Was Dennis Lillee really that great?

[Deleted_User_1]

Lillee is a great bowler, but his average to poor performance outside of Australia is a bit troubling and so is his reluctance/lack of desire to succeed on subcontinent pitches (i.e. not conducive to fast bowling) when Hadlee, Marshall and McGrath did.

[Mr. Wicket]

Bublu: Well, yes. A handful of Lillee's teammates rate him as the greatest of his generation, but that's a minority view. I don't see too many here calling him the greatest ever/of his time. That said pretty much everyone else can accept that he was one of the great bowlers - whether people rank him above or below an Imran, Kapil, Hadlee or Marshall is another matter.

[Ram]

These number based analysis of past cricketers is driving me up the wall.. :wall: Enough of this insanity already!

[vvvslaxman]

These number based analysis of past cricketers is driving me up the wall.. :wall: Enough of this insanity already!

Sehwag vs Sachin Sachin vs Richards Sachin vs Bradman Lillee vs .... I am going to ask cricinfo to shut down their statsguru site for a while until sanity returns :hysterical:

[Deleted_User_1]

Bah! You really need to remind me of 219 wickets@26.4?? Fans who lived before days of Statsguru would know that figure right off the bat. That all being said, do I consider Kapil Dev as a better bowler than Lillee? No. Do I consider Kapil as the greatest all-rounder in history?? You bet your dollars, and stats :winky:

Paaji was a great cricketer, but I think Gary Sobers was a better allrounder than Kapil. Sure's Kapil has an advantage in the bowling dept, but Sir Gary was miles ahead in batting.

[Lurker]

Imran Khan not having a stellar bowling record in India doesn't change the fact that he had to play half his matches on Pakistani wickets which were just as dead and unproductive for fast bowlers as the Indian tracks were. You are mixing up different things here. Also, Imran Khan averages 28.03 with the ball in India, not bad by any means.

Yes Sir it does. Anyone who has watched cricket in 80s would take pakistan's performance with a pinch of salt. Simple. Secondly it is hilarious to see that you consider his performance in India as "not bad" lol..Based on what? Wait let me guess..Stats! Bhai saab the man had 1 good series(look it up) and even there was beaten by Kapil Dev and Sikandar Bakht(if memory serves right). His other series were the same old "I-am-hurt-Wasim-Akram-will-bowl" nonsense. It is not exactly that he was a Kapil or Hadlee for his team who had to keep bowling all the time.

How does it matter whom he learnt it from? Bottom line, Akram was caught tampering with the ball. There cannot be different set of rules for different players.

I will start putting my arguments in points hereon since it appears you absolutely miss the discussion: a) Akram learnt art of ball tampering from the chor Imran. b) Akram's performance also comes under suspicion. Some fans prefer Akram(I do), others prefer Imran(probably you).

Was that the point I'm making? My point was and still is that Imran Khan isn't rated half the bowler that Lillee was by most cricket experts.

Who are these cricket experts?? Could you rattle me some names please? All experts I know put Lillee, Imran, Hadlee & WI greats in top bracket of 80s. But yes please substantiate.

:haha: You need to learn the art of comprehension. In other words, bowler A and bowler B both takes 5 top order wickets. It doesn't matter how they got their wickets i.e whether they deceived the batsman with swing or lethal pace, what matters is whether they took those wickets or not. And finally when they have done it, you analyze their performance by looking at their average and strike rate to figure out how many runs they conceded per wicket and how many balls it took them to get a wicket.

Hmmm I will pass this nonsense. xxx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Paaji was a great cricketer' date=' but I think Gary Sobers was a better allrounder than Kapil. Sure's Kapil has an advantage in the bowling dept, but Sir Gary was miles ahead in batting.[/quote'] Kapil actually didn't really do justice to his batting. Some of the shots i have seen him play were amazing. There was this match winston benjamin it was like a full length. He effortlessly swept him like an off spinner. He is definitely one of the most naturally talented batsman that totally failed to do justice to his talent. His aim was to score quick runs. In the process he sacrificed his wicket. He always came after 6. I do not rate Sobers bowling at all. He was a hugely over-rated bowler.

[Mr. Wicket]

Anyone who has watched cricket in 80s would take pakistan's performance with a pinch of salt. Simple.

But Lurker... who needs to watch? All we need to do is look up statsguru... run a few filters and find specific averages for Players X and Y... then pick and choose a few articles, dismissing others as 'biased Aussies or Brits' and that's our case. There are some guys who have actually WATCHED some of these players in action (folks like yourself, BossBhai, shwetabh and the like) whether in live footage or old tapes/DVDs - and others who I'm guessing have only read a couple of cricinfo articles and then run for the stats counter.

[Lurker]

Iam sorry but you simply dont understand the greatness of Kapil (the bowler only) ... you should stop calling yourselves as one of "THE" biggest supporters of the great man. I mean here you are rating a puzzy like Lillee who literally ran away when the heat got to him in a couple of tests (he then later was reported spouting bakwas about pitches in Subcontinent and swore to never set foot on them again) while the Great man played most of his career on the same pitches during the same era against the best teams and managed a comparable record without having not a single strike bowler to back him up at the other end. Wah-ji-wah mast logic hai ....

