Marut Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Ntini' date=' Chris Martin, Anderson, Umar Gul all have high averages, but around 60s SR.[/quote'] Their averages are in the high 20s or low 30s - not close to 40.
vvvslaxman Posted January 2, 2014 Author Posted January 2, 2014 This filter might not give true picture of some guys.. i would like to clarify.. It is not "IN COUNTRIES" filter It is "AGAINST COUNTRIES IN THEIR HOME" filter.. So Steyn would not feature in the filter vs SOUTH AFRICA in SOUTH AFRICA. That would give a skewed figures as it is his home country. Home Advantage is eliminated with this filter system.
Asim Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 I bet Younis Khan will do way better if given this much bowling in those conditions...
gattaca Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 clouderson legend born in england cant bowl on pitches that help him. Avg 38.02.
Marut Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 clouderson legend born in england cant bowl on pitches that help him. Avg 38.02. clouderson does have decent figures in England, averages 27 or so there. But he has been ordinary in SA and Aus.
rkt.india Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 clouderson legend born in england cant bowl on pitches that help him. Avg 38.02. His England stats are not included in that.
Scarves Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Prasad has a better overseas record in these countries (31.47) as compared to career avg (35.00) Because he was smart enough to know where and how to bowl on these wickets.
Detonator Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 This filter might not give true picture of some guys.. i would like to clarify.. It is not "IN COUNTRIES" filter It is "AGAINST COUNTRIES IN THEIR HOME" filter.. So Steyn would not feature in the filter vs SOUTH AFRICA in SOUTH AFRICA. That would give a skewed figures as it is his home country. Home Advantage is eliminated with this filter system. I ve the same doubt looking at OP. I guess this would work. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;host=1;host=2;host=3;host=5;orderby=bowling_average;orderbyad=reverse;qualmin1=3000;qualval1=balls;template=results;type=bowling By this filter, Harminson has done will in home and his overall average comes down to 34.56, as opposed to his career 31.5
Scarves Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Do we just look at stats and not consider opposition? SA and Australia are stacked. I mean Harmy had to contend with Australia in 02/03 and 06/07, a lineup of Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Katich (or Love), Waugh, Gilchrist or Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Clarke, Hussey, Gilchrist. People have to consider how tough it would be bowling to this lineup in Australia and the batting lineup in South Africa before judging on stats.
vvvslaxman Posted January 3, 2014 Author Posted January 3, 2014 Do we just look at stats and not consider opposition? SA and Australia are stacked. I mean Harmy had to contend with Australia in 02/03 and 06/07, a lineup of Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Katich (or Love), Waugh, Gilchrist or Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Clarke, Hussey, Gilchrist. People have to consider how tough it would be bowling to this lineup in Australia and the batting lineup in South Africa before judging on stats. Harmison must have had bowling partners right?. Those guys seem to have better figures
gattaca Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 His England stats are not included in that. Sure. But him being as worlds number one or two bowler and that avg doesn't make the cut. He is avg.
Marut Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Do we just look at stats and not consider opposition? SA and Australia are stacked. I mean Harmy had to contend with Australia in 02/03 and 06/07, a lineup of Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Katich (or Love), Waugh, Gilchrist or Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Martyn, Clarke, Hussey, Gilchrist. People have to consider how tough it would be bowling to this lineup in Australia and the batting lineup in South Africa before judging on stats. Average of 59 means that you let the opponent score 590 on average. This is garbage regardless of the teams or any other conditions involved.
Lurker Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 It goes on to prove a point that I've suspected: most of our pacers perform better in pacer-unfriendly conditions than in favourable conditions. Zak has a good record in these countries but both Kapil and Sri have records poorer than their overall records. The same also holds true' date= to a much higher degree, for Ishant and Prabhakar. If you look at the attached screenshot. It shows the same data but sorted by number of innings in descending order. You should see a comparison between Kapil Dev, Bob Willis and Michael Holding. These comparison is rather fair because they played in same era and bowled in very similar number of innings. High SR aside, Kapil's number is much better than Bob Willis who is widely acknowledged as the best English bowler of his time ahead of Ian Botham, and not too shabby against Holding who is clearly an all time great. This truth is often lost in the myriad of stats. Kapil's bowling stats should NOT be looked by number of tests, it should be looked at number of innings. Simple reason being India often lost by innings, or by 10 wickets during his time. Kapil did not always get a chance to bowl twice in a test. This is quite different to Windies, Pakistan and Australian bowlers who always got that chance and hence number of wickets increase accordingly. Of course these numbers overseas were cracked up with Binnys and Madan Lal in support. The only time I beleive Kapil had good support was Chetan Sharma in England (86) and Prabhakar in Australia (early 90s).
vvvslaxman Posted January 3, 2014 Author Posted January 3, 2014 I was curious to know how Ishant fares against other bowlers lol. That was the exercise of this thread. Other numbers of other bowlers might have other variables that we may not know about. A guy like Ishant gets to play in 4 countries where seamers have had more say than spinners over decades, Sucked in all 4 countries. Not averaging below 40 in any of the country. Average of 73 in England Average of 58 in Australia Average of 41 in New zealand Average of 54 in South Africa With downright shambolic numbers like this he is possibly the worst bowler in history to carry to these parts.
Lurker Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Kapils numbers are not really comparable to the other 2 .... look a the Avg and S/R columns as well ... not just the no.of wkts column. Of course that is not going to be comparable. Holding had a great support cast and Willis had Botham, Hendrick, Old and many others who would be compared to Madan Lal on his best day. It is rather easy really. India never dominated outside of subcontinent because outside of Kapil you didnt have a wicket taking bowler. And if you only have Kapil his stats are bound to suffer. This is also the reason why Kapil's stats improve at home. He gets support from Dilip Doshi, Shivlal Yadav..even a Ravi Shastri and suddenly India has a potent attack. Kapil's numbers improve accordingly.
vvvslaxman Posted January 3, 2014 Author Posted January 3, 2014 Regarding Kapil bowled lot more overs than he needed to because of lack of support. Hence his average might look inflated. He was a damn good bowler. They all fall within acceptable range. Some guys who are not really all time greats have spectacular career in specific parts. For instance Terry Aldermann has phenomenal record in England 12 test 83 wickets at 19.. 10 points better than his record in his own country.
King Tendulkar Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 So in summary Ishant is rubbish and needs to be axed for next 10 years Mods lock the thread, point proven p.s please post this thread to dhobi or srini
Marut Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Kapils numbers are not really comparable to the other 2 .... look a the Avg and S/R columns as well ... not just the no.of wkts column. You cannot compare Kapil to WI bowlers who hunted in packs. English bowlers did not enjoy so much luxury but were better off than Kapil. During the 80s it was heart breaking to see Kapil wage a lone battle on tours. Any pressure built up by Kapil from one end was immediately given up at the other end, so in the end Kapil also became less potent with the ball. At home, Kapil got support from spinners which is one of the reasons he has better stats at home. Kapil did not have frightening pace to run over opposition. But he was still a very good bowler who would have done much better if he had decent support bowlers - Binny, Madanlal, Chetan Sharma and Prabhakar were the support bowlers for most of his career. Except in patches (less than 25% of matches Kapil played) Kapil was waging a lone battle. Kapil is better than many bowlers who average better than him - due to bowling on bowler friendly conditions and better support bowlers. It is interesting that Kapil reserved his best for the best sides of his time.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now