Ian Botham's First Test Wicket

[HitMeQuick]

Boycott has often referred to Botham as a genius and you don't get  praise easily from him.

[panniize]

amazing cricketer

[indianspartacus]

That's poor comment by Kamyueloh, lets ignore this chap. Imran is a gentleman.

[kamyueloh]

@indianspartacus Calling Botham lucky is a poor comment and incredibly insulting to one of the world's greatest ever players. I apologise for my choice of words but if someone called SRT a lucky batsman just because he got runs off some poor shots and I replied calling that person an idiot, I very much doubt you would be calling him a gentleman and be ignoring me... ITB took 383 wickets at 28.4 and he is lucky? "Polite" comments can contain huge insults when their are properly analysed.

[indianspartacus]

@kamyueloh I never said he was lucky, he was incredibly talented cricketer, best all rounder England has ever produced. Off the field, he is doing great service for cancer treatment and all but, people should be respected for for their opinion too, even if they don't agree with you. Botham could walk into any team, that tells you everything.

[bongo155]

Wow. Look at how thin he is.

[layyah0905]

Botham was a fine bowler in his young days,swinging the ball at pace,no luck there.

A lot of these so called "lucky bowlers" were more than that-Botham could swing the ball out from close to the stumps and wide on the crease,trapping many tailenders lbw with his outter,swing it in as well as bowling many unplayable deliveries.

You dont get over 300 test wickets by sheer luck only.

[dlamiss]

many of Bothams wickets in test cricket were very lucky. he was however a superb batsman with a great technique-better than he was given credit for

[TheReadingStudent]

That can be said for a lot of the post-200 wickets bowlers.

[Imrankniazi]

@TheReadingStudent More so for Botham than others. And dlamiss and I are not the only two saying this!

[TheReadingStudent]

@Imrankniazi No, not really. Actually, scrap what I said about it being post-200 - MOST wickets taken are lucky. I'm a bowler, I know. I've only had 2 spells in my life where I've bowled wicket-taking balls as opposed to the batsman giving me his wicket.

[Imrankniazi]

@TheReadingStudent "I'm a bowler, I know" So am I or rather so WAS I :-)

We all have some lucky breaks, but the extent of pressure that Willis, Hendrick and later Dilley put from the other end had a huge impact in Botham's figures. And post 1984/85, he was a ghost of his former self. He only got wickets through bad shots by the batsmen or them caving into pressure. I'd say Beefy was lucky!

There are some bowlers that are really unlucky as well. Jason Gillespie is one that comes to mind.

[kamyueloh]

@Imrankniazi you are an idiot - the most talented cricketer of his generation by a mile

[Imrankniazi]

@kamyueloh That kind of language is not really needed when discussing cricket. I am an admirer of Ian as well. It's just that he peaked very early - was brilliant for teh first 6-7 years of his career and then fell away.

To quote Mike Selvey "His bowling average for the first 100 wickets was 18.97; for 200 it was 21.2: if he had retired then, it would have been preserved as amongst the best in history."

He wasn't the bowler that people make him out to be. Much better batsman, IMHO.

[LFfilms]

Exactly what he says in his auto-biog

[MrMahajana]

Botham got lucky. The ball deserved a boundary.