Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 95

Thread: The value of Anil Kumble was underestimated

  1. #16
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,710
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    It's like people have come together just to make troll threads towards me today.

    Expecting a 'Herath is god' thread to pop up at some point.
    Weren't I on holiday I'd surely make a picture
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  2. #17
    International Regular kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    3,986
    I need to understand why people rate Akram ahead of Ambrose?
    Kindly enlighten me.
    Aus. XI
    Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2


    W.I. XI
    Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4

    S.A. XI
    Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Waite+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

    Eng. XI
    Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3

  3. #18
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Locked up inside my opium den, surrounded by some Chinamen
    Posts
    45,082
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    I need to understand why people rate Akram ahead of Ambrose?
    Kindly enlighten me.
    Maybe as a cricketer?

    As a bowler tho; nah, Curtly every time.
    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

  4. #19
    State Vice-Captain Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    I need to understand why people rate Akram ahead of Ambrose?
    Kindly enlighten me.
    He bowls with the correct arm.


  5. #20
    State Vice-Captain Francis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    WELLYWOOD
    Posts
    1,040
    Wickets per match is really such a poor measure beyond a certain point.
    Nein. Es ist nicht!

    It's a fantastic criterion! I'd take a person who averages 26 per wicket and took five wickets per Test, than a person who averaged 20 and took four wickets per Test.

    Look at Dennis Lillee. He got wickets faster than Glenn McGrath, and only bled 2 or three extra runs per wicket. How many Tests did Australia play in Lillee's day that were decided by less than 15 runs? Not many... I recall the famous Test where Thompson was caught in slips and Alan Border was batting with him, etc.

    What's two or three extra runs compared to getting Viv Richards out with the last ball in the day.

  6. #21
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    I don't think you understand how bowling works...

    Let me give you a hint. Glenn McGrath would have had a much higher wickets-per-match ratio if he played for England than us. And it's not because he would have been a better bowler.

    You are literally picking the worse bowler just because they happened to play in a ****tier team. Have fun winning Tests like that.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  7. #22
    State Vice-Captain Francis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    WELLYWOOD
    Posts
    1,040
    Eh it's debatable...

    I'm sure Murali would have less wickets had he played for Australia. But as the argument always does, would McGrath have taken as many wickets if not for Warne.

    Would all the West Indies quartet have averages in the low 20s if they didn't have each other?

    It's hard to say sometimes.

    At the end of the day, the better cricketer is the one that wins you the Test! Kumble did that.

    And besides, no pace bowler could bowl for as long as Kumble...

  8. #23
    International Regular kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    3,986
    Wickets per match is more determined by the quality of your team mates, Murali and Hadlee basically sometimes bowled all day and often also had the run of the tail as well. Marshall, Mcgrath.had to share the spoils and bowled less overs and there was Warne, Garner ect clean up the tail (along with top/middle order players as well of course)

  9. #24
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tas
    Posts
    47
    There is a lot to like about Kumble
    • Great stamina, sustained pressure for long periods of time
    • Tremendous fighter - never gave up.
    • Bowlers like Kumble can be the difference between winning on the fifth day and
      letting the opposition escape with a Draw.


    After 2000, India had a lot of Great Batsmen, so the loss of one batsman was no great issue.
    But India had no one who could replace Kumble,
    in many ways Kumble was the most valuable player for India.

    But if Kumble had played for a side with better bowlers, he would of bowled a
    lot less overs.

  10. #25
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    I don't think Francis is making a generic statement about the game insofar as wickets-per-match being the best or ultimate stat representing a bowler's worth, so I do kinda agree with him in this thread re Kumble.

    I do believe he was probably better than his figures showed at times and when India scored a lot of runs, it really wasn't a matter of needing an ultra-cheap/fast bowler...India just needed someone to kill the game off in a respectable amount of time and get all the wickets to end the match. Kumble did that very well and was a matchwinner for them.
    ★★★★★

  11. #26
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    I only bother with WPM comparisons when someone has an unusually high or low stat for it. If they do have a very low/high value (anything below 3.5 or above 4.5) I look to see if there is an obvious explanation for it (such as they were the only classy bowler in their side). It's only when there is no obvious explanation (ala Steyn/Lillee or Miller in the reverse) that I start to consider the stat as important to the way I rate a player.

