Yes, he can be massively annoying in the commentary box and yes he may have become everything he used to despise (ie he is now one of the "in-my-day" brigade) but Ian Botham is still the one for England cricket fans. Ask the majority of them who their favourite all-time player is, they will probably say Botham; ask them who they most listen to in Sky's commentary team or whose column they still read in the newspapers, they probably say Botham and ask who they'd most like to go for drink with and they will probably - at a pinch - say Botham.
And even if he is one of the in-my-day brigade, at the very least, he has the performances to back it up. Have any of the other allrounders every produced with bat and ball in the same match as often and to such devastating effect? Ok, so he should have retired in 87, but the sight of him running though the Australia middle-order one last time (and then bashing them for 50 with the bat) at the 1992 World Cup was a memory to treasure.
No cricketer has ever been able to connect with his country's supporters like Beefy and in this era when the word 'great' is bandied about left, right and centre he is the one who, in allround cricketing terms, actually defines the term.
Comments
The inclusion of Shastri in this hall of fame is scarcely believable. A useful bits and pieces player at best. So if he can get on the "greatest" list, where is Chris Cairns?
Posted by: Michael at March 15, 2007 4:38 PM
Crucially, though, Botham was a poor captain. The real greats could bowl, bat, field, and were master strategists too. So I'd go for Sobers or Imran, with Benaud as an outside choice.
Posted by: Al Rockliffe at March 15, 2007 9:35 PM
Botham was a great, no doubt, but his inability to bring out his best against the best of his time, the West Indies, prevents him from being in the same league as Imran and Sobers. Supporters tend to rate Botham for his legendary performances in the formative stage of his career, whereas his record in his last ten years leaves quite a bit to be desired.
Posted by: Saqib at March 16, 2007 5:33 AM
Inclusion of Wasim Akram and non inclusion of Chris cairns is baffling to say the least.If Wasim akram with a batting average of 22 over 100 tests can make it to the list of great all rounders than what justification is there for ommitting players like G. A. Faulkner,Mark Boucher,Jeff Dujon, Alec Stewart, Andy Flower, farookh Engineer etc.Ravi Shastri was an ordinary bits and pieces player and the names mentioned above were definitely above average atleast in two skills.
Sir garry was not only the greatestAll Rounder but the Greatest Cricketer (who ever walked on this planet), wonderful Ambassador of the game and ideal role model for several generations to come.
Posted by: Sunil Tated at March 16, 2007 12:41 PM
A true allrounder is one who holds enough weight in both his skills viz. batting and bowling[or wk] to be given a place in the final XI. With The great allrounder Kapil[My idol] i doubt that was the case, if he were just a batsman who never bowled, i doubt he would have made it to every 135 Matches he played. Same for Wasim akram, Imran Khan, Richard Hadlee, Chris Cairns, Shaun Pollock, Mike Procter and a lot of names in the discussion. The opposite was the case with people like Ravi Shastri, no doubt he was a good left arm spinner but could he be included just as a spinner ?? I doubt that I am sure even he'll agree to it. These guys provided additional options to their captains and teams, they were either Batting allrounders who could bowl well or vice versa.
Now coming back to being greatest.....
1. Gary Sobers
2. Ian Botham
3. Jacques Kallis
4. Adam Gilchrist
5. Monty Noble
and a few more .... are the guys who could have played as either batsman or bowler[or wk] any day. Kallis' bowling appears weak on paper[No. of wkts] but thats because south africa has a good seam attack but this does not undermine the fact that he is a supreme bowler with a habit for breaking partnerships. I am not even going to write about Sir Sobers or about Ian Botham, their history is so well documented both as bowler and batsman that they need no support in leading this list.
Another interesting point to look at is captaincy and i guess Imran Khan is the leader all the followed by Gary Sobers and may be Richie Benaud, Kapil Dev and Wasim Akram.
With wk allrounders Gilchrist leads all the way needless to say.
