Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
coffee_rules

Any player in Cricket can be picked out with Statistical holes.

Recommended Posts

Satyavachan.

There is no player that can't be ridiculed for having something in the stats or career summary that can show his weakness. There is no perfect player, not even Bradman! A perfect Statsguru favorite!

 

Bradman - Can't pick any statistic hole, may be weak against short pitch bowling. His performance in the Bodyline series dipped majorly. He also didn't want to play in India.  Bradman has had behavioral issues,  There is an anecdote where the ship docked in Bombay for a day or two. All other players went out of the ship to play on invitation with some Bombay local cricketers. Bradman stayed in his ship.

https://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/10-cricketers-whom-sir-don-bradman-rubbed-the-wrong-way-17275

 

Quote

Vijay Merchant and the Indians: In 1948, on the way to England for Bradman’s final series, Strathaird, the ship carrying the Australian cricketers, docked at Bombay. The news reached many cricket-mad Indians who rushed to the harbour for a sight of the great man.

A large group of students gathered in the wharf, shouting, “We want Bradman.” When Bradman appeared at the rails of the deck, the cheer that went up was deafening.

Vijay Merchant led a contingent of Indian cricketers to Bradman’s cabin and requested him to disembark so that the men who had assembled could meet him. Vice-captain Lindsay Hassett, and journalists Ray Robinson and Fingleton obliged, and also went down for a bit of cricket at the Brabourne Stadium. Bradman, however, refused. He never set foot in India.

 

Pick any player, somebody can pick out something wrong with him. When nothing works, they say, form is temporary, class is permanent!

Hah!

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post

Rohit Sharma has filled all the gaps in his odi resurgence. I am talking about stats, no body fat jokes :nono: 

 

Every player has a bad patch and there is always a peak and decline and the amount of intangible models we need to add or subtract someone’s greatness, there is never going to be a perfect cricketer. That includes Bradman.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, maniac said:

Rohit Sharma has filled all the gaps in his odi resurgence. I am talking about stats, no body fat jokes :nono: 

 

Every player has a bad patch and there is always a peak and decline and the amount of intangible models we need to add or subtract someone’s greatness, there is never going to be a perfect cricketer. That includes Bradman.

Rohit Sharma can't play swing to save his life .

Also posters can accuse him of choking in knockouts too.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, maniac said:

Rohit Sharma has filled all the gaps in his odi resurgence. I am talking about stats, no body fat jokes :nono: 

 

 

when the ball swings , gap between his bat and the ball will be atleast few meters :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post

It appears as if people lack information on the Bodyline series .... In the Bodyline series, for Aus, Bradman had the highest  runs (close to 400 in 4 tests), highest average 57 and highest SR of 75. Next best avg for Aus was McCabe's 43. Other Aus batsmen averaged less than 40. 

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team Australia remove Australia from query
Opposition team England remove England from query
Home or away home venue remove home venue from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 remove between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 from query
Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 100 remove runs scored greater than or equal to 100 from query
Ordered by batting average (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 8 of 8   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO Runs HS AveDescending BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
DG Bradman 4 8 1 396 103* 56.57 529 74.85 1 3 1 48 1 investigate this query
SJ McCabe 5 10 1 385 187* 42.77 647 59.50 1 1 1 48 1 investigate this query
LS Darling 2 4 0 148 85 37.00 243 60.90 0 1 0 14 0 investigate this query
WM Woodfull 5 10 1 305 73* 33.88 994 30.68 0 3 1 15 0 investigate this query
VY Richardson 5 10 0 279 83 27.90 597 46.73 0 1 3 25 0 investigate this query
WAS Oldfield 4 7 2 136 52 27.20 341 39.88 0 1 0 10 0 investigate this query
JHW Fingleton 3 6 0 150 83 25.00 455 32.96 0 1 2 11 0 investigate this query
WH Ponsford 3 6 0 141 85 23.50 356 39.60 0 1 1 10 0

 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, zen said:

It appears as if people lack information on the Bodyline series .... In the Bodyline series, Bradman had the highest runs (close to 400), highest average for Aus 57 and highest SR of 75 for Aus. Next best for Aus was McCabe with an avg of 43. Other Aus batsmen averaged less than 40. 

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team Australia remove Australia from query
Opposition team England remove England from query
Home or away home venue remove home venue from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 remove between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 from query
Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 100 remove runs scored greater than or equal to 100 from query
Ordered by batting average (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 8 of 8   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO Runs HS AveDescending BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
DG Bradman 4 8 1 396 103* 56.57 529 74.85 1 3 1 48 1 investigate this query
SJ McCabe 5 10 1 385 187* 42.77 647 59.50 1 1 1 48 1 investigate this query
LS Darling 2 4 0 148 85 37.00 243 60.90 0 1 0 14 0 investigate this query
WM Woodfull 5 10 1 305 73* 33.88 994 30.68 0 3 1 15 0 investigate this query
VY Richardson 5 10 0 279 83 27.90 597 46.73 0 1 3 25 0 investigate this query
WAS Oldfield 4 7 2 136 52 27.20 341 39.88 0 1 0 10 0 investigate this query
JHW Fingleton 3 6 0 150 83 25.00 455 32.96 0 1 2 11 0 investigate this query
WH Ponsford 3 6 0 141 85 23.50 356 39.60 0 1 1 10 0

Ponsford and McCabe will be contenders in an all time Australian XI, will most definitely get into their 2nd XI. At his most vulnerable Bradman outscored them. In comparison Lara, Ponting, SRT, Dravid at their worst have had numbers worse than tailenders. 

 

Don is don, no matter how much people try to bring him down...always the GOAT. World of cricket will never see another player like him. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Don is don, no matter how much people try to bring him down...always the GOAT. World of cricket will never see another player like him. 

Perfects stats are relative and Don has those! .... Other batsmen with perfect stats (relatively) include Greg Chappell from what I recall (may have to relook that) 

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Gollum said:

In comparison Lara, Ponting, SRT, Dravid at their worst have had numbers worse than tailenders. 

True, look at Ind in SL in 2008 for example :lol: 

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team India remove India from query
Opposition team Sri Lanka remove Sri Lanka from query
Home or away away (home of opposition) remove away (home of opposition) from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 2008 and 1 Jan 2009 remove between 1 Jan 2008 and 1 Jan 2009 from query
Ordered by batting average (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 12 of 12   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO Runs HS AveDescending BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
V Sehwag 3 6 1 344 201* 68.80 366 93.98 1 1 0 46 5 investigate this query
G Gambhir 3 6 0 310 74 51.66 568 54.57 0 3 0 40 0 investigate this query
VVS Laxman 3 6 1 215 61* 43.00 443 48.53 0 2 0 18 0 investigate this query
R Dravid 3 6 0 148 68 24.66 358 41.34 0 1 0 15 0 investigate this query
SC Ganguly 3 6 0 96 35 16.00 226 42.47 0 0 1 11 2 investigate this query
SR Tendulkar 3 6 0 95 31 15.83 155 61.29 0 0 0 11 0 investigate this query
I Sharma 3 6 3 35 17* 11.66 126 27.77 0 0 3 1 0 investigate this query
Harbhajan Singh 3 6 0 65 26 10.83 96 67.70 0 0 0 9 0 investigate this query
KD Karthik 2 4 0 36 20 9.00 55 65.45 0 0 1 2 2 investigate this query
Z Khan 3 6 1 43 32 8.60 129 33.33 0 0 1 3 1 investigate this query
PA Patel 1 2 0 14 13 7.00 44 31.81 0 0 0 1 0 investigate this query
A Kumble 3 6 0 29 12 4.83 100 29.00 0 0 0 3 0

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, zen said:

True, look at Ind in SL in 2008 for example :lol: 

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team India remove India from query
Opposition team Sri Lanka remove Sri Lanka from query
Home or away away (home of opposition) remove away (home of opposition) from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 2008 and 1 Jan 2009 remove between 1 Jan 2008 and 1 Jan 2009 from query
Ordered by batting average (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 12 of 12   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO Runs HS AveDescending BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
V Sehwag 3 6 1 344 201* 68.80 366 93.98 1 1 0 46 5 investigate this query
G Gambhir 3 6 0 310 74 51.66 568 54.57 0 3 0 40 0 investigate this query
VVS Laxman 3 6 1 215 61* 43.00 443 48.53 0 2 0 18 0 investigate this query
R Dravid 3 6 0 148 68 24.66 358 41.34 0 1 0 15 0 investigate this query
SC Ganguly 3 6 0 96 35 16.00 226 42.47 0 0 1 11 2 investigate this query
SR Tendulkar 3 6 0 95 31 15.83 155 61.29 0 0 0 11 0 investigate this query
I Sharma 3 6 3 35 17* 11.66 126 27.77 0 0 3 1 0 investigate this query
Harbhajan Singh 3 6 0 65 26 10.83 96 67.70 0 0 0 9 0 investigate this query
KD Karthik 2 4 0 36 20 9.00 55 65.45 0 0 1 2 2 investigate this query
Z Khan 3 6 1 43 32 8.60 129 33.33 0 0 1 3 1 investigate this query
PA Patel 1 2 0 14 13 7.00 44 31.81 0 0 0 1 0 investigate this query
A Kumble 3 6 0 29 12 4.83 100 29.00 0 0 0 3 0

 

In 2003 Murali had better batting numbers than Sachin in tests, 99% sure of that.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Gollum said:

In 2003 Murali had better batting numbers than Sachin in tests, 99% sure of that.

Ind in SA 1992

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team India remove India from query
Opposition team South Africa remove South Africa from query
Home or away away (home of opposition) remove away (home of opposition) from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1992 and 1 Jan 1993 remove between 1 Jan 1992 and 1 Jan 1993 from query
Ordered by runs scored (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 13 of 13   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO RunsDescending HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
N Kapil Dev 3 4 0 168 129 42.00 237 70.88 1 0 0 20 1 investigate this query
PK Amre 3 5 1 163 103 40.75 513 31.77 1 0 0 17 0 investigate this query
SR Tendulkar 3 5 0 129 111 25.80 317 40.69 1 0 1 21 0 investigate this query
M Azharuddin 3 5 0 113 60 22.60 204 55.39 0 1 0 11 0 investigate this query
KS More 3 4 0 102 55 25.50 389 26.22 0 1 0 7 0 investigate this query
SV Manjrekar 3 5 1 68 32* 17.00 255 26.66 0 0 1 5 0 investigate this query
A Jadeja 2 3 0 60 43 20.00 197 30.45 0 0 0 5 0 investigate this query
A Kumble 3 4 1 60 21* 20.00 210 28.57 0 0 0 6 0 investigate this query
RJ Shastri 3 5 0 59 23 11.80 412 14.32 0 0 0 6 0 investigate this query
M Prabhakar 3 4 0 43 17 10.75 142 30.28 0 0 0 2 0 investigate this query
WV Raman 1 2 0 21 21 10.50 97 21.64 0 0 1 2 0 investigate this query
J Srinath 2 2 1 6 5 6.00 17 35.29 0 0 0 0 0 investigate this query
SLV Raju 1 2 2 2 2* - 8 25.00 0 0 0 0 0

