Vaas vs Srinath vs Lee vs Zaheer vs Sobers

[Ikki]

Let me make another comparison: Let's say batsman A and B both face the the WIndian quartet. Batsman A averages 60 against them over 20 tests. Batsman B averages 51 over 2. Are they comparable? Did they share similar success? Is it accurate to make out as if the two achieved the same feat; even if one more than the other? Do we say 1-1 because they both averaged 50+?

 

[Sir Alex]

I'm clearly talking about overall average.

The Lee/Vaas thing is just a smaller argument within an argument; but we both know they are of the same quality. One just played one team very few times while the other played them plenty more.

And not just any teams...teams you expect them to thrash on.

Nothing there to respond to

Lee has played 7 tests in all 4 countries in the subcontinent you and your drivel again. The only one he played near enough was India. The rest 3 tests for 3 teams.

Difference is he failed uniformally in the subcontinent no matter who opposition was. Add to that UAE (which has the same conditions) and he failed there too.

If you're preparing to exclude the subcontinent as you said 7 tests is not enough, let me exclude Vaas' England, Australia, SA records as well.

Haha, that is YOUR reasoning, not mine. The only teams we were removing in that discussion were MINNOWS. Richards didn't play ANY minnows in his era. Tendulkar played 2. That is why we removed them and none else. I've already gone to explain why I place minnows in a completely different category. Yet you tried to use their removal as reason to remove both SA and Sri Lanka in a sly way to improve Tendulkar's record.

Richards didn't face anybody like Donald/Pollock as well. He never faced Murali as well. If you check out Sachin has a tremendous record against SL, so there goes your bias argument out of the window.


No it doesn't...you know why? Because I wasn't daft enough to go about how one is better country by country when one of the players in question hasn't played more than 7 tests in 4 of the countries. The argument Avada made and you are desperately trying to validate.

If I had said Tendulkar failed against SA and Richards never played them so 1-0 to Richards...then you'd have a point.[/QUOTE]

 

[Ikki]

Difference is he failed uniformally in the subcontinent no matter who opposition was. Add to that UAE (which has the same conditions) and he failed there too.

If you're preparing to exclude the subcontinent as you said 7 tests is not enough, let me exclude Vaas' England, Australia, SA records as well.

He uniformly barely played there. He played as many tests in the WIndies alone.

Richards didn't face anybody like Donald/Pollock as well. He never faced Murali as well. If you check out Sachin has a tremendous record against SL, so there goes your bias argument out of the window.

You mean except for Lillee/Thommo, Imran/Sarfraz, Hadlee, Chandra, Bedi, etc.

Sri Lanka were a weak attack until the last decade.

Had you said "Tendulkar played in a more competitive era where there were more quality bowlers" you'd have had people giving more than enough consideration to that when looking at his record. However, you went and stat-fixed by removing Sri Lanka and S.Africa to make his average higher after having removed B/Z when it went lower. Essentially, you removed 4/9 teams he faced

 

[Sir Alex]

He uniformly barely played there. He played as many tests in the WIndies alone.

Still played less than 7 tests which appears to be your cut off here

You mean except for Lillee/Thommo, Imran/Sarfraz, Hadlee, Chandra, Bedi, etc.

Sure, Ambrose/Walsh/Bishop/Waqar/Wasim/Shane/Murali/McGrath/Donald/Pollock is same as the above..

Sri Lanka were a weak attack until the last decade.

So?

Had you said "Tendulkar played in a more competitive era where there were more quality bowlers" you'd have had people giving more than enough consideration to that when looking at his record. However, you went and stat-fixed by removing Sri Lanka and S.Africa to make his average higher.

Nope, You'd have done exactly the same had Lee averaged 70 against India and Vaas did not play against them. Don't twist it now.

Anyway let's not argue this Sachin vs Richards in this thread.

 

[Ikki]

Still played less than 7 tests which appears to be your cut off here

For one team, more than enough. For 4? Er, no.

Sure, Ambrose/Walsh/Bishop/Waqar/Wasim/Shane/Murali/McGrath/Donald/Pollock is same as the above..

IIRC Viv Also faced Waqar and Wasim. The 80s was probably 2nd to the 90s in the quality attacks. It's more than comparable. That's why you don't remove teams willy nilly.

So?

You mentioned Tendulkar doing well against Sri Lanka. For probably the majority of his career they were a weak side. If you're going to praise Sachin you can give much better examples.

Nope, You'd have done exactly the same had Lee averaged 70 against India and Vaas did not play against them. Don't twist it now.

