ICF All Time Test XI : Openers

[The Outsider]

Most great bowlers in any era who had good average, also had good SR. High SR means, one isn't a real strike bowler.

Can you name some spin bowlers from Underwood's time or earlier besides Chandra and Laker who had a distinctly superior strike rate than Underwood? Now if you are saying all spin bowlers before the 80s-90s were pie chuckers, let me know and I won't bother wasting more time.

[Lurker]

Can you name some spin bowlers from Underwood's time or earlier besides Chandra and Laker who had a distinctly superior strike rate than Underwood? Now if you are saying all spin bowlers before the 80s-90s were pie chuckers' date= let me know and I won't bother wasting more time.) read that as - Batsmen of yore did not score at a fast rate, bowlers did not have good strike rate. :nice::nice::nice::nice: I thought I was being harsh on rkt, but sometimes the first reaction is often the most correct one :--D

It is a circular logic, or a complete lack of cricketing understanding...take your pick. Sample this, well into 60s and 70s bowlers were bowling 8 balls over. Cricket was being played with Rest days, and in certain cases Timeless Tests. Clearly batsmen were in no hurry and neither were the bowlers. Why would the SR of a bowler bowling 8 balls over match up with modern day 6 balls over? The cynics (young and old

[Crookbond]

And regarding, SR and average question, no I dont take just one thing as a measure of greatness, it is both the things should come together, not just because both these things affect each other. Most great bowlers in any era who had good average, also had good SR. High SR means, one isn't a real strike bowler.

Can you name some spin bowlers from Underwood's time or earlier besides Chandra and Laker who had a distinctly superior strike rate than Underwood? Now if you are saying all spin bowlers before the 80s-90s were pie chuckers' date=' let me know and I won't bother wasting more time.[/quote'] RKT - This is how "we" normalize the denominators by comparing players. Sure, this doesn't sound unreasonable i.e. if you are willing to look at it in a different way.

[Crookbond]

It is a circular logic, or a complete lack of cricketing understanding...take your pick. Sample this, well into 60s and 70s bowlers were bowling 8 balls over. Cricket was being played with Rest days, and in certain cases Timeless Tests. Clearly batsmen were in no hurry and neither were the bowlers. Why would the SR of a bowler bowling 8 balls over match up with 6 balls over? The cynics (young and old ) read that as - Batsmen of yore did not score at a fast rate, bowlers did not have good strike rate. :nice::nice::nice::nice: I thought I was being harsh on rkt, but sometimes the first reaction is often the most correct one :--D

And then we will have someone asking us to back with "facts" and "evidences" - when all these are present and people chose to ignore it. How about this ? JRC0eo3Ngy0 Shahid Afridi playing in Morocco which Tendulkar or any Indian batsmen has. So, he becomes better than Tendulkar?

[The Outsider]

Shahid Afridi playing in Morocco which Tendulkar or any Indian batsmen has. So, he becomes better than Tendulkar?

Scoring in the Sahara! Unless Tendulkar scores in the Sahara, can't take his contention to being an all time great seriously. :adore:

[The Outsider]

Afridi has played ODIs in 17 countries and Tendulkar only in 16 => Afridi > Tendulkar.

[Crookbond]

Let me tell you something more funnier - I just checked the votes of the poll for the ICF ALL Time XI Middle Order. All of us have unanimously voted for Tendulkar here.

adi B, BeautifulGame, bleed blue, cameron_black, carnish, CasualVisitor, Chalks, Chandan, Clarke, Cricketics, cricket_god, DeepakDeo, DHON_ZONE, fedex, ganeshran, gloryof83, India-KXIP fan, Khalpat, laaloo, Lurker, maniac316, Manny_Pacquiao, Marut, master22, mcenley, My two cents, nospam, Numb, OmOr, Pagalpanti, phaedrus, pravinkataria, psrb4u, punjabi_khota, Raghav_12, rkt.india, Robelinda, sabby2013, Sachin=GOD, Scarface, Sehwag1830, Serani, Shane, Sidhoni, Sooda, The Outsider, Tiger-Don, transparent, Ultimate_Game, vamos_rafa, Vibhash, Vijay.Sharma, zaheer, zakk

It clearly explains who loves the game and who loves a player.

[Lurker]

Shahid Afridi playing in Morocco which Tendulkar or any Indian batsmen has. So, he becomes better than Tendulkar?

You may have made that comment tongue-in-cheek, but you may be more correct than you know. Afterall there was a time when (for some) Saeed Anwar was considered a top contender for worlds greatest LOI opener since he scored centuries at will at Sharjah and Greenidges and Haynes didnt. This was before Gilly, Sanath, SRT cut loose of course.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

Let me tell you something more funnier - I just checked the votes of the poll for the ICF ALL Time XI Middle Order. All of us have unanimously voted for Tendulkar here. It clearly explains who loves the game and who loves a player.

May also explain why some people just indulge in criticism and never work towards a solution, even if it is as trivial as voting in an online poll (hint - check how much time BB spends on Arthur Mould vs voting lol )

[The Outsider]

So now playing ODIs in Morocco = Playing Tests in India ?

Now you are just being a racist. Making fun of Morocco? It's a big challenge to score there in the oppressing heat and the one and only Sahibzada Mohammed Shahid Khan Afridi has done it, not Tendulkar, not Bradman, not Lara. And what's more the Sahibzada traveled to Morocco across the Sahara on a camel back with one bottle of water - please check back in about Tendulkar's ODI greatness when he achieves the feat of scoring a half century in Morocco or at least reaching there on a camel.

[Crookbond]

Chalo at least for ODI's Tendulkar can't stake claim to undisputed King because he hasn't scored in the Sahara. :yess:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

So now what happens from hereon in the debate ? You will get offended that your thyori on S/R's went belly-up , gather your fav cheerleaders , indulge in some mudslinging to get even and declare that those who don't subscribe to your understanding of cricket are dheets and suchlike. In reality it is you who is the maha dheet and I wont be surprised if rkt logs off as he certainly cant compete with you in the fine art of trolling and hurling insults which is your main intention for posting on this site.

:asleep::asleep::asleep:

Because there is no statistical evidence to suggest that balls-per-over has any bearing on a bowlers SR. I can show you a bunch of bowlers that have excellent Strike rates ( 65 ) in matches where 8 ball overs were used. Most famous ones being Imran , Trueman , Sarfraz . There is a lot more to the story of balls-per-over , match duration, S/R but I can't be bothered.

:asleep::asleep::asleep: Instead of usual nautanki and bhasan, why dont you put numbers to show greats of 8 over era and their SR compared to greats of 90s (say). :beee:

[Old guy]

Bad dua mat de yaar, main toh aiveyi mazaak kar raha tha :(( :icflove:

ok :icflove: vaise bhi its more like antijinx now u will be richer then rajiv

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

:acute: But no it isn't even needed as it can never be any more meaningful than comparing the records of bowlers who played in both 6 ball and 8 ball overs during their careers. There are 139 such bowlers who have atleast 10 wkts in each type. Ignoring those that have minor differences in SR ( Glad I responded to you with a :asleep::asleep::asleep::asleep::asleep::asleep:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

and as I had predicted ... the need to save your face at any cost on a internet forum will make you do anything ... which is why you are the Param dheet of this forum :nice:

HhaPTzSu7g8

[Vilander]

Sunny and Greenidge