The value of Anil Kumble was underestimated

[Teja.]

Originally Posted by Monk

Strike rate gives you a more accurate idea of a bowler's ability than wickets per test does.

That Waqar, a true god eh?

[kyear2]

Econ, s/r and average are all equally important.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

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.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Econ, s/r and average are all equally important.

I reckon SR is more important than average, within reason.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Teja.

That Waqar, a true god eh?

Agree, especially in his prime. Absolutely brilliant.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Francis

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)

Seriously it is the worst **** when people do this. If you've got two ****s in 7th then there's no 8th FFS.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Monk

Fourth best spinner I've seen (in 30ish years) behind Warne, Murali, MacGill.

Yeah, I think MacGill was a better bowler than Kumble too. Obviously he didn't achieve anywhere near as much so it won't be seen that way though.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Seriously it is the worst **** when people do this. If you've got two ****s in 7th then there's no 8th FFS.

[weldone]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Econ, s/r and average are all equally important.

So you mean only average in important...

[weldone]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Yeah, I think MacGill was a better bowler than Kumble too.

...reminds me for how long I truly believed that Utpal Chatterjee was a better bowler than Kumble...In fact, I believed the same till Kumble started approaching towards 200 or 300 test wickets IIRC..

[kyear2]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Seriously it is the worst **** when people do this. If you've got two ****s in 7th then there's no 8th FFS.

[kyear2]

Originally Posted by weldone

So you mean only average in important...

Strike rate and average are equally important, because as it is preferable that a bowler takes wickets as quickly as possible, it is preferred that he doen't get carted around the park as he does.

[weldone]

Originally Posted by kyear2

Strike rate and average are equally important, because as it is preferable that a bowler takes wickets as quickly as possible, it is preferred that he doen't get carted around the park as he does.

Sorry, I tried a bad ( average = strike rate * economy rate / 6 ) joke.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by weldone

...reminds me for how long I truly believed that Utpal Chatterjee was a better bowler than Kumble...In fact, I believed the same till Kumble started approaching towards 200 or 300 test wickets IIRC..

Utpal who?

[Beleg]

someone up-thread was going on about macgill being better than kumble - thats absolute bollocks. macgill leaked pressure like a blown gasket. kumble had the ability to induce false strokes through a combination of imposing, combative attitude and sheer, bloody-minded presence. i watched a lot of him growing up and he was always relentless and never gave up. got a lot of wickets because of that. and he also induced false strokes from batsmen against other bowlers. the fact that the fellas on the other end didnt capitalise is another story.

i very rarely remember kumble getting a proper tonking. whereas thats one of the main things i associate with macgill. and he was able to get away with it, to a large extent, owing to the excellence of the bowlers around him.

kumble is hands down the third best spinner of his generation and a class apart from the likes of saqlain, macgill, paul strang, mushtaq ahmed and daniel vettori.

and prince ews,

if the word better, in this context, isnt linked to actual performance then its kind of meaningless isnt it?