Page 22 of 50 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 316 to 330 of 740

Thread: The stats do not do him justice!

  1. #316
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,613
    Despite the fact that all of the bowlers I listed have decent records?

  2. #317
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91 View Post
    Despite the fact that all of the bowlers I listed have decent records?
    SA didn't have a good bowling attack until the 50s, with Adcock, Heine, Tayfield.

    WI didn't have a good bowling attack until the 60s, with Hall, Griffith, Gibbs. Although you could argue the spin duo of Valentine/Ramadin had their moments in the 50s.

    IND clearly didn't have a good bowling attack until the arrival of the "magic 4" in the late 60s, which did wonders in the 70s. Mankad was definately a top bowler, but most of his heroics with the ball came after Bradman retired.

    Unfortunately the only top attacks Bradman faced was ENG & O'Reilly & Grimmett in the competitive AUS domestic competitions.

    But in saying that i'm not in rivera's camp, that believes Tendy was better than Bradman.

  3. #318
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,934
    I don't know much about the bowling attacks listed by wdfu_ben but I understand that Constantine was pretty handy.

    Besides The Sean makes the killer point which was that England had the best bowlers in the world throughout that period (Grimmett and O'Reilly excepted) and Bradman had to face them disproportionately often.

  4. #319
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    One of your consistent theories, Richard, but one which puzzles me. Didn't Viv Richards control the game? Didn't Ian Botham? Didn't (urgh) Matt Hayden? Didn't Gilchrist? Didn't Boycott or Atherton or Kirsten?
    A truly once-in-several generations talent like Richards or Gilchrist, in their brief on-peak years (Richards '76 and '79-'81, and Gilchrist '99/00-'03), might just have done - the case that almost whatever you bowled, it was going. However, Hayden emphatically didn't - if you could bowl a decent well-directed inswinger at a reasonable pace he was a sitting-duck to you. Nor did virtually anyone else - it just isn't possible.

    The likes of Boycott, Atherton and Kirsten very rarely scored especially quickly, and thus don't fit the mould that people are arguing in favour of - ie, that aggressive batsmen can just play shots to whatever they want and they thus have complete control. Even in their own way - being difficult to lure into indiscretions - they did not exactly control the game, as bowlers could still get them out by bowling the outstanding ball (sometimes it required that to dismiss all three, and many besides)
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #320
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Briony View Post
    I'm actually going on the heights of the bowlers who presented but is reasonably well documented that people have become progressively taller over the past couple of centuries. Most children are taller than their parents, though this is expected to plateau as better nutrition etc. has levelled things out.
    That doesn't mean there was no-one of especially tall height in the 1930s!
    As for more dropped catches now, you might find statistics to bear this out but there is also an argument to be mounted that more catches are gone for. Players today dive full length and being taller on average reach for catches that would have been bypassed in days of yore. The dive for more on the boundary, even in terms of stopping shots. Most commenators who have witnessed or played in earlier eras will habitually point this out.
    More catches may be gone for, but something that's nowhere near the reach of a fielder remains the same, and an easy catch remains an easy catch.
    If you read reports of all Bradman's innings, what sticks out is how often he was dropped. Remember they were at best semi-professionals and there wasn't the emphasis there is today on fielding.
    Never come accross such a thing myself.
    Another point of interest is the LBW rule. Most old-timers are quite bemused at how many are given today and how they actually give LBs when the batsman is on the front-foot which was a non-existent dismissal as recently as the 60s (according to those who played and watched during that era), let alone the 30s. Batsmen could be hit on the pads with impunity, it had to be absolutely plumb before the umpire would consider raising the finger.
    The lbw law is one thing that's undoubtedly gone much more in favour of bowlers; the vast reduction in uneven bounce of pitches has gone the other way.
    I must admit, when I look at the footage from the 30s, a lot of the bowlers look like out and out pie chuckers.
    Grainy black-and-white footage sometimes has that effect. Anyhow, there is no reason to believe the best bowlers bowled much if at all less well than they do now.

  6. #321
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91 View Post
    If batting is so easy in the modern era then how come Tendulkar has only relied on good scores against Bangladesh & Zimbabwe to average over 50 since 2000? By your illogical comparisons, this just proves Tendulkar would've been nothing more then a footnote if he played in the same era as Bradman.
    Actually it doesn't. Any fool who has watched Tendulkar could see quite clearly that he declined massively in 2003 and has only fairly recently begun to play even remotely close (and still a fair way behind) how he played 1990-2002.

  7. #322
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Actually it doesn't. Any fool who has watched Tendulkar could see quite clearly that he declined massively in 2003 and has only fairly recently begun to play even remotely close (and still a fair way behind) how he played 1990-2002.
    But if batting is so easy as you claim it is in post 2001, then despite the decline Tendulkar should've been able to maintain his brilliance from the 90s.

  8. #323
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91 View Post
    But if batting is so easy as you claim it is in post 2001, then despite the decline Tendulkar should've been able to maintain his brilliance from the 90s.
    His tennis-elbow woes would have clearly affected that between probably ENG 02 to about PAK 07/08. From the AUS tour, Tendy has been showing sings of a renaisance of his 90s self.