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, zen said:

Ind in SA 1992

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team India remove India from query
Opposition team South Africa remove South Africa from query
Home or away away (home of opposition) remove away (home of opposition) from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1992 and 1 Jan 1993 remove between 1 Jan 1992 and 1 Jan 1993 from query
Ordered by runs scored (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 13 of 13   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO RunsDescending HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
N Kapil Dev 3 4 0 168 129 42.00 237 70.88 1 0 0 20 1 investigate this query
PK Amre 3 5 1 163 103 40.75 513 31.77 1 0 0 17 0 investigate this query
SR Tendulkar 3 5 0 129 111 25.80 317 40.69 1 0 1 21 0 investigate this query
M Azharuddin 3 5 0 113 60 22.60 204 55.39 0 1 0 11 0 investigate this query
KS More 3 4 0 102 55 25.50 389 26.22 0 1 0 7 0 investigate this query
SV Manjrekar 3 5 1 68 32* 17.00 255 26.66 0 0 1 5 0 investigate this query
A Jadeja 2 3 0 60 43 20.00 197 30.45 0 0 0 5 0 investigate this query
A Kumble 3 4 1 60 21* 20.00 210 28.57 0 0 0 6 0 investigate this query
RJ Shastri 3 5 0 59 23 11.80 412 14.32 0 0 0 6 0 investigate this query
M Prabhakar 3 4 0 43 17 10.75 142 30.28 0 0 0 2 0 investigate this query
WV Raman 1 2 0 21 21 10.50 97 21.64 0 0 1 2 0 investigate this query
J Srinath 2 2 1 6 5 6.00 17 35.29 0 0 0 0 0 investigate this query
SLV Raju 1 2 2 2 2* - 8 25.00 0 0 0 0 0

He got his customary 100 I see, for him and his fans mission accomplished. 

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Gollum said:

He got his customary 100 I see, for him and his fans mission accomplished. 

Even in 96-97 series :no:

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team India remove India from query
Opposition team South Africa remove South Africa from query
Home or away away (home of opposition) remove away (home of opposition) from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1996 and 1 Jan 1998 remove between 1 Jan 1996 and 1 Jan 1998 from query
Ordered by runs scored (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 13 of 13   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO RunsDescending HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
R Dravid 3 6 1 277 148 55.40 693 39.97 1 1 0 38 0 investigate this query
SR Tendulkar 3 6 0 241 169 40.16 418 57.65 1 0 0 39 0 investigate this query
SC Ganguly 3 6 0 202 73 33.66 397 50.88 0 2 1 32 2 investigate this query
M Azharuddin 3 6 0 160 115 26.66 169 94.67 1 0 0 25 2 investigate this query
NR Mongia 3 6 0 86 50 14.33 283 30.38 0 1 0 11 0 investigate this query
A Kumble 3 6 1 66 29 13.20 204 32.35 0 0 0 4 1 investigate this query
V Rathour 2 4 0 66 44 16.50 224 29.46 0 0 0 6 0 investigate this query
J Srinath 3 5 0 63 41 12.60 121 52.06 0 0 1 5 0 investigate this query
VVS Laxman 2 3 2 40 35* 40.00 136 29.41 0 0 0 5 0 investigate this query
BKV Prasad 3 6 2 23 15 5.75 56 41.07 0 0 1 2 0 investigate this query
WV Raman 2 4 0 22 16 5.50 70 31.42 0 0 1 2 0 investigate this query
DJ Johnson 1 2 0 8 5 4.00 22 36.36 0 0 0 1 0 investigate this query
D Ganesh 2 4 2 4 2* 2.00 41 9.75 0 0 0 0 0

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, zen said:

It appears as if people lack information on the Bodyline series .... In the Bodyline series, for Aus, Bradman had the highest  runs (close to 400 in 4 tests), highest average 57 and highest SR of 75. Next best avg for Aus was McCabe's 43. Other Aus batsmen averaged less than 40. 

