It is amazing how often people quote some stats like a batsman's or bowlers failure in a particular tour in a partticular cpountry to prove that he was not good enough and vice versa. Very often these stats are totally misleading but go unchallenged because they are so striking. Pontings failure in India is one such stat. People refuse to accept, if they want to make an anti-Ponting point, that this could be a statistical chance just as a captain can win ten tosses in a row.
The pointing of Murali's figures in Australia of 116 runs per wicket is a case in point. I was answering that post without realising that the thread got closed.
While I am not so keen to argue with Scallywag so as to revive the thread but I think the point of out-of-context or freak stats being quoted in arguments is one I would like to point at. For this I am using my reply to Scallywag which wasnt posted in the now closed thread.
While I would like to get into the argument as to who is the better of the two. I am amazed that you find these stats so significant.Originally Posted by Scallywag
1. Do you realise that these figures of 116 runs per wkt are over just two test matches?
2. Do you realise that these two mathces were played TEN years ago ?
3. Do you realise that upto that stage, Murali was nowhere near the bowler he was to become later having taken his wickets at an unimpressive 34 runs each ? And till that stage he was taking a moderate 3.5 wickets per test ?
4. Do you know that since then he has taken 450 wickets at just over 20 runs each ?
5. Do you know that in taking these 451 wickets he has averaged a staggering 6.6 wkts per test match, easily the most astonishing and sustained wicket taking spree in the history of the game ever ?
6. Do you realise that during the last ten years, while he was virtually running throught batting orders all over the world, he did not play a single test in Australia so as to better his first and only two tests performance there ?
7. Do you know that while he did not play in Australia, during this period, he did play Australia at home in 6 tests in last ten years and
- took 43 wkts
- at over 7 per test
- at an average of 22.1 per wkt and
- a strike rate of 47.1 balls per wkt ?
Do you think there is any significance of the average of 116 per wkt in Australia that you quote and for some weird reason find hilarious ?
If you do, I salute you and shut my mouth up
While we can forget , at this point about the Warne vs Murali debate (arent we sick of it) but I think we need to be carefull in bandying about freak stats with misplaced conviction to make invalid points.