Anyway let's not argue this Sachin vs Richards in this thread.

Nope, I never have and never do. I have gone to lengths to show in this thread just how consistent I am. Look at what I wrote for Migara.

You don't seem to understand. If I wanted to remove all small samples (to be "fair" or what you deem that to be) it actually improves Lee's record more. If I just accept and remove Sri Lanka, I can also remove ICC, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe all under the same excuse and it will actually improve his record.

You know what's even funnier? Had he done well I'd still remove them because they're minnows and it would inflate his record! The only reason I would keep minnows is if the player played them enough and has poor stats against them. That is when I say "your bad, mate; no excuses".

If I wanted to, I could have easily taken that deal and removed all the teams he didn't play enough. But I didn't and it actually hurt Lee's record.

See, it doesn't hurt to be honest

 

[Sir Alex]

If I wanted to, I could have easily taken that deal and removed all the teams he didn't play enough. But I didn't and it actually hurt Lee's record.

See, it doesn't hurt to be honest

Ignoring the Richards vs Tendulkar thing.

Oops there isn't anything left to respond.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Lee has played 7 tests in all 4 countries in the subcontinent ...

More lies. Lee never played in Pakistan so how is it 4

 

[Burgey]

Hooray! Love this thread this past page or so.
It's like deja vu all over again.

 

[Beleg]

shades of tec and Richard circa 2004. only more eloquently put.

 

[Ikki]

More lies. Lee never played in Pakistan so how is it 4

Geez you're brilliant. Nothing gets past you. I've already said in this thread that Lee hasn't played in Pakistan. I am referring to the fact that in all subcontinental countries (of which there are 4) he has played 7 tests in total. Lee not playing in Pakistan actually helps my argument; why would I lie about it?

 

[ret]

Zaheer (Career SR 60) > Vaas (Career SR 66) is the joke of the millenium

Inserted the parts in bold

 

[Migara]

Joke continues when you consider following.

Avg - Vaas 29.58, Zaheer 32.98
ER - Vaas 2.68, Zaheer 3.32

On your SR thingy, Harbhajan = Kumble because both their SRs is 65.9

 

[ret]

Joke continues when you consider following.

Avg - Vaas 29.58, Zaheer 32.98
ER - Vaas 2.68, Zaheer 3.32

On your SR thingy, Harbhajan = Kumble because both their SRs is 65.9

Forgot to mention, tests against BD and Zim

Vaas - 22
Zak - 13

That would probably explain a slightly better avg. And most quicks bowling a lot in Ind would probably have a higher average considering the nature of the pitches in general. To put that in to perspective

Zak in India - Avg 37
Vaas in India - Avg 41

That's not all, talking abt Avg/SR in some of the other countries

in Australia (avg/SR)
Zak - 40/57
Vaas 42/84

in Eng
Zak - 29/59
Vaas - 78/159

in NZ
Zak - 23/42
Vaas - 23/48

in SA
Zak - 39/67
Vaas - 47/89

I am not going to get in to this childish debate. You are free to think Vaas is better but that would be the joke (if chosing one over the other is one), imo!

 

[Migara]

Now what happened to stats in SL, PAK and other countries?

 

[satyam]

I think people should also add Heath streak(ZIM) to this list.He was better bowler than all of the above.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

1.Vaas
2.Srinath
3.Lee
4.Zaheer
5.Sobers

In that order.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

I think people should also add Heath streak(ZIM) to this list.He was better bowler than all of the above.

Agreed.

 

[ret]

Now what happened to stats in SL, PAK and other countries?

Does it really matter how they compare in some of the other countries considering Vaas comparitively poor record in places like Aus, SA and Eng? In short, if you aren't even competing in countries like Aus and SA (where quicks mostly are needed to do the job), along with Eng, then other matters like performances against WI, Zim, BD and Pak become irrlevant. In short, who cares!

 

[Migara]

Does it really matter how they compare in some of the other countries considering Vaas comparitively poor record in places like Aus, SA and Eng? In short, if you aren't even competing in countries like Aus and SA (where quicks mostly are needed to do the job), along with Eng, then other matters like performances against WI, Zim, BD and Pak become irrlevant. In short, who cares!

Performances in AUS, SAF and ENG are preferentially superior to that of SL and PAK?

 

[Athlai]

Haha incredible, not a chance that Vaas may have tailored his type of bowling to excel in home conditions?

Na lets discount it only matters how he did in traditional fast bowling countries, but you know what for the hell of it lets include India, the old seamers paradise.