 

View overall figures [change view]
Primary team Australia remove Australia from query
Opposition team England remove England from query
Home or away home venue remove home venue from query
Start of match date between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 remove between 1 Jan 1932 and 1 Jan 1934 from query
Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 100 remove runs scored greater than or equal to 100 from query
Ordered by batting average (descending)
Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 8 of 8   First pageFirst Previous pagePrevious Next Next page Last Last page dblBakArwB.gifReturn to query menu
dblBakArwW.gifCleared query menu
Overall figures
Player Mat Inns NO Runs HS AveDescending BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
DG Bradman 4 8 1 396 103* 56.57 529 74.85 1 3 1 48 1 investigate this query
SJ McCabe 5 10 1 385 187* 42.77 647 59.50 1 1 1 48 1 investigate this query
LS Darling 2 4 0 148 85 37.00 243 60.90 0 1 0 14 0 investigate this query
WM Woodfull 5 10 1 305 73* 33.88 994 30.68 0 3 1 15 0 investigate this query
VY Richardson 5 10 0 279 83 27.90 597 46.73 0 1 3 25 0 investigate this query
WAS Oldfield 4 7 2 136 52 27.20 341 39.88 0 1 0 10 0 investigate this query
JHW Fingleton 3 6 0 150 83 25.00 455 32.96 0 1 2 11 0 investigate this query
  3 6 0 141 85 23.50 356 39.60 0 1 1 10 0

 

For a person who scored 100+ average, 57 will seem a failure. Also, he would score 4 to 5 big 100s, just 1 century and highest 103 is a failure. Aus lost the series 3-1 even with his supposedly big performace, so a failure. He had trouble batting short pitched balls. GC avoided playing in India and SL. He only played in Pakustany

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

For a person who scored 100+ average, 57 will seem a failure. Also, he would score 4 to 5 big 100s, just 1 century and highest 103 is a failure. Aus list the series 3-1 , so a failure. He had trouble batting short pitched balls.

FYI, that 100 is his career average, not an average in every series. In Aus vs. Eng, he averages 78. In Eng, he averages 103. Overall, his avg vs. Eng is 90. 

 

In four series in Aus vs. Eng, his averages were 67, 57 (Bodyline), 90, and 97, so only in his last two series, he averaged 90 or more. 

 

 

Quote

GC avoided playing in India and SL. He only played in Pakustany

Not playing in Ind and SL esp. during Chappell's career means zilch 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, zen said:

 

 

 

Not playing in Ind and SL esp. during Chappell's career means zilch 

He has played a test in SL. Not playing in India which had 50 years of cricket history, meant he inflated his figures elsewhere. That is the same blot in Lillee's career too.  He averaged just 40 in Eng for a player with perfect stat. Even Ponting scored better in Eng. Maybe in Bradman's era, not playing in India didn't matter, not for GC who played mostly in Aud and Eng and bloated his stats,

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

He has played a test in SL. Not playing in India which had 50 years of cricket history, meant he inflated his figures elsewhere. That is the same blot in Lillee's career too.  He averaged just 40 in Eng for a player with perfect stat. Even Ponting scored better in Eng. Maybe in Bradman's era, not playing in India didn't matter, not for GC who played mostly in Aud and Eng and bloated his stats,

I am not too hung up on a player not playing in x or y countries esp. if they are developing ones. If I were a cricketer, I would prefer to skip BD, Pak, etc., for e.g. 

Share this post


Link to post

GC against India's spin quartet would have been interesting. Doug Walters faced a torrid time against Bedi in the 69-70 series while Ian struggled against Prasanna. Now both those legends dominated Lance Gibbs in WI, both terrific against spin. Quartet for a 7-8 years period was a big challenge for the best batsmen. 

 

Greg Chappell's resume is incomplete, a great player indeed (esp if you add WSC stats) but there is a reason he will be behind King Viv in my book. 

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, maniac said:

I remember Amre and Kapil’s 100’s in SA but forgot about Sachin getting one in 1992 itself. True G O A T:hail:

 

Thank you @zen

Do you mean GOAT just like Amre and Kapil? :dontknow:

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post

Revisited Chappell's numbers .... At the basic level, those are among the best numbers ..... An avg of less than 50 against only one country, which is acceptable! Overall pretty solid relatively. 

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0 4s 6s  
overall 1970-1984 87 151 19 7110 247* 53.86 24 31 12 755 16 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0 4s 6s  
v England 1970-1983 35 65 8 2619 144 45.94 9 12 4 291 4 view innings
v India 1981-1981 3 5 0 368 204 73.60 1 2 1 44 0 view innings
v New Zealand 1973-1982 14 22 3 1076 247* 56.63 3 3 3 129 5 view innings
v Pakistan 1972-1984 17 27 2 1581 235 63.24 6 6 1 142 3 view innings
v Sri Lanka 1983-1983 1 1 0 66 66 66.00 0 1 0 7 0 view innings
v West Indies 1973-1982 17 31 6 1400 182* 56.00 5 7 3 142 4

 

It is good to know Lillee and Chappell liked to smash Pak :lol:

 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post

I looked at Aus in India in 70s and 80s. They only made 2 trips - 1 in each decade:

 

  • 1979: Only trip during Chappell's tenure. Appears as if they sent a B team with key players resting (or playing the World Series Cricket). A parallel could be current key Indian players sitting out of some tours. 
  • 1986: This was after Chappell retired. This series involved that tied test. And when Aus was in rebuilding phase. 

 

The above shows a lack of intensity in the Ind-Aus rivalry in that period. Reflecting back, I can understand key Aus players skipping the tour to India for a series with low intensity taking place one a decade, and maybe the allure of World Series Cricket. 

