Lyon, the best spinner of his generation!

[zen]

1 minute ago, Lord said:

 

Indian pitches don't assist pacers. That makes Umesh better than Anderson/Broad.

 

FYI, Indian pitches are pointless (doctored to not develop their own cricketers) as those conditions are not replicated in other major test playing countries. While SENA includes 4 major test-playing countries. 

 

There is a false equivalence of comparing India (a pointless place to play test cricket) v SENA (a place that drives test cricket). 

[vvvslaxman]

20 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

Indian pitches don't assist pacers. That makes Umesh better than Anderson/Broad.

 

This clown doesn't know England also creates different pitches for different teams. For instance against SA they opened with Moeen Ali.

[BacktoCricaddict]

Uh oh .... The stage is set perfectly now for Nathan Lyon to bat Australia to a win in the first Ashes test.

 

  @zen , is more ammunition coming your way ;-)?

[zen]

9 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Uh oh .... The stage is set perfectly now for Nathan Lyon to bat Australia to a win in the first Ashes test.

 

  @zen , is more ammunition coming your way ;-)?

 

Buddy, this is a thread on bowling! 

 

Whatever Lyon does with the bat is not going to improve his bowling! 

[BacktoCricaddict]

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

Buddy, this is a thread on bowling! 

 

Whatever Lyon does with the bat is not going to improve his bowling! 

Still, if someone says, Ashwin is more valuable, you can say "Ashes 2023 ..."!  ;-)

[zen]

26 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Still, if someone says, Ashwin is more valuable, you can say "Ashes 2023 ..."!  ;-)

 

  ok! 

 

Btw, note that I am not a fan of either Lyon or Ashwin, whose performances have come on Indian pitches which I don't consider. In tests, I only rate two spinners - Warne and Murali, along with Barnes as he bowled spin too. Add Swann as he comes across as a funny cricketer. Among Indian spinners, I mainly like Chandra (because of his 5-ers to innings ratio in SENA and relative mystery qualities) ... The cricketers that I follow are limited (most of the time I do not even discuss them except if they are currently playing). I tend to give preference to cricket and not necessarily Indian cricket. 

 

It is good to see Lyon elevate himself as the best of his generation!

Edited June 20, 2023 by zen

[sandeep]

On 6/19/2023 at 4:58 PM, zen said:

IIRC, you started a thread called "Drop Jadeja for Ashwin" or something like that! So maybe you are more invested in Ashwin (I don't need to be). 

At least you didn't accuse me of 'gujju bias'. 

[sandeep]

16 hours ago, Stan AF said:

At some point in time, ICF moderators should take a stock and examine how much lies and abuses is spread on their own forum against India's players.

 

I'd have expelled this serial liar long ago.

calm your tits, Let people have opinions, its a free space.  And you are free to counter them, instead of calling for commie dictator style 'expulsions'.  He spouts OTT 'strong opinions' against other players too.  Its just that you seem to be particularly worked up because maybe it involves one of 'yours'? ;P 

Edited June 20, 2023 by sandeep

[vvvslaxman]

Australia lost 4 test series in a row lol Lyon featured in each one of them.  Best spinner  my a** . Never touched no.1 ranking. His best ranking is 6 that too now.  

Edited June 21, 2023 by vvvslaxman

[vvvslaxman]

7 hours ago, Lord said:

 

Indian pitches don't assist pacers. That makes Umesh better than Anderson/Broad.

 

Logic is beyond slaves of white :)

[zen]

10 minutes ago, sandeep said:

At least you didn't accuse me of 'gujju bias'. 

I don’t think you have Gujju bias (at least not consciously) … but I also hope that you don’t attempt to discard Gujju players to not appear as one having a Gujju bias as that beats the purpose of genuine cricketing opinion!

 

 

[sandeep]

2 hours ago, zen said:

I don’t think you have Gujju bias (at least not consciously) … but I also hope that you don’t attempt to discard Gujju players to not appear as one having a Gujju bias as that beats the purpose of genuine cricketing opinion!

 

 

In case you haven't noticed, I backed Jaddu as the test player when there were quite a few on this forum who didn't believe in him.  And as you well aware, I've been backing gujju lukdya since his early days with the Indian team.  I DGAF about players' ethnicities, only about what value I perceive them bringing to team India, whether its a Sanju Samson, a Washington Sundar, or a Hardik Pandya.  

[zen]

12 minutes ago, sandeep said:

In case you haven't noticed, I backed Jaddu as the test player when there were quite a few on this forum who didn't believe in him.  And as you well aware, I've been backing gujju lukdya since his early days with the Indian team.  I DGAF about players' ethnicities, only about what value I perceive them bringing to team India, whether its a Sanju Samson, a Washington Sundar, or a Hardik Pandya.  

I knew about Sundar and Hardik, not about the other two (or may have forgotten). 

[Stan AF]

5 hours ago, sandeep said:

calm your tits, Let people have opinions, its a free space.  And you are free to counter them, instead of calling for commie dictator style 'expulsions'.  He spouts OTT 'strong opinions' against other players too.  Its just that you seem to be particularly worked up because maybe it involves one of 'yours'? ;P 

Strong opinions my ass, just recently he had called one of the other ICF posters as third world junk and yet you guys do nothing about it.

 

Any other decent forum would have kicked him out for this kind of stereotypical abuse.

 

[zen]

5 hours ago, Stan AF said:

Strong opinions my ass, just recently he had called one of the other ICF posters as third world junk and yet you guys do nothing about it.

 

Any other decent forum would have kicked him out for this kind of stereotypical abuse.

 

Learn the decency to mind your own business rather than drawing on random examples without understanding the context, clutching on to the straws … Apply your theories to yourself and hate less.

 

You have called me a serial liar, which is a lie told by you (here to take pot shots), a bas**** (on an IPL match thread), etc., appearing to be more interested in posting about me than the topic   

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by zen

[BacktoCricaddict]

17 hours ago, zen said:

 

  ok! 

 

Btw, note that I am not a fan of either Lyon or Ashwin, whose performances have come on Indian pitches which I don't consider. In tests, I only rate two spinners - Warne and Murali, along with Barnes as he bowled spin too. Add Swann as he comes across as a funny cricketer. Among Indian spinners, I mainly like Chandra (because of his 5-ers to innings ratio in SENA and relative mystery qualities) ... The cricketers that I follow are limited (most of the time I do not even discuss them except if they are currently playing). I tend to give preference to cricket and not necessarily Indian cricket. 

 

It is good to see Lyon elevate himself as the best of his generation!

:-).

 

So, what is your explanation for Warne's rather pedestrian performance on doctored, spin-friendly Indian pitches?  How come he averages 43.11 (SR 83!!)?  Even conceding that he was bowling to better players of spin, that is just abysmal. If he really was the greatest ever, he would at least have been mediocre.  My contention is that every one of these guys - Warne, Lyon, Ashwin, Jadeja, Axar even - are more successful in conditions that are similar to where they learned their craft.

 

But even more importantly, I think we fans tend to gloss over and underestimate the importance of ball-brand (Dukes vs Kookaburra vs the other one I can't recall the name of).  With such small margins for error for spinners, even a minuscule difference in how the ball is gripped, how it behaves in the air and off the pitch etc. matter more than we can imagine.  Some of this can be overcome in practice matches before test series, but the ceiling would still be lower while using a brand that is outside their comfort zone.  

 

Now, Murali waali baat to doosri hai, so am not going there.

 

[sandeep]

6 hours ago, Stan AF said:

Strong opinions my ass, just recently he had called one of the other ICF posters as third world junk and yet you guys do nothing about it.

 

Any other decent forum would have kicked him out for this kind of stereotypical abuse.

 

if you have a problem with any specific post, please use the 'report' functionality and moderators will review and address using their judgement.  

 

You are free to have your personal "forum dushmani" with this or other poster.  Don't be a crybaby and ask for bans.  You yourself have been guilty of posting questionable comments in the past.  It happens, we all occasionally write things in the heat of argument.  I'm not holding your past actions against you.  Or Zen's.  

 

If you think this forum is not "decent" enough, don't let the door hit you on the way out.  I have little patience for ungrateful whinges.  

[zen]

7 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

So, what is your explanation for Warne's rather pedestrian performance on doctored, spin-friendly Indian pitches?  How come he averages 43.11 (SR 83!!)?  Even conceding that he was bowling to better players of spin, that is just abysmal. If he really was the greatest ever, he would at least have been mediocre.  My contention is that every one of these guys - Warne, Lyon, Ashwin, Jadeja, Axar even - are more successful in conditions that are similar to where they learned their craft.

Warne left India to the likes of Clarke  … He ran into some good batting by Indian batsmen in form - such as Sidhu, Tendulkar (98), Laxman (01), etc. All the pitches weren’t necessarily rank turners (Kol for e.g. where Laxman made 281. At Nagpur, where Warne probably did not play, there was grass on the pitch).  

The rank turner era began In the 90s where spinners like Raju and Joshi used to do well too. Now we are seeing various versions including pitches with selective doctoring where certain areas are left underprepared (and bowlers more conditioned to take advantage of that which works against them when not bowling in extremely favourable conditions for “them”). 
 

[BacktoCricaddict]

30 minutes ago, zen said:

Warne left India to the likes of Clarke  … He ran into some good batting by Indian batsmen in form - such as Sidhu, Tendulkar (98), Laxman (01), etc. All the pitches weren’t necessarily rank turners (Kol for e.g. where Laxman made 281. At Nagpur, where Warne probably did not play, there was grass on the pitch).  

The rank turner era began In the 90s where spinners like Raju and Joshi used to do well too. Now we are seeing various versions including pitches with selective doctoring where certain areas are left underprepared (and bowlers more conditioned to take advantage of that which works against them when not bowling in extremely favourable conditions for “them”). 
 

With all due respect, I think you are rationalizing a lot.  43 avg and 83 SR over 9 tests can't just be explained away like that.  Even excellent bowlers run into a ceiling. That was Warne's - and it does not take away from his excellence otherwise.  Similarly, for everyone else as well.

 

All of these bowlers have touched excellence at the highest level but have run into challenges under specific circumstances.  If we are going to praise one of them for success under one of those conditions while ignoring their stinkers under other (even supposedly more helpful) conditions, we must at least have the courtesy of applying the same principle for the others.

 

My hypothesis: Familiar pitches and familiar ball-brands make all the difference.

[zen]

1 minute ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

With all due respect, I think you are rationalizing a lot.  43 avg and 83 SR over 9 tests can't just be explained away like that.  Even excellent bowlers run into a ceiling. That was Warne's - and it does not take away from his excellence otherwise.  Similarly, for everyone else as well.

 

All of these bowlers have touched excellence at the highest level but have run into challenges under specific circumstances.  If we are going to praise one of them for success under one of those conditions while ignoring their stinkers under other (even supposedly more helpful) conditions, we must at least have the courtesy of applying the same principle for the others.

 

My hypothesis: Familiar pitches and familiar ball-brands make all the difference.

Warne’s relative lack of success in India has no impact on his legacy. If India was a key factor, Kumble would have been rated higher. Murali is not rated high (relative to a Kumble not necessarily Warne) because of his exploits just in SL, but he has won tests in places like Eng (picked up 16 wickets in a game for e.g.) as well. 

 

If your hypothesis is that familiar pitches  + ball brands make the difference, then you would see why spinners who do well in countries like SENA (4 countries that are clubbed due to relative similarity even though conditions can vary at many venues like Perth can be different than SCG) are rated higher. 
 

India too needs to move towards creating relatively more sporting pitches within the limitations of what is possible in subcon.