Page 3 of 50 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 740

Thread: The stats do not do him justice!

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Smithsonian
    Posts
    641
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    Sure, dream. But those sort of dreams are not the basis upon which to say "Sachin's career record underrates how good he is".
    To an extent, yes. There is nothing more than speculation to suggest otherwise.

  2. #32
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Umar Gul. Was reading this and thought it was spot on and he gives another solid performance today. His stats don't do him justice and he is perhaps one of the most underrated cricketer of our times.

  3. #33
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Smith View Post
    He averaged nearly 60 in Australia and more than 60 in England and those two countries make up about 70% of total cricket played by a consistent Aussie cricketer. So the argument that had he played for Australia, the averages could have been more than 60, is very much valid.
    Please do not make this another thread about Tendulkar.

  4. #34
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,934
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanz View Post
    Please do not make this another thread about Tendulkar.
    Absolutely agree 100% with this. It's so desperately dull seeing every bloody thread turned into an analysis of Sachin Bloody Tendulkar.


  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Smithsonian
    Posts
    641
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    Absolutely agree 100% with this. It's so desperately dull seeing every bloody thread turned into an analysis of Sachin Bloody Tendulkar.
    Yet another reason he is so underrated.

  6. #36
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    I think people pretty much get what they deserve. Even the most talented people have technical issues that would have to be ignored to project them higher.

    A guy like Tendulkar plays with an angled bat off the back foot. That isnt an issue when he is 'in form' but it hurts him when he is a little out of form.

    Botham had a batting technique well suited to the medium/quicks but he didnt get properly into line against the express bowlers and consequently he never knew where his off stump was.

    Rhodes was a technical mess and a substandard Test cricketer until he was properly tutored.

    etc

    I think it is often too easy to overlook the deficiencies in certain players and then revise history as to what our expectations should have been.

    For example Andy Caddick, on his day, was unplayable. Fast, bounce, swing, venom: he could have averaged low 20s in Test cricket. However, his failings meant that was not possible.
    Completely agree with this. Stats aren't everything, but they're the bottom line. How many runs you score is a better judge of how good a player you were than how effortless you scored your boundaries or how classical your cover-drive looked. Everyone gets what they deserve.
    Ind33d. (To an extent, anyway - obviously an occasional player will have an amount of luck far above-average, whether some people like that or not.)

    The "stats do not do justice" idea is simply a don't-go-there. Stats show what happened. "Stats do not tell the full story" is a much fairer phrase - because there is always more to a player than purely what his contributions to wins and losses are. Even if Ian Bell is an infinitely lesser batsman than Kevin Pietersen, he'll always be an infinitely more attractive one. And some players' runs can merely win a game; some players' runs can win a game and win a thousand hearts to boot.

    It's in this way that cricket is about more than just stats. But how good someone is is about precious little besides. Though clearly an overall career average is a pretty meaningless thing, and always needs closer examination before real truths can be discerned.
    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

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Gooch too. 42.5-ish doesn't really reflect how dominant he was for the middle portion of his career.
    End portion, more like. However, the figures from said portion - 1990-1994 - do indeed do precisely such a thing. Ditto Tendulkar's 1990-2002.

    Don't confuse the meaninglessness of a banal career average with the meaningfulness of stats, which are so much more than overall career averages.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Smithsonian
    Posts
    641
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanz View Post
    Please do not make this another thread about Tendulkar.
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    End portion, more like. However, the figures from said portion - 1990-1994 - do indeed do precisely such a thing. Ditto Tendulkar's 1990-2002.

    Don't confuse the meaninglessness of a banal career average with the meaningfulness of stats, which are so much more than overall career averages.

  9. #39
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Even if Ian Bell is an infinitely lesser batsman than Kevin Pietersen, he'll always be an infinitely more attractive one.
    Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat!
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  10. #40
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,934
    I was going to pick up on that too. I didn't, because I accept that if it's a pretty technique you're after, Bell is hard to beat. But to my mind Penisen is one of the most watchable batsmen I've ever seen.

  11. #41
    RTDAS pasag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Looking for milksteak
    Posts
    31,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanz View Post
    Umar Gul. Was reading this and thought it was spot on and he gives another solid performance today. His stats don't do him justice and he is perhaps one of the most underrated cricketer of our times.
    Yeah, I remember praising him a while back (couple of years ago now) on the forum and getting shot down. Fantastic player. Let's hope he remains fit and doesn't have to bowl on too many more disgustingly flat tracks.
    Rest In Peace Craigos
    2003-2012

  12. #42
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,519
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    I was going to pick up on that too. I didn't, because I accept that if it's a pretty technique you're after, Bell is hard to beat. But to my mind Penisen is one of the most watchable batsmen I've ever seen.
    Even in terms of technique i find KP much better. His signature shot, effortlessly pushing it through midwicket for four off the back foot, is better than anything Bell can play.

  13. #43
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Locked up inside my opium den, surrounded by some Chinamen
    Posts
    45,084
    Quote Originally Posted by pasag View Post
    Yeah, I remember praising him a while back (couple of years ago now) on the forum and getting shot down. Fantastic player. Let's hope he remains fit and doesn't have to bowl on too many more disgustingly flat tracks.
    I've offered my meagre stamp of approval before now too. Carried Pakistan's attack pretty much single handed in 2006 up here (until Asif returned for the forfeit anyway) and looks to have added a yard since then too without sacrificing his movement or accuracy.

    Hope something can be done regarding Pakistan playing tests up here (or anyway else, come to that) becuase it'd be a travesty if Gul loses his best years through no fault of his own.
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "The committee discussed the issue of illegal bowling actions, and believed that there are a number of bowlers currently employing suspect actions in international cricket, and that the ICC's reporting and testing procedures are not adequately scrutinising these bowlers."
    - Even the ICC's own official press release thinks things must change

  14. #44
    U19 Vice-Captain rivera213's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    London
    Posts
    503
    Umar Gul is an excellent limited overs bowler. I don't think he is great in the test format imo, though he can swing the ball and is much better now than when we faced him in 2006.

    I don't know when the next schedule series against Pakistan is, but I'm sure he'll be more of a handful this time around.

    ------

    As for the issue of stats showing what happened, I disagree. Stats do not take into account things such as match situations, pressure (especially in Sachin's case since he is bigger than Hinduism in India! Lol), quality of bowling faced etc.

    Stats also don't tell you how fine a player a person was. I'm talking simply aesthetics but also the ability to time the first good length ball for a drive down the ground, being able to completely smother the best spinners of all time on a turning dust bucket etc.

    Tendulkar for me, based on what I've seen (and I've seen all the bad of Tendulkar whereas I've only seen the good from Pollock, both Richards, Sobers, Bradman, Gavaskar etc and no play and misses, no mistimed shots etc. Only the dismissals) is No.1 and IMO deserves a much greater average than all of those I mentioned.

    He at the very least deserves an average way above that of Ricky Ponting who has only cashed in during the batting era and after a great start from the openers more often than not.

    I kind of agree with Richard on the subject of Ian Bell. I think aesthetically he is better than PIetersen (and even Viv Richards) when he's driving good length deliveries as though it's second nature.

    I think KP and Viv are more talented since both can/could take a ball on a good length from outside off stump and whip it through the leg side. That requires a lot of skill. But either of those were as pleasing on the eye through the off side as Bell (on form) is IMHO.
    All-Time Test XI:
    Gavaskar, Boycott, Tendulkar, G.Pollock, V.Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist (wk), Warne (c), Waqar/Wasim, Lillee, Ambrose.

  15. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Smithsonian
    Posts
    641

Page 3 of 50 FirstFirst 1234513 ... 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
  •