:aetsch::bumsmack::bumsmack::aetsch: Kapil is the King. Lekin bhai saaheb thora yatharth pe bhi dhyaan dein? Agar jyaada bol gaye to log bharosa hi nahin karenge. Biggest gripe with stats is actually when it comes to players like Kapil. I am reminded of Imran taking his 200th wicket in 42nd test while Kapil managed in 50th. But they both took same number of innings(82 if I remember correct) to reach there. Sums it up doesnt it? High time you gave up on stats :orderorder: ..... and SQL server :giggle:

[The Outsider]

Could you point me to the part in my post where I even talk about contempories ?

Precisely my point - you don't. Just statsguru is not enough to judge cricketers. Let me hazard a guess as to how the OP opened this thread - he read a few comments from people claiming how Lillee was an absolute genius with the ball and the best of his times. He went to statsguru, punched in the names of a few of Lillee's contemporary bowlers and found some actually averaged less than him. Voila! all those people placing Lillee above Imran must be idiots because look, he averages a whole 0.857834738 more than Imran. Let's base a cricketing argument on that! I am glad I don't follow cricket in such fashion. Anyhow, I am out of this thread. It's a shame that modern databases have reduced a whole lot of interesting discussions that can be had on the topic to mere mathematical jugglery.

[Ram]

If you want to make a case for or against player, the stats should be an add-on argument, not the main argument. Your main argument should come from the numerous times you have seen that player play live, to see for yourself how he reacts in different situations. I was guilty of falling prey to the same folly once (when I took potshots at Gavaskar's record, even though I've not seen him play even once..). I have since realized the error of my ways, even though I think there's a reasonable case to be made (based on the man's own commentary, some bizzare ODI innings etc..) for the man's obsession with stats. But who knows what the players' mindset was, back then. Its demeaning to the legacy of the players themselves, if all you look to judge them is the numbers they left behind. That is such a shame, especially in a team sport like Cricket.

[Mr Eintstein]

That is because apart from Hadlee everyone else sucked in his team :hysterical: Seriously you could hardly call that as a difference.

this sucky team beat oz in their backyard :hysterical::hysterical: there. got it out. now carry on... statsguru vs nostalgia, who will win??!! :eyedance:

[Lurker]

But Lurker... who needs to watch? All we need to do is look up statsguru... run a few filters and find specific averages for Players X and Y... then pick and choose a few articles, dismissing others as 'biased Aussies or Brits' and that's our case. There are some guys who have actually WATCHED some of these players in action (folks like yourself, BossBhai, shwetabh and the like) whether in live footage or old tapes/DVDs - and others who I'm guessing have only read a couple of cricinfo articles and then run for the stats counter.

Which is why I am not sure if StatsGuru is actually helping or hurting cricket? It does help unravel a lot of mysteries but is also making us all monkeys who can churn numbers. There is a distinct differentiation between fans of 80s, and today in the sense 80s folks would know how many wickets Ian Botham needs to overtake Bob Willis or who scored more than 8000 runs in Test(and exact runs). These days you simply look up Statsguru. Also its not like me, or Shwetabh or BB actually watched all the games. Broadcast(TV) was minimal and we were kids(back then kids didnt get to watch much tv anyway), but reading was important and I would think most of us read Sportstar, Sportsworld etc(although I do think even then BB was thinking of fans versus pseudo-psec gurus). Thats how we learnt pataudi, wadekar, engineer, didnt need a statsguru to tell me greatness of Prasanna, One More Over did it for me. Which is why folks like you, Sriram and others are exceptions..stay away from CI and keep your hands on Fingeltons and Chappels.

[bunny]

Btw, watching highlights is not the best way of forming an opinion. I was watching Laver vs Rosewall (and Laver vs Roche) on youtube, and had almost formed an opinion that tennis matches of yore were much more fun and competitive, and then got hold of a complete recording of Laver vs Rosewall French Chamionships. That bored me to death. Stupid rallying, no speed, poor backhands.

[vvvslaxman]

this sucky team beat oz in their backyard :hysterical::hysterical: there. got it out. now carry on... statsguru vs nostalgia' date=' who will win??!! :eyedance:[/quote'] Dude.. that was meant to be a complement towards Hadlee. He was amazing as a bowler. But it definitely helps your tally when there is not many to share. Would you disagree with that?

[vvvslaxman]

if cricinfo and cricket archive shut down their stats listing so many threads in recent times would not have spawned.

[Mr Eintstein]

Dude.. that was meant to be a complement towards Hadlee. He was amazing as a bowler. But it definitely helps your tally when there is not many to share. Would you disagree with that?

yea ok, but i just don't get complimenting a player through demeaning others. he was a great bowler, full stop.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Anyone who has watched cricket in 80s would take pakistan's performance with a pinch of salt. Simple.

As an inquisitive fan who missed that era, I'd really like to know why you believe so?

[Ram]

As an inquisitive fan who missed that era' date=' I'd really like to know why you believe so?[/quote'] Apparently, not inquisitive enough. This so;