Early era batsmen

[Monk]

Does anyone have any insight in to when bowling changed from under-arm to round-arm to over-arm etc?

Greg Chappell's captaincy aside...

[benchmark00]

You judge them like this:

Have you seen them play?
If yes judge them against others you have seen with respect to environmental variables.
If no :

is the level of cricket able to be compared to other cricket without making massive leaps?
If yes ----> take comparison to peers and stack up against other contenders.
If no ----> Error 404 - can not compare

[watson]

Originally Posted by Cabinet96

But how else would you rate a player then, as, like I said, I don't believe judging how certain players would have gone in different eras and circumstances than they ever had to play in is fair?

Estimation of players strengths and weaknesses is not a matter of fairness. There is no ethical dimension here.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

You judge them like this:

Have you seen them play?
If yes judge them against others you have seen with respect to environmental variables.
If no :

is the level of cricket able to be compared to other cricket without making massive leaps?
If yes ----> take comparison to peers and stack up against other contenders.
If no ----> Error 404 - can not compare

Have to factor in artistry as well.

[watson]

Originally Posted by Monk

Have to factor in artistry as well.

Only as a means to scoring relatively quickly and effectively.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by watson

Only as a means to scoring relatively quickly and effectively.

Many will disagree, but in my eyes Mark Waugh was a much superior batsman to his brother, and many of his other team-mates with higher averages.

[Coronis]

Originally Posted by Monk

Many will disagree, but in my eyes Mark Waugh was a much superior batsman to his brother, and many of his other team-mates with higher averages.

If I had a choice between the Waugh brothers, I would choose Steve every time. Unless I'm picking based purely on style. In that case I might as well pop in David Gower in all my XI's.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Coronis

If I had a choice between the Waugh brothers, I would choose Steve every time. Unless I'm picking based purely on style. In that case I might as well pop in David Gower in all my XI's.

I wouldn't. I'd choose Mark. As I said, many would disagree, and I understand why.

Take away Steve's massive amount of NOs however, and their averages are very comparable (flawed thing I know, but they averaged a very similar amount each time they batted).

[watson]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

You judge them like this:

Have you seen them play?
If yes judge them against others you have seen with respect to environmental variables.
If no :

is the level of cricket able to be compared to other cricket without making massive leaps?
If yes ----> take comparison to peers and stack up against other contenders.
If no ----> Error 404 - can not compare

I do like a good algorithmn.

[Coronis]

Originally Posted by Monk

I wouldn't. I'd choose Mark. As I said, many would disagree, and I understand why.

Take away Steve's massive amount of NOs however, and their averages are very comparable (flawed thing I know, but they averaged a very similar amount each time they batted).

I understand where you're coming from, but personally I'd much rather the batsman who would stay in and play a match-winning innings rather than one who may throw his wicket away much earlier.

[watson]

Originally Posted by Monk

I wouldn't. I'd choose Mark. As I said, many would disagree, and I understand why.

Take away Steve's massive amount of NOs however, and their averages are very comparable (flawed thing I know, but they averaged a very similar amount each time they batted).

There's very little between Mark and Steve and both fit into any ATG team. The main reason that people are sceptical of Mark (I think) is that he got himself out when he shouldn't have, unlike his brother.

In other words he also scored too many 50s that should have been converted into 100s. And no really big scores either. A batsman of Mark Waugh's class should have a double century to his name. Even Jason Gillespie has a double century. In some ways his apparent laziness is unforgiveable.

[Satyanash89]

Originally Posted by Monk

Many will disagree, but in my eyes Mark Waugh was a much superior batsman to his brother, and many of his other team-mates with higher averages.

Thats like saying VVS was a better batsman than Dravid. Needless to say i disagree vehemently... Apart from aesthetic, Mark had nothing over Steve

[L Trumper]

Originally Posted by Monk

Does anyone have any insight in to when bowling changed from under-arm to round-arm to over-arm etc?

Greg Chappell's captaincy aside...

Edgar Wilsher instigated the wider change in 1864, even though there are instances before that. Generally 1864 is considered the start, although there are some disagreements. On a whole by 70s over arm was the norm. Curiously WG was noted as bowling round arm at that time.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Satyanash89

Thats like saying VVS was a better batsman than Dravid. Needless to say i disagree vehemently... Apart from aesthetic, Mark had nothing over Steve

Except that VVS batted lower in the order than Dravid, while Mark batted higher in the order than Steve.

I wouldn't argue or labour the point hard, cos as I said, most would disagree with me, but in my opinion, a player like Mark is of immense value because of his ability to score fluently and his skill against spin.

I reckon Mark was an underachiever in some ways. In all honesty, I think he is probably the most gifted Australian batsman since Greg Chappell, yet his stats record doesn't reflect this. Always got the sense with him that he had a bit of Miller about him, and he loved the game, but didn't care much for the accolades that come with averages and big scores. S. Waugh had a bit more Bradman about him!

[GingerFurball]

Originally Posted by Monk

Many will disagree, but in my eyes Mark Waugh was a much superior batsman to his brother, and many of his other team-mates with higher averages.

Yeah, no.