    Kumble had minimal backup for most of his career. His WPM figure was higher because of it.

    Kumble was a very fine bowler and had his career not coincided with that of Warne and Murali, he would rightly have been regarded far more highly than he was. As it is, he was the third best regular sping bowler of his time (it's arguable as to whether MacGill was better than him or not) and probably in the top ten spin bowlers ever.

    It is amazing that we had so many top spin bowlers for so long. In many eras Harbhajan would have been the best spinner, but he was easily behind 4-5 other spinners for most of his career.

  12. #27
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tas
    Posts
    47
    Most ATG fast bowlers bowl some where near there Wicket per test limit (Why bowl second rate bowler when you have a ATG bowler in the side).

    All bowler's Wickets per Test count is limmited by
    (the number of Overs he can bowl per test) / (Strike Rate).
    For most fast bowlers (including most ATG) that is about 4 wickets per test.

    It is only in the really Great Teams (WI, Aus [recent + late 40's] where competition
    for Wickets becomes a issue. For example if you look at Imran, he does very little bowling in the fourth inning of a Test Match's and his bowling average is > 40 runs per wicket in the fourth innings. I doubt Imran could of bowled to many more overs than he did without a big drop in average / strike rate and more injuries.

    For example if Fast Bowler had a strike rate of 50 and bowls 40 overs a game he will take 4.8 wickets per test. Very few fast bowlers have a strike rate of < 50 and very few can sustain 40 overs a Test. Fast bowlers who can take 4.8+ wickets a test are a very, very rare breed.

    I recently heard a speech (on the radio) by a long term of Australia's Cricket Trainer (State, national level), he stated in the last 40 years, Australia has only produced 2 Test class fast bowlers (Lillee, McGrath) who could sustain 40 overs a Test. I think he is right in that and I do not think any other country has produced more bowlers who could bowl 40 overs per game over a 10 year period.
    Also Fast Bowlers who go flat out all the time (e.g. Holding, Akram, Steyn) generally bowl less that 35 overs per Test.

    For a fast bowler to sustain 4.8 wickets a test he needs to be able to bowl well on most wickets / most days in a Test, he also needs to have one of
    • Incredible Strike rate (Steyn, Strike Rate=40).
    • Excellent Strike Rate, Excellent Stamina (Marshal, Strike Rate = 46, 38 overs per test).
    • Incredible Endurance, Good Strike (Lillee, Haddle and probably McGrath ??? Strike
      Rate = 51 - 53).


    Spinners have it slightly easier but have other issues.
    Last edited by MartinB; 27-12-2012 at 08:53 AM.

  13. #28
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Francis View Post

    I'll rate the bowlers...

    1. Warne
    2. Murali
    3. McGrath (just... just ahead of Akram. I'd prefer watching Akram 9/10)
    4. Akram
    5. Ambrose
    6. Walsh
    7. Donald/Kumble
    8. Waquar
    9. Pollock
    10. Steyn (will be much higher when he's finished)

    Edit: Actually maybe Steyn should be higher... nearly 5 wickets per Test at under 24...
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    This
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  14. #29
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pakistan
    Posts
    21,617
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    I need to understand why people rate Akram ahead of Ambrose?
    Kindly enlighten me.
    People who like more skill with the ball and more flair prefer Akram.

  15. #30
    International Vice-Captain Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,547
    Strike rate gives you a more accurate idea of a bowler's ability than wickets per test does.

Page 2 of 7 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. Scoring 500+ in first innings, only to lose by an innings
    By blahblahblah in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28-08-2012, 09:45 AM
  2. Mystery Draft V.2 (1989-2009)
    By Mupariwa_Magic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 492
    Last Post: 21-11-2009, 01:00 PM
  3. Anil Kumble - India's New Test Captain
    By Sanz in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 19-11-2007, 11:01 PM
  4. **Season 7 Press Releases!!!**
    By lord_of_darkness in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 08-02-2006, 11:16 PM
  5. Anil Kumble and Amit Mishra
    By Salamuddin in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 18-10-2003, 04:08 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
  •