 

I think the Ind vs. Aus intensity picked up post 1998 once the Aus-WI rivalry began to fade away. Post 1998, Aus has been making 3 trips per decade on an average to India (they last did that in the 60s). Also the cricket b/w the two has been interesting! 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post

^^ What I read was India was supposed to travel after Aus visited India in 1969-70 , India won in Eng next year in Wi and Eng, so they were more lucrative. India was supposed to travel in 1975, but Aus picked WI over India. 1979 , packer series was almost over, but Aus toured India mins GC, DL etc. So can’t blame him. But he was not meant to play. India played more of Eng, WI and Pak in those times

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

^^ What I read was India was supposed to travel after Aus visited India in 1969-70 , India won in Eng next year in Wi and Eng, so they were more lucrative. India was supposed to travel in 1975, but Aus picked WI over India. 1979 , packer series was almost over, but Aus toured India mins GC, DL etc. So can’t blame him. But he was not meant to play. India played more of Eng, WI and Pak in those times

To be fair to Chappell and Lillee, Aus only toured India once during their careers, so we should stop being harsh on them for not touring India as if Aus used to tour frequently and they used to skip all those tours. It is not a big deal :lol: 


Both these players have served India - one as the coach (bringing some innovation including questioning superstardom) and the other through MRF pace foundation. 

 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Take up Barrington and Sangakarra. They have perfect 58xx averages to debug

If we make a basic qualification of having an avg of 50 or more vs. 80% of opposition against whom a batsman played at least 3 test matches: 

 

Barrington qualifies if we take 49.45 as 50. If not, he does not qualify as technically 49.45 = 49

 

areer averages
  Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0  
overall 1955-1968 82 131 15 6806 256 58.67 20 35 5 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0  
v Australia 1961-1968 23 39 6 2111 256 63.96 5 13 1 view innings
v India 1959-1967 14 21 3 1355 172 75.27 3 9 0 view innings
v New Zealand 1963-1965 5 6 0 594 163 99.00 3 1 0 view innings
v Pakistan 1961-1967 9 12 3 715 148 79.44 4 2 1 view innings
v South Africa 1955-1965 14 23 3 989 148* 49.45 2 6 1 view innings
v West Indies 1960-1968 17 30 0 1042 143 34.73 3 4 2

 

^ 4/6 = 67% .... or 5/6 = 83% (one avg of 49.45)

 

 

Sangakkara does not qualify

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
overall 2000-2015 134 233 17 12400 319 57.40 22882 54.19 38 52 11 1491 51 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
v Australia 2004-2012 11 21 1 878 192 43.90 1809 48.53 1 7 1 110 2 view innings
v Bangladesh 2001-2014 15 21 2 1816 319 95.57 3042 59.69 7 7 1 201 16 view innings
v England 2001-2014 22 40 1 1568 152 40.20 3313 47.32 3 9 3 200 1 view innings
v India 2001-2015 17 28 2 1352 219 52.00 2633 51.34 5 2 0 162 3 view innings
v New Zealand 2003-2015 12 21 3 887 203 49.27 1477 60.05 4 2 1 117 6 view innings
v Pakistan 2002-2015 23 45 6 2911 230 74.64 5331 54.60 10 12 2 307 14 view innings
v South Africa 2000-2014 17 32 0 1534 287 47.93 2714 56.52 3 7 2 208 4 view innings
v West Indies 2001-2010 12 19 2 918 157* 54.00 1818 50.49 3 5 1 110 1 view innings
v Zimbabwe 2001-2004 5 6 0 536 270 89.33 745 71.94 2 1 0 76 4

 

^ 5/9 = 56% .... or 6/9 = 67% (one avg of 49.27)

 

 

So far qualified:

1. Bradman = 100%

2. G Chappell = 80%

 

Conditional:

1. Barrington 

 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post

Similarly for bowlers - a basic qualification of a bowling average of 25 or less vs. 80% of opposition against whom a bowler has played at least 3 test matches. 

 

Qualified: 

 

Malcolm Marshall

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
overall 1978-1991 81 151 2930.4 614 7876 376 7/22 11/89 20.94 2.68 46.7 22 4 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
v Australia 1984-1991 19 36 722.3 136 1959 87 5/29 10/107 22.51 2.71 49.8 7 1 view innings
v England 1980-1991 26 50 965.0 232 2436 127 7/22 10/92 19.18 2.52 45.5 6 1 view innings
v India 1978-1989 17 30 584.3 128 1671 76 6/37 11/89 21.98 2.85 46.1 6 1 view innings
v New Zealand 1985-1987 7 12 289.1 51 775 36 7/80 11/120 21.52 2.68 48.1 1 1 view innings
v Pakistan 1980-1990 12 23 369.3 67 1035 50 5/33 9/144 20.70 2.80 44.3 2 0

 

5/5 = 100% 

 

 

Richard Hadlee

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
overall 1973-1990 86 150 21918 9611 431 9/52 15/123 22.29 2.63 50.8 36 9 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
v Australia 1973-1990 23 41 6099 2674 130 9/52 15/123 20.56 2.63 46.9 14 3 view innings
v England 1973-1990 21 35 5853 2399 97 6/26 10/100 24.73 2.45 60.3 8 2 view innings
v India 1976-1990 14 24 3106 1493 65 7/23 11/58 22.96 2.88 47.7 4 2 view innings
v Pakistan 1973-1989 12 20 2949 1448 51 6/51 8/110 28.39 2.94 57.8 4 0 view innings
v Sri Lanka 1983-1987 6 11 1405 473 37 5/29 10/102 12.78 2.01 37.9 2 1 view innings
v West Indies 1980-1987 10 19 2506 1124 51 6/50 11/102 22.03 2.69 49.1 4 1