  9. #324
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,934
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    A truly once-in-several generations talent like Richards or Gilchrist, in their brief on-peak years (Richards '76 and '79-'81, and Gilchrist '99/00-'03), might just have done - the case that almost whatever you bowled, it was going. However, Hayden emphatically didn't - if you could bowl a decent well-directed inswinger at a reasonable pace he was a sitting-duck to you. Nor did virtually anyone else - it just isn't possible.
    I just don't agree. A batsman who flays an attack will seize control from the fielding side. I've seen it happen literally hundreds of times.

    And your reference to those players' peaks misses the point. A player can be far from his peak and yet play an exceptional or controlling innings. Eg Viv Richards at Antigua in 1986 when he was, by your reckoning (and I'm not particularly disagreeing), not at his peak. The point about his career peak is that this is the time when the likelihood of such an innings is at its greatest. But all sorts of players, whether at their peak or not, have played controlling innings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    The likes of Boycott, Atherton and Kirsten very rarely scored especially quickly, and thus don't fit the mould that people are arguing in favour of - ie, that aggressive batsmen can just play shots to whatever they want and they thus have complete control. Even in their own way - being difficult to lure into indiscretions - they did not exactly control the game, as bowlers could still get them out by bowling the outstanding ball (sometimes it required that to dismiss all three, and many besides)
    I watched McKenzie and Smith at Lord's last year batting in a Boycott/Kirsten mode. And believe me, they controlled the game.

  10. #325
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    I just don't agree. A batsman who flays an attack will seize control from the fielding side. I've seen it happen literally hundreds of times.

    And your reference to those players' peaks misses the point. A player can be far from his peak and yet play an exceptional or controlling innings. Eg Viv Richards at Antigua in 1986 when he was, by your reckoning (and I'm not particularly disagreeing), not at his peak. The point about his career peak is that this is the time when the likelihood of such an innings is at its greatest. But all sorts of players, whether at their peak or not, have played controlling innings.
    Gilchrist vs. England at Perth, 2006.

  11. #326
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Colombo, SL
    Posts
    5,740
    Quote Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91 View Post
    Despite the fact that all of the bowlers I listed have decent records?
    West Indian bowling before the series

    Code:
    Player		Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR
    HC Griffith	35	29.62	2.81	63.2
    LN Constantine	26	38.65	3.23	71.7
    OC Scott	20	40.3	3.98	60.6
    GN Francis	19	30.52	2.84	64.3
    CA Roach	2	51.5	2.78	111
    FR Martin	1	417	2.79	894
    LS Birkett	1	59	3.1	114
    JED Sealy	0	-	10.66	-
    GA Headley	0	-	3.34	-
    GC Grant	0	-	1	-

    SAF bowling before the series

    Code:
    Player		Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR
    CL Vincent	57	25.71	2.46	62.5
    AJ Bell		19	36.57	2.78	78.9
    DPB Morkel	17	39.94	2.79	85.7
    NA Quinn	15	39.73	2.68	88.7
    Q McMillan	13	49.46	3.42	86.6
    HW Taylor	5	31.2	2.73	68.4
    JAJ Christy	2	33.5	3.72	54
    B Mitchell	2	78	3.83	122
    IND bowling before the series

    Code:
    Player		Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR
    L Amarnath	21	25.09	2.05	73
    MH Mankad	14	28.92	2.18	79.3
    CS Nayudu	2	123	3.78	195
    VS Hazare	2	121	3.05	238
    CT Sarwate	1	28	2.04	82
    SW Sohoni	0	-	2.49	-
    Gul Mohammad	0	-	1	-
    Not a single 25- average bowler in those sides. Closest is CL Vincent.
    All those bowling figures does not show even a glimpse of a good attack.
    Diuretics are used to look good at TV shows

    I played for 20 years in the Lankan team, I did not have any problems as a Tamil - Muralidaran

  12. #327
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Migara View Post
    Not a single 25- average bowler in those sides.
    You highlighted two.

  13. #328
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Colombo, SL
    Posts
    5,740
    Quote Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91 View Post
    You highlighted two.
    You just missed the small hyphen after 25 showing it was <25.

  14. #329
    International Regular Beleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    3,437
    definitely inzamam. easily among the top three most talented batsmen of his generation (tendulkar and lara being the other two). just didn't perform as well as he could have.

  15. #330
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Migara View Post
    You just missed the small hyphen after 25 showing it was <25.
    To be fair, Ben said they were decent - which they are. I'd say in most people's books 25 and under would be really pushing amongst greats.
    ★★★★★

Page 22 of 50 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cricket Web - Stats Spider
    By James in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 06-05-2013, 09:38 PM
  2. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-01-2007, 12:40 PM
  3. Cricket Web - Stats Spider
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29-12-2006, 04:53 AM
  4. Help with Stats
    By Simon in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 23-04-2006, 09:38 PM
  5. Player Stats
    By Simon in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-01-2005, 03:00 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •