Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 108

Thread: This obsession with how batsmen would do against all-time great dream lineups...

  1. #16
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    55,200
    I was more speaking in general that people assume previous greats are better than current greats at times. Not really referring to the point about pitches directly.
    "I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."

    Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.

  2. #17
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Just under your skin
    Posts
    5,829
    Good thread.
    Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)

  3. #18
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,916
    This thread would have received no replies back when I first joined CW
    Quote Originally Posted by DingDong View Post
    gimh has now surpassed richard as the greatest cw member ever imo

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  4. #19
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,841
    Don't agree with some bits

    For example:

    Say you play table tennis in a competition
    You do well against the players there
    But then you play in another competition which is of a higher standard and therefore you don't do as well

    Have you simply tailored your game to play against the lesser players and succeed at that level or does your game actually have flaws in it? Thus, it's not unreasonable to assume that (some) batsmen who play against poorer bowlers might not have done so welll against better bowlers/bowler friendly conditions, assuming that such batsmen has examples of failing in conditions during his career that would have suited bowlers of the past.
    Last edited by GotSpin; 21-10-2010 at 07:27 AM.
    Mark Waugh
    "He's [Michael Clarke] on Twitter saying sorry for not walking? Mate if he did that in our side there'd be hell to play. AB would chuck his Twitter box off the balcony or whatever it is. Sorry for not walking? Jesus Christ man."
    Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad
    RIP Craigos


  5. #20
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Agreed, it's all your fault GIMP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  6. #21
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,916
    Quote Originally Posted by Got_Spin View Post
    Don't agree with some bits

    For example:

    Say you play table tennis in a competition
    You do well against the players there
    But then you play in another competition which is of a higher standard and therefore you don't do as well

    Have you simply tailored your game to play against the lesser players and succeed at that level or does your game actually have flaws in it? Thus, it's not unreasonable to assume that (some) batsmen who play against poorer bowlers might not have done so welll against better bowlers/bowler friendly conditions, assuming that such batsmen has examples of failing in conditions during his career that would have suited bowlers of the past.
    Not quite the same, though, is it. If the OP had come out and said that batsmen who do well in state cricket should be thought of as highly as Test cricketers, then fair enough. But clearly the point is that the top echelon of Test cricketers are always brought down with the 'was better back in the day' routine, and it's not really fair.

  7. #22
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,841
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    Not quite the same, though, is it. If the OP had come out and said that batsmen who do well in state cricket should be thought of as highly as Test cricketers, then fair enough. But clearly the point is that the top echelon of Test cricketers are always brought down with the 'was better back in the day' routine, and it's not really fair.
    I think it is fair sometimes - Regardless of whether said modern day batsmen has 'tailored' his game to score runs in the present. Technical flaws aren't going to recover themselves regardless of era.

    ftr - I don't think all modern day batsmen should be brought down. I still believe (in most instances) that if you're good enough to play in one era, you'd probably be good enough in another. However, there are definitely cases where a modern day batsmen has greatly benefited from a lesser supply of quality bowling line ups and bowler friendly wickets that have covered up technical weakness that would otherwise have been exposed. Sure, said batsmen might have been able to cover these flaws up had he been forced to play in such an era, but I still think his average would have been brought down with it.

  8. #23
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    But the point is the batsmen shouldn't be brought down by designing their techniques to play on what's in front of them. If Sehwag began in a different era, being the hard worker he is (and he is, he's obviously honed his game to perfection), probably would have gone about building his technique differently.

    If the wickets today were predominantly green or turners or whatever, the batsmen would change accordingly. You either adapt or fail, and batsmen are always working on new ways to make themselves better to play what's in front of them. It's why you see young players who fail initially in tests returning with some adjustments.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  9. #24
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    But the point is the batsmen shouldn't be brought down by designing their techniques to play on what's in front of them. If Sehwag began in a different era, being the hard worker he is (and he is, he's obviously honed his game to perfection), probably would have gone about building his technique differently.

