Harris vs. Hauritz vs. Swann

[Streetwise]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

Well if the stats say Hauritz is better then he must be hey, STATS ARE LAW

Stats just tell you what the player has done, It seems a defense mechanism is triggered whenever stats are mentioned. When the stats are at odds with someones opinion the first thing to do is declare that the person mentioning the stats thinks stats are everything.

The only thing I notice about stats is that the better a players stats are the better the player. I cant think of one great player that does not have great stats.

[Uppercut]

That's because great players generally play in more than 12 matches. Plenty of all-time great bowlers have averaged over 30 for one 12-match period. Variance. Just because two players have similar stats after 12 matches doesn't mean they're similar quality.

But you can show Swann's superiority statistically anyway. Batsmen average 37.10 in matches involving Swann and 32.66 in matches involving Hauritz. In other words, Swann's bowled on much, much more batsman-friendly pitches than Hauritz has, but they both come out with the same average. Something that anyone who's followed both their careers will know anyway, but it's good to show it in numbers.

[vic_orthdox]

I reckon Swann's a better bowler, not by that much though. And I'm just really enjoying watching a guy grow into his role as a Test cricketer, especially one who copped a lot of unfair criticism. Sheffield Shield cricket is pretty unforgiving as a spinner, and I think a lot of people forget that.

They also don't understand that subtlety is the greatest variation a spinner can have, and that's something that doesn't get picked up by armchair critics.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

But you can show Swann's superiority statistically anyway. Batsmen average 37.10 in matches involving Swann and 32.66 in matches involving Hauritz. In other words, Swann's bowled on much, much more batsman-friendly pitches than Hauritz has, but they both come out with the same average. Something that anyone who's followed both their careers will know anyway, but it's good to show it in numbers.

If batsmen are averaging 5 more runs in matches involving Swann can we then assume Hauritz is better as Swann is obviously leaking runs somewhere?

[GIMH]

I don't think Uppercut's post is fair on Hauritz; it's hardly his fault that he plays all of his matches alongside that paper-thin batting line-up that is the Australian middle order.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

If batsmen are averaging 5 more runs in matches involving Swann can we then assume Hauritz is better as Swann is obviously leaking runs somewhere?

Haha you what?

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

I don't think Uppercut's post is fair on Hauritz; it's hardly his fault that he plays all of his matches alongside that paper-thin batting line-up that is the Australian middle order.

It's not 'paper thin' it's 're-designed for success'. Don't think we didn't notice that 2 centuries was the magic number when it came to winning series. How many centuries have we scored this summer? 2! And we've won both series. Shane Watson should be applauded for not ****ing it up by getting the tally to 5 or 6 and resigning us to defeat.

I'm just worried we'll get ahead of ourselves now and score 15 in the next Ashes series to a paltry 1 (by Jimmy Anderson) yet in between somehow manage to get bowled out twice for 78 or less and lose the series again.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

It's not 'paper thin' it's 're-designed for success'. Don't think we didn't notice that 2 centuries was the magic number when it came to winning series. How many centuries have we scored this summer? 2! And we've won both series. Shane Watson should be applauded for not ****ing it up by getting the tally to 5 or 6 and resigning us to defeat.

I'm just worried we'll get ahead of ourselves now and score 15 in the next Ashes series to a paltry 1 (by Jimmy Anderson) yet in between somehow manage to get bowled out twice for 78 or less and lose the series again.

Here mate, think you might like this

[Jono]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

I don't think Uppercut's post is fair on Hauritz; it's hardly his fault that he plays all of his matches alongside that paper-thin batting line-up that is the Australian middle order.

Lol that actually was very good.

Anyway, I think Hauritz cops way too much criticism, but I've watched enough cricket to know that Swann is the better bowler.

Give this 12-18 months and I believe this will be clear. If not, well good for you Hauritz.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

Haha you what?

To be honest, I find watching off-spinners a bit boring (sorry Jack!). I think it's the years of being spoilt by Warney. Anything else is a bit of a letdown. Wasn't that impressed by Swann in The Ashes, and am pleased that Hauritz is doing better than was predicted for Australia.

Who's better? I'm struggling to muster up the breath to care really. I do hope Swann gets a hiding out here in Oz though.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

To be honest, I find watching off-spinners a bit boring (sorry Jack!). I think it's the years of being spoilt by Warney. Anything else is a bit of a letdown. Wasn't that impressed by Swann in The Ashes, and am pleased that Hauritz is doing better than was predicted for Australia.

Who's better? I'm struggling to muster up the breath to care really. I do hope Swann gets a hiding out here in Oz though.

Yeah, he was awful at Cardiff and after that up and down. Must have found him to have bowled well in your unsuccessful fourth innings chases though?

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

Here mate, think you might like this

I'm not sure what that is, it looks like a glass of dirty bathwater. Lovely table though it must be said. Is this something off 'Antique Roadshow'?

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

I'm not sure what that is, it looks like a glass of dirty bathwater. Lovely table though it must be said. Is this something off 'Antique Roadshow'?

Is a (admittedly flat and minging-looking) pint of bitter tbh

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

Yeah, he was awful at Cardiff and after that up and down. Must have found him to have bowled well in your unsuccessful fourth innings chases though?

Given we got about 400 in them I didn't take a lot of notice (time zones played their part too, couldn't stay up too late with work on). As I said in my post, I don't generally get too excited by off-spinners. But that's a greater reflection on me than off-spinners and their talents obviously! If it's turning a fair bit then I'll watch them with interest, otherwise I'm probably off doing something else and waiting for a noise from the TV to suggest something's happened.

I'm sure he bowls well though, he must do. I just don't appreciate it as much as bigger turners of the ball and the fast men. He's also a better bowler than Hauritz, but Hauritz isn't as bad as some people make out. Swann is flashier, but part of that's down to his teeth.

Have to go and watch some clips of Warney now to cleanse my mind of this off-spin talk!

[GIMH]

I'd never really seen Hauritz bowl before the Ashes. Upon hearing all the talk of him I expected to see the sort of delivery that I tend to send down, so he certainly is a LOT better than people make out. I do actually think he's a good bowler, I just think Swannehhhh is better, but then Swannehhhhh is the Bradman of bowling so it's all good