West Indies Attacks early 80s vs present English attack

[greg]

Which is why i suppose almost all bookies give odds based on statistical simulation models and not just what they feel, correct ?
.

Could have sworn I said that.

Anyway I'm going to slightly change tack here because I'm getting tied in knots, arguing something i do not believe. A good model will work, on average. No model is infallible, and can be undone if one can pick up on information not taken account for by the model. As usual you mistake "intuition" for evidence of the eyes. If you are a good judge then the evidence of your eyes can be just as important, if not more so, than the statistics. Anyway we have got stuck into this argument about the value of mathematical modelling, more because I have disagreed with your use of statistics. (triggered by the whole argument over which results (against which countries) should be taken note of). You may be an advocate of mathematical modelling. It does not automatically follow that your models are to be trusted.

That is yet another hyperbole.
Clearly you havnt watched Lara or Tendulkar's duels with Warney in the 90s or from a few years back.

But then you haven't watched the Oval test. So whether it's hyperbole or not you aren't in a position to say.

 

[C_C]

And that's also getting carried away.

2 great bowlers, 1 who never actually played enough games to prove himself at that level and some pie chuckers.

2 great bowlers, who are better than any england has to offer right now and a pie chucker who is in the same league as Giles.With the other two being in the vicinity of Hoggard and Harmison.

 

[C_C]

3 Tests, 3 Wickets, 300 runs.

Not at all comparable.

0 tests, 0 wickets 0 runs for all. very much comparable, mr 'current'.


Look, i would like you to ask this - go to ANY research firm who specialise in modelling and predicting the future. ASK them if your method even compares to mine.Come back and let us know what they said. Thank you very much.

 

[C_C]

If you are a good judge then the evidence of your eyes can be just as important, if not more so, than the statistics. Anyway we have got stuck into this argument about the value of mathematical modelling, more because I have disagreed with your use of statistics. (triggered by the whole argument over which results (against which countries) should be taken note of). You may be an advocate of mathematical modelling. It does not automatically follow that your models are to be trusted.

ANY modelling relies on established trends and data to predict a future trajectory. Its very much like working out where the missile will land- your model is completely irrelevant without knowing the initial trajectory. You are doing it too with your intuitive feel- only that with my mathematical approach, my data is far more concise and accurate than your's. As per whether my models are to be trusted or not, i will leave that for you to find out. I am an engineer and analysis is the stream i am concentrating on. I will leave you to take my modelling technique to an actual real life real world research firm and see if they consider your stuff as more credible or not.

 

[marc71178]

0 tests, 0 wickets 0 runs for all. very much comparable, mr 'current'.


Look, i would like you to ask this - go to ANY research firm who specialise in modelling and predicting the future. ASK them if your method even compares to mine.Come back and let us know what they said. Thank you very much.

Predicting the future when the event you're talking about has already happened.

I'm sure research firms wouldn't find it too hard to work it out.

And as for the current form, do you enjoy making yourself look like such an idiot or does it come naturally?

 

[C_C]

Predicting the future when the event you're talking about has already happened.

I'm sure research firms wouldn't find it too hard to work it out.

And as for the current form, do you enjoy making yourself look like such an idiot or does it come naturally?

I am sure a research firm ( considering that i have WORKED for one) would not attach much value to a small sample space of data ( 3 tests ) for application of a futuristic modelling ( if Gillespie should or shouldnt walk into the english lineup next match provided he was english).

As for current form, you are the one being an idiot here, i am subtly ( guess it flew over your head) trying to point out to you that your definition of 'current' is utter tosh- current can be defined as instantaneous, over the last 1 match, 1 year, 2 years or 5 years.
But then again, i suppose you wouldnt know much about the concept of current and the implications of the word current.

 

[marc71178]

Nobody is even talking about the future though - so what relvance is that to the discussion?

We're talking about right now - and you can be a pedant all you like, but it won't change a thing - it is obvious to everybody what is meant by current - and you being a smartarse about both that and with all your theories means absolutely nothing because anyone can see something that happened between 4 and 8 years ago with completely different teams has no effect on what will happen in the future (as clearly shown by the recent Ashes series)

 

[C_C]

We're talking about right now - and you can be a pedant all you like, but it won't change a thing - it is obvious to everybody what is meant by current - and you being a smartarse about both that and with all your theories means absolutely nothing because anyone can see something that happened between 4 and 8 years ago with completely different teams has no effect on what will happen in the future

Dont presume to speak for others. Speak for yourself.

