FischerTal Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 sir viv averaging 47 in that era with his SR is mind boggling
MK55 Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 That means you can't differentiate between FTBs and batsmen who can bat any where? Because what you are saying now applies the same logic to bowlers. Bowling average of 23 odd over 350 matches is extraordinary for a pace bowler from the SC. Other top bowlers from the SC struggled to break sub 25 because home pitches weren't conducive, but Akram managed to beat those odds. McGrath averaged only 26.72 as a bowler away from home; Akram averaged 23.89; It is easy to see who is the better bowler when the home advantage is taken out. You have made an interesting argument but we can’t say with certainty as to who is the better bowler between Mcgrath and Wasim by simply looking at their overall average and their average away from home. All we know is that Mcgrath has a better overall average but worse away average than Wasim. Conditions in Australia are considered more pace friendly than say Pakistan for bowlers in general. So the away performances of Mcgrath will be excluding Australia while Wasim’s would be excluding the docile tracks of Pakistan. This could have portrayed a slightly better away average for Wasim. If we are using stats, then we should probably look at averages in away matches excluding both Pakistan and Australia. I expect both these bowlers to have a relative advantage with respect to each other when it comes to home conditions. So we can also look at the extent by which the bowler is out-performing the other in his home conditions. Unless we get country level data, it will be difficult to say who’s superior by simply looking at data points. I personally prefer Brett Lee as an ODI bowler. Probably had one of the best strike rates. Well regardless of the stats he was definitely one of the most exciting fast bowlers to watch in the modern game.
sensible-indian Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Kallis played in an era when 240 was a winning score and top order was required to defend first 15 overs so tail and hitters would score at a rapid rate. His role was never to be a pinch hitter or finisher. So that explains his strike rate. Even Tendulkar's SR was below 80 before 1999 as that was the requirement of the era before batsman friendly tracks starting coming with 300+ scores. Your perfect example of mediocre all rounder is Shane Watson - he is neither a fast bowler nor a great batsman. Still he would walk into ANY team in the world today. That's the utility of all-rounders with short shelf-life. But Kallis and Flintoff were ATG at this and would be more valuable than Tendulkar any day of the week just on their bowling or batting alone. What? Nope. In the 90s SRT's SR in 90s was 86. 228 games sample set. As opener, his SR was 91. 142 game sample set.
sensible-indian Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Kallis was neither a great ODI batsman nor bowler. In tests, he is definitely MORE VALUABLE than SRT considering his batting and bowling.
RedFever Posted February 11, 2015 Posted February 11, 2015 Kallis played in an era when 240 was a winning score and top order was required to defend first 15 overs so tail and hitters would score at a rapid rate. His role was never to be a pinch hitter or finisher. So that explains his strike rate. Even Tendulkar's SR was below 80 before 1999 as that was the requirement of the era before batsman friendly tracks starting coming with 300+ scores. Your perfect example of mediocre all rounder is Shane Watson - he is neither a fast bowler nor a great batsman. Still he would walk into ANY team in the world today. That's the utility of all-rounders with short shelf-life. But Kallis and Flintoff were ATG at this and would be more valuable than Tendulkar any day of the week just on their bowling or batting alone. :haha: I would take Lance Kluesner any day over Kallis. When both Kallis and Kluesner were in their prime in the late 90's, Kluesner was more relaiable than Kallis. You cant call him an ATG, was mediocre at his best.
Gambit Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 sir viv averaging 47 in that era with his SR is mind boggling Zaheer Abbas had an avg of 48 with a SR of 85.
FischerTal Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Zaheer Abbas had an avg of 48 with a SR of 85. 62 versus 187 ODIs. But I get your point
Guest nimesh632 Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 shahid AFRIDI and kallis Afridi will get soon as world cup process of DBL - DBL. 400 wkts. 8000 ODI RUNS, Dynamic yet underrated player.TENDULKARS record say so, he is the best , 18 time out for 90 in one dayer yet scored 51 one day century and not score 1st, til 79th. Match. Rules change every once and while but no one like Kallis on earth. He was 4 in one.
Scarves Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Bevan - Due to the whole finisher and how to finish a game. Gilchrist - Explosive opener/keeper Botham/Greatbatch - Explosive opener Simon O'Donnell/Steve Waugh - Slower ball Dhoni - New age of how to play in the latter overs Dean Jones/Viv Richards - How to bat in ODI I guess.
govinda Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 viv- had average of 47 and strike rate of 90 in era of gr8 bowlers
brendan07 Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 viv- had average of 47 and strike rate of 90 in era of gr8 bowlers Yes, but luckily he didn't have to face Croft, Garner, Marshall, etc all. Mind you the same could be said about Gilchrist not facing McGrath, etc.
govinda Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Yes' date=' but luckily he didn't have to face Croft, Garner, Marshall, etc all. Mind you the same could be said about Gilchrist not facing McGrath, etc.[/quote'] but he faced imran botham hedlee wasim kapil and abdul quadir lets not forget in 70s and 80s almost every team had good bowling attack
goose Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 What does valuable mean? To me it means how much poorer does a team become if you take him out. In a sense one's value is diminished within a strong set up. By this definition, Tendulkar by miles...of the players i have seen which unfortunately did not include much of Viv Richards. He played in an era where 280 was more often than not a winning score. He opened the innings. He was the master of the century. Quite simply if Tendulkar was batting in the 45th over, India had won almost regardless of what was going on elsewhere.
Lord Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Ishant Sharma valuable for all teams except India
putrevus Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Most valuable has to be Kapil Dev, his exploits in 1983 changed the whole way cricket is governed now. He may not be the best ever but he is the most valuable, he changed whole dynamics in world cricket without him there would be no IPL today. Can you imagine today any Indian match not being covered, his greatest innings was not even covered by television.
maniac Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Most valuable has to be Kapil Dev, his exploits in 1983 changed the whole way cricket is governed now. He may not be the best ever but he is the most valuable, he changed whole dynamics in world cricket without him there would be no IPL today. Can you imagine today any Indian match not being covered, his greatest innings was not even covered by television. Some credit to misbah as well for his scoop shot :giggle:
putrevus Posted February 12, 2015 Posted February 12, 2015 Some credit to misbah as well for his scoop shot :giggle: yep who can forget that magical scoop.:winky:
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