he bowled. Imran's role then used to be marshaling the tail (unless batting with Miandad when he would be a bit more free.) Therefore you will see low strike rates - because a score needed to be put on. That's where Imran outshone Botham/Kapil etc. He could be relied upon to score 30's, 40's, 50's or 60's under any circumstance to see the team through. He led many rearguard when the top order couldn't play the conditions. Imran was an all conditions man - not especially gifted in stroke making - but easily amongst the elite in dogged determination to see his side through. I remember couple of 72's (one of them not out) he played against Australia in Australia when the rest of the team (with Zaheer etc in the side) couldn't put bat on ball. At that time he was suffering from groin injury so was playing as a batsman - and Captain. Also his batting contribution in the test win in India (Sunny Gavaskar 96*) is a footnote but was crucial in Pakistan putting up decent totals on a track turning square.

Imran was also extremely unselfish - declared on himself when on 96* against Sri Lanka to have enough time to win the game. He was single minded about winning that way.

He differed from Misbah in that he was prepared to take on the fast bowlers. That's where his entertainer part came in. Very good on the bouncer and happy to give any fast bowler the charge. I remember a six on Defraitas in England when Imran was batting on 30 odd and Pakistan had made a sub 150 score on quite a good batting track (sigh...some things don't change!) Against the run of play he charged and hit a straight straight down the ground in the second tier. In those days sixes used to be on the charge and usually straight - I think a lot to do with the bats they used to have. Give Imran today's bat and his scoring rate with rise as well. He was also great against the spinner - playing the ball very late (great late cuts) but sometimes coming down the track. He really didn't get to bat much on dead pitches like Faisalabad because our top order did very well on them.

Imran was a full on package as a batsman and Strike Rate is a narrow way of looking at what his batting meant to the team (just like Misbah's.) I remember in those days, thinking of Imran as our best bet after Miandad to get us to a good score - everyone else was a bit of a hit and miss.

dTalent wise, his batting range was definitely less than some of the leading batsmen of his time. However, every team needs someone they can rely on to lead them to a competitive total - and for Pakistan it was Imran down the order (much like Waugh or Larry Gomes.) Later in his career he started to come up the order - but his powers of batting had waned somewhat so he never posted big scores - or maybe he just got bored with batting, not sure!

I think his batting is underrated for three reasons - he didn't post 200+ score, he did not have expansive strokes but I feel, most importantly, his bowling was so monstrous his batting contributions were outshone - a bit like Sobers in reverse.)

Having seen him in action, Imran, for me can walk into any team in the world in any era based on his bowling or his Captaincy. For his batting, I will say no - but I won't dismiss him either - because no bowler could!

Great explanation for those like me who haven't watched Imran. Thanks.

 

[IndianWillow]

So what is your point now ?

Basically that Imran made better use of his ability than Kapil. A test batsman needs to be able to make those patient and grinding knocks from time to time, but Kapil had only one gear to his batting. Kapil had a casual attitude towards his batting, in his own words he considered himself a bowler first and then only a batsman. In this era Kapil would have been a very successful batsman, but 80s required test batsmen to have several gears.

 

[Feroz Rawther]

Sehwag vs Dravid analogy works in the case of Kapil vs Imran.

Imran was technically sounder than Kapil but Kapil was more destructive. Kapil was extraordinary early in his career, but for some reason he never became a reliable batsman like Imran. Kapil could play a few outstanding knocks in tests and had outstanding ability with the bat, but he could never become a reliable test batsman. His strike rate does not mean much in tests (it means a lot in ODIs), and those quick and frequent cameos are rarely match defining knocks in tests.

Perhaps if Kapil had played in this batsmen friendly age, he would have been a very dangerous player like Sehwag and Warner. But in the 80s, batting conditions were tougher and Kapil's undisciplined approach to batting often made him susceptible to cheap dismissals. Imran with better technique made more useful runs for his team.

if Imran was more reliable then how come thier runs/inns at the end of 126 inns was more or less the same?
Imran's runs/inns value = 30.21
Kapil's runs/inns(first 130 meaningful inns) = 29.88

'meaning ful' in the sense i take out 2 '0 notouts' from Kapil's first 132 inns because they contribute nothing to runs/inns value. After that Kapil's terminal decline started.So neglecting the rest as far as 'consistancy factor' is concerned.

I don't feel Imran was that technically sound a batsman as you say.Kapil can be said as 'unreliable' if the comparison is with a top order batsman. But having nothing to choose between their runs/inns value , how could it be that
Imran was more realiable?
More over , if quality of bowling, match situation, single handed effort ,etc are taken into acount, it was Kapil who made more useful runs for the team.... i feel

 

[Feroz Rawther]

'A test batsman needs to be able to make those patient and grinding knocks from time to time' but Kapil had only one gear to his batting. Kapil had a casual attitude towards his batting, in his own words he considered himself a bowler first and then only a batsman. In this era Kapil would have been a very successful batsman, but 80s required test batsmen to have several gears.

if so the best batsman of the 80s had how many gears? Viv almost on all occasions played aggressively.
similarly Kapil played more aggresively from 5th batting position

 

[Bilal7]

Imran would probably walk into any of the current teams as a batsman alone. Average of 48, after removing all the cheap not-outs is outstanding.

A very good batsman at his peak and a good one, overall.

 

[Robert]

Probably the only cricketer other than Miller that would be picked in the team solely on the strength of his 2nd discipline, not even Sobers can boast that!

Sobers was originally picked for his bowling alone, when he was a tailender.

Botham and Kapil would certainly have got into their respective sides purely as bowlers (at least, in Botham's case, for his first sixty tests, when he was rather better than James Anderson, I think). Kapil was India's best ever opening bowler.

The other think about Botham is that you got a brilliant slip fielder too, perhaps England's best since Wally Hammond in the 1930s and certainly after Botham retired. He leaped around like a salmon and caught everything.

 

[Robert]

Nobody will pick Imran purely as a batsman

I would have done. More importantly, so did the PCB.

 

[Bewal Express]

Solid and reliable. Lacked the talent of his All round rivals as a batsman, but made more of what he had then some of them.

 

[IndianWillow]

if so the best batsman of the 80s had how many gears? Viv almost on all occasions played aggressively.
similarly Kapil played more aggresively from 5th batting position

Viv was an exception. He was a genius. Do you know he averaged 60 at a S/R of 70 during his first half? At that batting average, playing for a team that had the best bowlers, Viv needed only two gears.

Kapil dev did not play for a team which could afford that luxury. Indian team strength often required him to play a typical test match knock. Had Dev been a batsman who averaged 40@60 instead of 31@81 he would have influenced quite a lot of matches with his bat.