 

5/6 = 83% 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Allan Donald qualifies:

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
overall 1992-2002 72 129 2586.3 661 7344 330 8/71 12/139 22.25 2.83 47.0 20 3 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
v Australia 1993-2002 14 24 544.2 115 1647 53 6/59 9/133 31.07 3.02 61.6 2 0 view innings
v England 1994-2000 17 30 652.0 170 1982 86 6/53 11/127 23.04 3.03 45.4 9 1 view innings
v India 1992-2000 11 20 415.4 121 987 57 7/84 12/139 17.31 2.37 43.7 3 1 view innings
v New Zealand 1995-2000 5 9 177.0 56 443 21 4/69 6/112 21.09 2.50 50.5 0 0 view innings
v Pakistan 1995-1998 6 11 180.0 32 604 27 5/79 8/74 22.37 3.35 40.0 1 0 view innings
v Sri Lanka 1993-2001 6 11 206.0 58 556 29 5/54 8/127 19.17 2.69 42.6 2 0 view innings
v West Indies 1992-2001 10 18 309.2 76 894 43 5/49 7/82 20.79 2.89 43.1 2 0 view innings
v Zimbabwe 1995-1999 3 6 102.1 33 231 14 8/71 11/113 16.50 2.26 43.7 1 1

 

7/8 = 88% 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, zen said:

To be fair to Chappell and Lillee, Aus only toured India once during their careers, so we should stop being harsh on them for not touring India as if Aus used to tour frequently and they used to skip all those tours. It is not a big deal :lol: 


Both these players have served India - one as the coach (bringing some innovation including questioning superstardom) and the other through MRF pace foundation. 

 

If we are questioning whether player toured a certain country or not, then can we question that Bradman didn't face fast bowlers in his career and his numbers are mostly against what we would call slow-medium pacers today?

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

If we are questioning whether player toured a certain country or not, then can we question that Bradman didn't face fast bowlers in his career and his numbers are mostly against what we would call slow-medium pacers today?

We are not anymore. 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, NameGoesHere said:

Love the thread title. 

 

Imagine going up to SRT, Lara, Ponting and that other ATG, Shahid Afridi, with this line:

 

"Mr SRT/Lara/Ponting/ Afridi,  how are you today?  I'm from ICF, and I've got excel and statsguru tools to, erm, expose your holes....."

I would give you a 100 upvotes for this comment if the site allowed me to.

All this nerd talk is very tiresome. The very idea of using statistics/excel/graphs to determine the purported greatness of a cricketer is flawed.

Greatness is measured by moments of magic on the field and by nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, zen said:

Allan Donald qualifies:

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
overall 1992-2002 72 129 2586.3 661 7344 330 8/71 12/139 22.25 2.83 47.0 20 3 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
v Australia 1993-2002 14 24 544.2 115 1647 53 6/59 9/133 31.07 3.02 61.6 2 0 view innings
v England 1994-2000 17 30 652.0 170 1982 86 6/53 11/127 23.04 3.03 45.4 9 1 view innings
v India 1992-2000 11 20 415.4 121 987 57 7/84 12/139 17.31 2.37 43.7 3 1 view innings
v New Zealand 1995-2000 5 9 177.0 56 443 21 4/69 6/112 21.09 2.50 50.5 0 0 view innings
v Pakistan 1995-1998 6 11 180.0 32 604 27 5/79 8/74 22.37 3.35 40.0 1 0 view innings
v Sri Lanka 1993-2001 6 11 206.0 58 556 29 5/54 8/127 19.17 2.69 42.6 2 0 view innings
v West Indies 1992-2001 10 18 309.2 76 894 43 5/49 7/82 20.79 2.89 43.1 2 0 view innings
v Zimbabwe 1995-1999 3 6 102.1 33 231 14 8/71 11/113 16.50 2.26 43.7 1 1

 

7/8 = 88% 

 

Can you check mcgrath record 

Share this post


Link to post

The chink in Bradman's armour isn't his performance in the Bodyline series but his record on the so-called "sticky dogs". His average goes down to 20 on these wickets.

 

MATCHES INNINGS RUNS NO AVERAGE HS 100 50 0
11 15 284 1 20.29 82 0 1 4
41 65 6712 9 119.90 334 29 12 3

 

The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, kohli said:

