Hear, Hear, Hear : Lend me your Ear

[vic_orthdox]

On par regarding just their FC (without Tests) record, or just as players generally? That is what I'm asking. And thanks for the Assorted thingy.

[marc71178]

On a par based on non-Test performances!

[steds]

Originally Posted by marc71178

I apologise for my rank amateur attempt at proving you wrong.

Could you prove for me how Robert Croft is on a par with Ashley Giles please when comparing their respective non-Test stats?

I wanna go!

Why Robert Croft is on a par with Ashley Giles

Ashley Giles and Robert Croft have long held Englands spin department in an era of Warne's, Murali's, Harhajan's, Kumble's and Saqlain's running around world cricket, so these two stout yeomen from Swansea and Surrey tend to be far underrated. This case is especially so for Croft as Giles has played in over twice as many tests for England. However, I am about to prove that Croft is on a par with Giles as a player.

1) Batsman

• In First Class cricket, Robert Croft has scored exactly twice as many 100's and exactly twice as many 50's (6 to 3 and 42 to 21 respectively) in less than twice as many innings (449 to 229) as Ashley Giles, therefore he is a superior First Class batsman

• In one day cricket, Croft regularly takes a spot at the top of Glamorgan's batting order and has scored 4 List 'A' centuries to Giles' 1.

• He also is a FAR better record in Twenty/20 than Giles, who has scored 0 runs with a best of 0 not out.

2)Bowler

• Robert Croft's best First Class bowling is 8/66, and in that match he took 6/103 in the first innings to prove it wasn't a fluke. His victims included intenational players Andy Lloyd, Dermot Reeve, Neil Smith, Roger Twose, and Tim Munton whilst Ashley Giles' best first class bowling is only 8/90.

• Giles has taken 50+ wickets in a season just twice, whilst that feat has been acheived by Croft 7 times.

• Giles' ODI economy is a huge 4.32 runs per over compared to Croft's 4.24

3)Fielder

• Croft has taken over 10 catches in 5 English seasons (1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997). Giles has only acheived the feat in 1996

4)Captaincy

• Robert Croft showed how great a captain he is by leading Glamorgan to the 2004 National League 1 title. Giles hasn't captained Warwickshire to anything

Therefore, I conlude that Robert Croft is Ashley Giles' equal if not better in all areas of cricket

[vic_orthdox]

Haha, thanks Steds. I really was going to struggle with that one. I owe you one...in fact, if there's one you'd like me to do for you, lay it out for me. (I'd prefer international comparisons )

[Adamc]

Originally Posted by steds

• Croft has taken over 10 wickets in 5 English seasons (1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997). Giles has only acheived the feat in 1996

Haha, I read this disbelievingly a few times before I realised it referred to fielding, not bowling.

[steds]

Originally Posted by Adamc

Haha, I read this disbelievingly a few times before I realised it referred to fielding, not bowling.

ahh crap. I knew I'd f*ck up somewhere. Edited to read catches

[Sudeep]

I'm still awaiting a report on why Tendulkar's batting has been more valuable to India that's Dravid's, since 2000.

If not, I'd like refund.

[SJS]

PUBLIC NOTICE

The views, analysis,opinions etc of our guest contributors are essentially their own and SJS Stats Factory does not stand any liability for disputes arising out of these

[honestbharani]

Waiting for the Agarkar/McGrath one.... And this should be pinned, seriously....

[Slats4ever]

thank you so much for answering my question about the Zim v Bangladesh one... i'll try to come up with more questions. i'm seriously thinking about trying to answer one of these as well. u should be a politician SJS... turn anything into something believable

[SJS]

Originally Posted by Slats4ever

thank you so much for answering my question about the Zim v Bangladesh one... i'll try to come up with more questions. i'm seriously thinking about trying to answer one of these as well. u should be a politician SJS... turn anything into something believable

What do you mean young man ?

I havent turned anything into anything.

The stats speak for them selves !!

[Son Of Coco]

Hello all...

SJS, apologies for not getting onto this Agarkar/McGrath conundrum...things are a bit busy at the moment. With this in mind I think it's only fair that I step back and give Vic Orthodox the Head Stats role as my input here will be minimal at best for at least the next couple of weeks.

I'm off to Falls Creek next week to work for the winter so I'm currently trying to get stuff organised for that, and am working in the meantime...thus there's not a lot leftover for stats analysis unfortunately. Now I know that we should all look to the great God Stat in times of trouble, but I feel that at this point in my life I have to leave out the decimal points and simply deal with whole numbers. I look forward to the day I can return to the fold with frivolous tales of numbers divisible by three and long nights spent square rooting, but until the move is complete and we're bunked down in a little country hut with the internet being beamed in via a sweating mouse on a wildly spinning wheel...I feel I must tend my resignation.

I would like to swap with Vic and become the roving reporter if that's at all possible...ducking in occasionally to pick up floating work?

Yours in numbers,

SOC.

[vic_orthdox]

Alrighty, while I'm waiting for confirmation on what the job structure shall be in light of this news, I'm going to take on the Agakar > McGrath as a bowler task.

Coming in the next two hours...

[vic_orthdox]

Much to the delight of his many supporters, I wish to proclaim that Ajit Agarkar is much a much better bowler than Glenn McGrath, whom has somehow managed to take 499 test wickets, a measly 446 more than AA. The man known around these forums simply by his initials (no, not TEC ) is often ridiculed as much as admired in Cricket Web circles. I'm here today to inform you that such criticism is unwarranted. While almost as many consider Glenn McGrath to be the greatest seamer of the past 10 years compared to those who think he's lucky, I believe that neither group is right. Yes, Glenn is a wonderful bowler, but the only fast bowler worth "ooh ahh"-ing about in my books is Ajit Agark-"ooh"-ar. And now why.