    If the wickets today were predominantly green or turners or whatever, the batsmen would change accordingly. You either adapt or fail, and batsmen are always working on new ways to make themselves better to play what's in front of them. It's why you see young players who fail initially in tests returning with some adjustments.
    And if a player like you mentioned had to retune his technique completely couldn't it therefore be argued that his average would drop by a couple runs because he couldn't play his naturally expansive game that rests on dominating the attack through the covers?

  10. #25
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Got_Spin View Post
    And if a player like you mentioned had to retune his technique completely couldn't it therefore be argued that his average would drop by a couple runs because he couldn't play his naturally expansive game that rests on dominating the attack through the covers?
    Nah, because if he designs his technique appropriately then he should be sweet. If you're good through the covers, then you design your technique to keep that advantage while not getting out. Plenty of old schoolers were awesome through the covers, so I don't see why a modern player couldn't adjust.

    Likewise plenty of old schoolers were expansive. Maybe not to the extreme extent of some players today when they have a hot streak (though Viv didn't seem to have too many issues) but they did take the attack to the bowlers and succeed. Sehwag does block the delivery when he deems it appropriate. He just doesn't deem it appropriate very often. He's a freak.

  11. #26
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    How about we reverse it? I'm pretty sure many old timers bowling averages would bump up if they had to enjoy bowling on the flat decks around today. I think there's a few bowlers around the world that, if they played in a previous era, would be seen in a better light because they got helpful conditions more often.

    But it doesn't matter because it's all hypothetical. What does matter is some bowlers are much better at bowling in this era than others.

  12. #27
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    Nah, because if he designs his technique appropriately then he should be sweet. If you're good through the covers, then you design your technique to keep that advantage while not getting out. Plenty of old schoolers were awesome through the covers, so I don't see why a modern player couldn't adjust.

    Likewise plenty of old schoolers were expansive. Maybe not to the extreme extent of some players today when they have a hot streak (though Viv didn't seem to have too many issues) but they did take the attack to the bowlers and succeed. Sehwag does block the delivery when he deems it appropriate. He just doesn't deem it appropriate very often. He's a freak.
    I don't really want to bring Sehwag into this tbh - ole can of worms. While players of todays game would probably be able to adjust, I think some of them - apart from the elite e.g Gillespie, Ponting and Lara - would definitely suffer an average drop of a couple runs.

    -edit . This is not to say they are lesser players, they would have just played in a tougher game
    Last edited by GotSpin; 21-10-2010 at 07:54 AM.

  13. #28
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Got_Spin View Post
    I don't really want to bring Sehwag into this tbh - ole can of worms. While players of todays game would probably be able to adjust, I think some of them - apart from the elite e.g Gillespie, Ponting and Lara - would definitely suffer an average drop of a couple runs.
    I can see the point you're trying to make, but it's so arbitrary there's not much point in trying to decide who would be affected how. For all we know...who's another hated "flat track bully"?....Herschelle Gibbs would have decided to go Mark Richardson style and end up averaging 60.

    Gillespie would still be 1337 though.

  14. #29
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    12,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I can see the point you're trying to make, but it's so arbitrary there's not much point in trying to decide who would be affected how. For all we know...who's another hated "flat track bully"?....Herschelle Gibbs would have decided to go Mark Richardson style and end up averaging 60.

    Gillespie would still be 1337 though.
    Oh yeah I agree. I'm just trying to say that you can't pluck a batsmen from todays game and say if he'd simply 'tailored' his game differently he would have done just as well in another era. There's a reason why the 00s average is higher than the 90s average.

    All hypothetical of course - Which really makes any discussion pointless

  15. #30
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    How about we reverse it? I'm pretty sure many old timers bowling averages would bump up if they had to enjoy bowling on the flat decks around today. I think there's a few bowlers around the world that, if they played in a previous era, would be seen in a better light because they got helpful conditions more often.

    But it doesn't matter because it's all hypothetical. What does matter is some bowlers are much better at bowling in this era than others.
    Like Vettori regularly bowling on uncovered wickets?

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. CW Players A-Z
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum CW Development League
    Replies: 316
    Last Post: 09-05-2007, 11:35 PM
  2. Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-02-2005, 08:25 AM

Posting Permissions

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