Can you check mcgrath record 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
overall 1993-2007 124 243 4874.4 1470 12186 563 8/24 10/27 21.64 2.49 51.9 29 3 Profile
Career summary
GroupingAscending Span Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10  
v Bangladesh 2003-2003 2 4 55.1 17 124 5 3/20 4/45 24.80 2.24 66.2 0 0 view innings
v England 1994-2007 30 60 1213.2 331 3286 157 8/38 9/82 20.92 2.70 46.3 10 0 view innings
v ICC World XI 2005-2005 1 2 18.0 7 42 3 2/34 3/42 14.00 2.33 36.0 0 0 view innings
v India 1996-2004 11 22 426.2 157 951 51 5/48 10/103 18.64 2.23 50.1 2 1 view innings
v New Zealand 1993-2005 14 27 571.1 172 1444 57 6/115 7/89 25.33 2.52 60.1 2 0 view innings
v Pakistan 1994-2005 17 33 639.1 173 1736 80 8/24 9/68 21.70 2.71 47.9 3 0 view innings
v South Africa 1994-2006 17 32 680.2 223 1558 57 6/86 8/49 27.33 2.29 71.6 2 0 view innings
v Sri Lanka 1995-2004 8 15 304.4 84 823 37 5/37 7/61 22.24 2.70 49.4 2 0 view innings
v West Indies 1995-2005 23 46 912.3 287 2132 110 6/17 10/27 19.38 2.33 49.7 8 2 view innings
v Zimbabwe 1999-1999 1 2 54.0 19 90 6 3/44 6/90 15.00 1.66 54.0 0 0

 

5/7 = 71% .... if we round off 25.33 vs NZ to 25, then 6/7 = 86% so a conditional qualification based on rounding. 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

The chink in Bradman's armour isn't his performance in the Bodyline series but his record on the so-called "sticky dogs". His average goes down to 20 on these wickets.

 

MATCHES INNINGS RUNS NO AVERAGE HS 100 50 0
11 15 284 1 20.29 82 0 1 4
41 65 6712 9 119.90 334 29 12 3

 

The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket

Valid point. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Valid point. 

I do not think it is a chink as there are no more sticky wickets and the data itself is unverified - "By my reckoning there were fifteen of Bradman’s Test innings which we can consider rain-affected and treat them separately – here are the adjusted averages:-" :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Mariyam said:

 

Greatness is measured by moments of magic on the field and by nothing else.

Good! So how do you define magic on field? To be fair to cricketers of all generations and teams, the magic on field is not going to be tied to your memory or some random match of the team you follow that you saw. Also most cricketers would have moments of "magic" so again is everyone great or are you suggesting that one with more such moments is great. If it is latter, you are delving into stats (subconsciously) .... or worse, promoting greatness based on limited information (based on factors such as what your old neighbor for example tells or fanboyism or even to the line of reasoning where my dog makes me most happy, therefore most magical and the greatest animal) and a copious amount of unknown unknowns :p:

 

PS 

 

 

Edited by zen

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, zen said:

Good! So how do you define magic on field? To be fair to cricketers of all generations and teams, the magic on field is not going to be tied to your memory or some random match of the team you follow that you saw. Also most cricketers would have moments of "magic" so again is everyone great or are you suggesting that one with more such moments is great. If it is latter, you are delving into stats (subconsciously) .... or worse, promoting greatness based on limited information (based on factors such as what your old neighbor for example tells or fanboyism or even to the line of reasoning where my dog makes me most happy, therefore most magical and the greatest animal) and a copious amount of unknown unknowns :p:

It's not only Statsguru that decide greatness. At a basic level we can see how they scored in different countries, home. away, . Also, we need to check match conditions, how they batted under pressure, how was the bowling. In one session of play after rain, even Jaydev Unadkat will be McGrath. So if they survived or dominated and counter-attacked, that counts more than scoring a 200 on a flat wicket. All these are not available on Statsguru. So, Batting ratings help there, but they address only the peaks of a batsman, not entirely a mark of greatness. We need to check how long they held top 10, shows form and longevity of form. Laughing at Tendulkar's 898 v/s Steven Smith 947 doesn't cut it.

 

Also, we need to read about what sports writers and fellow cricketers say about a person's greatness. It is a combination of it all. That's what I wanted to say in the trolling of Tendulkar thread you were active on. Hence, I opened this thread to show how any cricketers can be looked into for weaknesses. The sticky wicket weakness of Bradman cannot be made available in some statsguru, but only from writers and anecdotes. You have taken this exercise as a mere look into stats. Enough ranting.  :laugh1:

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

If we are questioning whether player toured a certain country or not, then can we question that Bradman didn't face fast bowlers in his career and his numbers are mostly against what we would call slow-medium pacers today?

And fielders who would stand and clap in admiration!

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, zen said:

I do not think it is a chink as there are no more sticky wickets and the data itself is unverified - "By my reckoning there were fifteen of Bradman’s Test innings which we can consider rain-affected and treat them separately – here are the adjusted averages:-" :lol: 

I knew that Don failed on stickies but thought the sample size would be small. Clearly not if one goes by JC's link....11 tests, 15 innings is almost 20% of his playing career. 

 

Doesn't matter if there are no more sticky dogs, Bradman's peers and almost all the pre-WWII players had to face that test and ATGs like Hobbs, Hammond, Headley, Trumper, Sutcliffe, Hutton passed the challenge with flying colours. So definitely a chink. 

 

Regarding the data, unless someone can counter the stats I think we must go by what the author said. If you want to go by peer review, there are enough observations which highlight the GOAT's struggles on stickies, most notable among them by Sutcliffe. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

It's not only Statsguru that decide greatness. At a basic level we can see how they scored in different countries, home. away, . Also, we need to check match conditions, how they batted under pressure, how was the bowling. In one session of play after rain, even Jaydev Unadkat will be McGrath. So if they survived or dominated and counter-attacked, that counts more than scoring a 200 on a flat wicket. All these are not available on Statsguru. So, Batting ratings help there, but they address only the peaks of a batsman, not entirely a mark of greatness. We need to check how long they held top 10, shows form and longevity of form. Laughing at Tendulkar's 898 v/s Steven Smith 947 doesn't cut it.