When comparing their records, at first sight I thought, "Wow, this actually seems difficult ". Glenn McGrath does average 25 runs per wicket less than AA. But when you break down their respective stats, you see a number of areas where Ajit has it all over Glenn. And it is these areas that are most vital.

Now, before you bring in total records, I'd like to defend Ajit quickly. When one breaks his stats down into his record in each test, his record in the 1st test outstrips that of his 2nd, his 2nd outshines his 3rd, and it continually gets worse. What this indicates is that, and it is completely the fault of the body with which God gave him to work with (even though some might argue Ajit is God) cannot stand the toil of bowling in consecutive Tests. And I agree...I mean, give the guy a break, he is 4'2 and weighs 19kg. Therefore, we can legitimately not compare whole records and draw conclusions from that, we must highlight specific facts to display who has been the greater exponent of pace bowling.

Now, after my intense analysis of both players, the most glaring of McGrath's (many) weaknesses is his record in 2003, arguably the best year of batting in cricketing history. We saw the following luminaries in wonderful form: Dravid (average of 100.37), Laxman (85), Ponting (100.2), Hayden (77.17), Lara (74.66), Tendulkar (17, not bad considering his recent form ) Kallis (50), Sangakkara (50), and Farzeez Maharoof managed to average 55.23 versus Pakistan U/19s. God, even Ed Smith managed a Test Match 50 in 2003! This truly was the year when the mettle of bowlers was tested.

And it is in this year where we see the true class of the two competitors come to the fore. In one less game throughout the calendar year, Ajit Agarkar took twice as many wickets, despite playing against the best team in the world in all the games in which he played during the calendar year. His average of 27.18 during this time, with the extraordinary strike rate of 44.9, makes Glenn McGrath look like the true amateur he is, with only 8 wickets throughout the whole calendar year, taking them at 35.25 runs per wicket, and with 100 balls seperating each wicket. Yes, Glenn had to bowl 16.4 overs before taking a wicket, on average, during the period in which batting was at its hardest, while the little jockey who's ears account for half his body weight (despite this handicap) was on average taking a wicket once every 7.3 overs. Go figure...wait, I'll do it for you. It means Ajit is better.

I also discovered that Ajit is a much more competitive player in times of turmoil. Any cricket lover knows the confidence sapping effect of losing the toss. Well, when India loses the toss, our favourite little man manages to get back up on the horse and fight on, averaging 11 runs less per wicket when Sourav does the wrong thing by his team. Yet McGrath slumps, not showing the fighting character when things aren't going Australia's way and averages 2 runs per wicket more when his captain has lost the toss. So it can be concluded that McGrath is just a frontrunner who's fantastic when things are going his way, but can't fight back from adversity, unlike our 'Git.

The final, and many would say the most damning, statistic I would like to bring to your attention (although I do have many more, its just that after Jack's Late Night Theses, numero due I was made aware in no uncertain terms *cough*Deja Moo*cough* that if its too long, people won't bother reading it ....shush, Deja, it was clearly implied ) is that Agarkar clearly outshines McGrath in respect to their records versus the powerhouse Bangladesh. Now, after my esteemed colleague SJS, the widely recognised guru of statistics, proved that Bangladesh are a greater side than Australia, we see that Bangladesh are effectively the number 1 ranked side in the world. Therefore, when comparing their record against the best, we see that Glenn McGrath averages a reasonable 24.8, but yet it seems grotesquely large and obsolete in comparison to the Great AA's average of 21 versus the benchmark of world cricket. Agarkar also takes a wicket against Bangladesh every 63 balls, outshining one G. McGrath by three balls, and despite all this talk about McGrath's supposed miserlyness, the real scrooge is Agarkar, who's economy rate against the best is only 2 runs per over. It is these statistics that show that, even when McGrath does do well, Agarkar outpoints him, especially against the better competition.

Simply put, Agarkar completely pantses Glenn McGrath in all aspects of bowling. So while Glenn runs round the pool table with his pants round his ankles, we can further bathe in the glory of the Great One's triumph. Despite Ajit coming up against so many hardships, the main being asked, "Excuse me Mr. Dettori/Oliver/Cochrane/Yoda, can you please sign this for my brother?" all the time, he has in his thus far limited opportunites risen above the cream, above the hot air, and has hit his head upon the roof. So it is with such confidence that I point out that Ajit Agarkar will soon regain his spot in the Indian line-up, as I have it on good word that Greg Chappell is a massive fan of this column and in particular SJS' work (damn I want Son of Coco's vacated job )

Pity he stopped coming here when he saw the logic behind the "first chance theory"...and realised he'd have a career average of 22.3

[SJS]

Some brilliant stuff there :

- When one breaks his stats down into his record in each test, his record in the 1st test outstrips that of his 2nd, his 2nd outshines his 3rd, and it continually gets worse

- give the guy a break, he is 4'2 and weighs 19kg

- the little jockey who's ears account for half his body weight

- Despite Agit coming up against so many hardships, the main being asked, "Excuse me Mr. Dettori/Oliver/Cochrane/Yoda

I think the brilliance of your oratory outstrips your analytical strengths. I suggest you consider writing editorials for us.