11-17-2025, 11:31 AM
(11-17-2025, 09:56 AM)Shabby Russian Wrote:(11-15-2025, 01:26 PM)wba13 Wrote:(11-15-2025, 01:13 PM)Shabby Russian Wrote:Now you are kidding check out the stats Botham beats Flintoff in every field Batting, bowling and catching so who was the better cricketer. Loved them both for there passion and there love of playing for England but there’s only one winner here.(11-14-2025, 01:30 PM)Johnnykayeengland Wrote: I know it's only opinions... but surprised to see Sir Geoffrey as low as 41.
And only 3 English in the top ten.
Did Boycott have a great ashes record, good undoubtedly. Plus he did have a test hiatus which spared him the series when Thomson and Lille took us apart.
More surprised by the gap between Flintoff and Botham. Might be thinking of their overall test career not their Ashes career. Take the view that Flintoff was a better cricketer than Botham.
Yes you are right on averages, looked it up after posting.
It's not a hill I would die on just a view which is less secure because of distance of time.
Not much of a difference in batting averages, but Botham comfortably ahead with bowling stats.
What i would argue is that the Aussie sides Botham faced were not nearly as good as the Flintoff era Aussie sides
On the other hand, flintoff played in a period where there were some much weaker teams who England could really batter. Botham only had a poor ish Sri Lanka. The other tests teams were strong. Had a world class WI, NZ, Pakistan for periods he played.