 

Also, we need to read about what sports writers and fellow cricketers say about a person's greatness. It is a combination of it all. That's what I wanted to say in the trolling of Tendulkar thread you were active on. Hence, I opened this thread to show how any cricketers can be looked into for weaknesses. The sticky wicket weakness of Bradman cannot be made available in some statsguru, but only from writers and anecdotes. You have taken this exercise as a mere look into stats. Enough ranting.  :laugh1:

To me that sounds like blaming stats or even trying to misrepresent it by implying that others factors are not considered or accounted as your favorite player does not measure up on them :lol:  

 

If your post is from a Tendulkar fanboy perspective  - they are the last ones who should be complaining about stats. Many of them have wasted their lives in an effort to blow his horn by relying on stats including combine Tests and ODI runs, attacking players such as Bradman, Richards, Lara, and even Indian ones like Gavaskar, and so on. I am not sure if many of them even enjoy performances of other cricketers :dontknow:  .... At the foremost, we should be cricket fans not an individual cricketer fans 

 

 

Quote

The sticky wicket weakness of Bradman cannot be made available in some statsguru, but only from writers and anecdotes. You have taken this exercise as a mere look into stats.

 

That information is actually acquired from stats by trying to figure out which innings were impacted by sticky wickets. However, this particular information is unreliable by the author's own reckoning as it depends on what the person is able to identify as those conditions, which do not even matter now :winky: 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Mariyam said:

I would give you a 100 upvotes for this comment if the site allowed me to.

All this nerd talk is very tiresome. The very idea of using statistics/excel/graphs to determine the purported greatness of a cricketer is flawed.

Greatness is measured by moments of magic on the field and by nothing else.

Cricket isn't art or drama. There is a definite quantitative objective to be achieved at the end of the day and stats are an integral part of the sport. 

 

'Moments of magic' is a wrong path to follow in any sport, otherwise Zico would be talked as a GOAT contender, 80s Brazil as the GOAT football team and someone like Safin will trump a Djokovic with 10% of the latter's achievements....in cricket guys like Kallis, McGrath, Jaddu, Kumble will be dismissed as boring. Sure there may be a few exceptions for whom stats don't tell the complete story (Trumper, GR Vishy being foremost examples in cricket) but in most cases stats/excel/graph etc. are important to filter out the lesser candidates and get the creme de la creme. After you classify the various cricketers tier-wise (based on cold, hard data) feel free to factor in various intangibles, flair, magic, mental toughness, legacy/influence etc. to rank them. 

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Mariyam said:

I would give you a 100 upvotes for this comment if the site allowed me to.

All this nerd talk is very tiresome. The very idea of using statistics/excel/graphs to determine the purported greatness of a cricketer is flawed.

Greatness is measured by moments of magic on the field and by nothing else.

 

Copy pasting what I wrote in ICF whatsapp group last month.

 

Quote

Player don't become ATG at end of the career. It's not final analysis. Take case of Younis Khan, his numbers are as good as many ATG players, but he isn't rated as same. Thing is ATG players are talked about during initial days (4-5 years), people see the potential. People talk about, people wait for their performances in overseas tours. Failures are criticised more. And when players prove critics wrong multiple times, they are branded as ATG during that course, not at the end of the career. If you're not talked about, it means you lack something, in case of Kallis it was combination of boring batting, always being 2nd or 3rd highlight in overseas success and lack of performances against big guns

Yet he ended up as ATG, means he got recognition at right time, when he started scoring big and not when he was missing from show.

Adding to that, no one is rated as ATG by seeing numbers at end of the career. Player is usually already ATG few years before retiring. 

 

Above message was extension of following explanation of why Kallis wasn't rate earlier and gave an impression of underrated player at end of career.

 

Quote

Kallis averaged 41 in first 50 tests, so that also went against him creating his first impression. Most ATG show their greatness during first 50 tests, SRT, Lara, Viv or potential ATGs like Root, Williamson, Kohli or Root. Ponting (mid 40s) and Sanga (48) were attacking batsmen which helped them change impression when hit their peak.

First 6 years, many poor series, slow boring batting, nothing much to show except that 100 against against McGrath from 1995-2001. Then he goes to Zimbabwe and scores big. 388 unbeaten runs.

Then a good series in India but no hudred. 2 series against Aus, again no 100s. Then Bangladesh series and again scores unbeaten 214.

After that 9 tests against Pakistan, SL, Eng and failures in both overseas tours of Eng and Pak with 1 100 in home tour.

Then he hit a big series against WI with 700 runs. Those are his first 8 years of career, 71 tests.

During this phase he averaged in 30s against, Aus, Eng, Pak and SL.

Scoring 4k runs at avg of 41 against top 7 teams and that too at SR of 38 with just 7 100s meant he was just improving his reputation during later years as a batsman.

It's not difficult to see why he wasn't rated much. Of course he was just unstoppable during later years. But people initial impression of player remains for so long as cricket fans follow sports for decades.