One more point i want to emphasize is the difference protective gear has made on cricket, especially helmets. The legends uptil 70's were truly great for they played genuine pace without head protection....but this for some other discussion page ....
Posted by: jj at March 16, 2007 3:35 PM
Wasim Akram was included because he was such a great bowler.
For me I believe Imran Khan was the greatest all rounder ever along with Gary Sobers.
Lets analyse Imran Khans career - Batting average was about 37.50 and bowling was 4.11 wickets a match. We should not forget Imran did not bowl in every match in which he played and scarcely bowled when Waqar was introduced into the team. Recall his batting average is good because he faced good bowlers in the 1980's unlike today where bowlers are mediocre.
Imran in his last 10 years averaged 19 with the ball and 50 with the bat - What a player good enough to be in the team as either a bowler or batsmen.
Dont forget as a captain he was the best in terms of all these all rounders.
Why include Ravi Shastri????
Posted by: Tony Smith at March 16, 2007 5:02 PM
I think its a very tough call between Gary Sobers and Imran Khan and for me I think Imran edges out Sobers by a veeery sliiight margin... just because of the quality attack he played against and the glorious batsmen be bowled to.
I was just looking at the number of balls both Sobers and Imran have bowled. Imran has bowled just 200 and odd more balls than Sobers!
And of course.. what an inspirational leader...
Posted by: Manohar at March 16, 2007 11:30 PM
Where is HIRST ?
I am astonished to read this list of "greats" and find no mention of the legendary George Hirst!
I realise that all these surveys favour players from the era of television, but a list without Hirst can have no credibility.
Over 36,000 runs, 2,742 wickets(batting average near enough double his bowling average)superb fielder(600 catches) and IMMENSELY POPULAR throughout his career. Correct this injustice and
get him added to that list!!
Posted by: Will Mennell at March 22, 2007 5:01 PM
While possibly one of the greatest fast bowlers of all time, Wasim stopped being a genuine all rounder about halfway through his career. He had his moments with the bat, but never really had the temperament or the technique to be reliable.
Imran Khan, as a player, leader and icon, stands out on this list of giants of the game. Gary Sobers is the only real competition he has in terms of numbers and achievements. Kallis, growing up in an age of bloated batting averages has looked mediocre as a batsman for most of his career, and is now getting too much credit on the basis of sheer numbers. If he was from Pakistan, India, England, West Indies or Australia, his career would've ended after the first three matches.
Posted by: Fouad Khan at March 23, 2007 9:38 PM
Geez this is getting out of hand. I would say oldens wouldn't for sure make it there. Well, I would have to say Khan, Shastri, Beefy, Gilly, Shauny Pollock, Sobers, Rhodes, Akram, Miller, Knott, Dev, Hadlee, Benaud, Freddie Flintoff, Kallis, Constantine, Greig, Noble, Procter. Why have Procter at the top?
Posted by: Zale Atkins at March 24, 2007 12:08 AM
The non-inclusion of Chris Carins leaves me and obviously many others baffled. The fact that he was injured for so much of his career (as is the case with many of NZ's best players), yet had the courage to keep fighting back stronger is something else that should be considered here. I don't have the stats at hand right now, but from memory everything improved (batting / bowling averages) in the latter half of his career. I would have him in my team before quite a few of the others in the current list.
Posted by: Phil at March 25, 2007 12:43 PM
For me there are two indisputables in the history of cricket:
Greatest batsman - Don Bradman
Greatest cricketer (=all rounder) - Garfield Sobers.
This debate is about who comes in second. Sobers batting:bowling ratio is comfortably ahead of the rest.
Posted by: David Sealey at March 30, 2007 12:49 PM
What makes a great allrounder or even a cricketer...i think the number of matches you have won on our own makes you gr8 y we rate lara better evn though sachin has a better test record simply bcoz lara has played more match winning innings also if we look for a period of say 5 years in which somebody has performed gr8ly then i think nod shudd go to botham for his initial 5 years he was the best world has ever seen
Posted by: Pushkar Singh at March 30, 2007 11:33 PM