Any modelling for AT THE MOMENT will use a select sample space FROM THE PAST to determine the veracity of the modelling and the veracity of your modelling ( take it from someone who actually DOES modelling for a job and research paper) is utter tosh. If you dont believe me, like i said, pop into a research firm or ask a professor whether your idea has any merit or not.

And yes, england had a totally different team from 2 years ago. 2 years is nothing in test cricket and therefore, i said that there has to be a BIGGER SAMPLE SPACE for one to draw the obtusely jingoistic conclusion you and some englismen here are drawing.

 

[aussie]

Comparing Flintoff- Giles- Harmison-Hoggard-Jones to Roberts-Garner-Marshall-Holding-Croft-etc. is sheer folly at this stage.

word out.....

 

[aussie]

Now that i don't agree with.

well its true take out this series & his performaces for Australia have been top-class, no english bowler comes close as yet.....

 

[aussie]

The funniest post of the lot.

he's got the right idea though....

 

[Slifer]

To be fair, the thread starter IS from Florida.

(You need to be a Farker to understand that)

Im not from Florida yute Im from the Caribbean aka the West Indies.

 

[Slifer]

Oh and to add I never once compared the WI attacks to this England attack but I have heard several (especially in the media) comparing the two. Ian Botham springs to mind as well as Langer.

 

[greg]

Oh and to add I never once compared the WI attacks to this England attack but I have heard several (especially in the media) comparing the two. Ian Botham springs to mind as well as Langer.

Like I said people have not been directly comparing them in terms of quality, but in effect. And in Langer's case it is difficult to imagine him being hit more often by any attack, however great, than he has been this summer.

 

[luckyeddie]

Im not from Florida yute Im from the Caribbean aka the West Indies.

Oh, dear.

In which case you have no excuse for starting such a thread ( ).

Of course there's no comparison between the two attacks, other than the fact that both sides employed 4 quicks.

 

[C_C]

They are nowhere near the effect either.
I have clips of Holding bowling to Boycott or to Close.....he nearly killed Brian Close and Boycott was shaking when he walked off the pitch... West Indies four prong hit almost every batsman if they lasted more than 30-40 minutes on the crease...the only one i can remember who rarely got hit was Gavaskar. As per Langer getting hit, i remember seeing his debut match in Adelaide where he cropped atleast half a dozen serious blows in the second innings alone.

 

[Swervy]

They are nowhere near the effect either.
I have clips of Holding bowling to Boycott or to Close.....he nearly killed Brian Close and Boycott was shaking when he walked off the pitch... West Indies four prong hit almost every batsman if they lasted more than 30-40 minutes on the crease...the only one i can remember who rarely got hit was Gavaskar. As per Langer getting hit, i remember seeing his debut match in Adelaide where he cropped atleast half a dozen serious blows in the second innings alone.

the boycott over...did you see how pitchs in the WIs were prepared back then..also you have to take into account how the short pitched bowling law was different then...a great over with the odds firmly stacked in Holdings favour.

 

[C_C]

the boycott over...did you see how pitchs in the WIs were prepared back then..also you have to take into account how the short pitched bowling law was different then...a great over with the odds firmly stacked in Holdings favour.

Err. I dont see how the bouncer rule had anything to do with it.....only two deliveries that over were bouncers....other were all just short of good length rib-ticklers, something that is very much allowed under the current bouncer rules.

 

[Swervy]

Err. I dont see how the bouncer rule had anything to do with it.....only two deliveries that over were bouncers....other were all just short of good length rib-ticklers, something that is very much allowed under the current bouncer rules.

it does have something to do with it because the batsmen back then were expecting a bouncer pretty much every ball. This affects how you play each individual ball , with a reluctance to play each ball on its merits (ie you will tend to the playing for the short ball all the time, especially on those pitches, which were geared completely towards express pace).
A batsman can play forward with more confidence these days (or at least attempt to make an initial movement forward, which opens up more options for a batsman, which is one of the reasons for todays batting superiority...which is why it is futile to compare players from this generation and previous ones, we simply do not know how the bowlers of today would manage in those more bowler friendly times)

 

[greg]

No helmets either.