Cricket Player Manager
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 122
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: DoG’s Top 100 Test Batsmen - Bowling Discussion

  1. #1
    International Vice-Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    4,592

    DoG’s Top 100 Test Batsmen - Bowling Discussion

    PLEASE KEEP ALL BOWLING DISCUSSION OUT OF THE BATTING THREAD AND POST YOUR ESSAYS HERE

    Quote Originally Posted by Singh Is King View Post
    Chill guys I was only stating what DOG was stating himself thay he was lower because Indias win rate. If India had had at least average bowlers he would been where he deserves which is top 3, just a shame there ain't a way to incorporate indias rubbish bowling lol. thanks for your response DOG keep up the good work.
    and yes dravid would of been higher in India didn't have crap bowlers to!
    Nah, I'm gonna bite. What the **** is this about India having a "rubbish" bowling attack? Kumble, Srinath, Harbhajan and Zaheer Khan are all top 100 bowlers.
    Last edited by nightprowler10; 30-08-2013 at 10:30 AM.
    Greatest Ever Test XI: JB Hobbs, L Hutton, DG Bradman (c), IVA Richards, BC Lara, GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), Imran Khan, RJ Hadlee, MD Marshall, SK Warne 12th man: M Muralitharan


    Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), AC Gilchrist (wk), CL Cairns, SK Warne, FS Trueman, SE Bond, T Richardson 12th man: H Larwood

    "Neither of them will have an international cricket acareer past 2016."
    Brocky on Martin Guptill and Ish Sodhi. 20/11/2014.

  2. #2
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,396
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Nah, I'm gonna bite. What the **** is this about India having a "rubbish" bowling attack? Kumble, Srinath, Harbhajan and Zaheer Khan are all top 100 bowlers.
    Yessss Bring it on DoG, start it immediately following the batting one (maybe enjoy a Belgian beer and salad first for all your hard work).
    NRL Tipping Champion 2014

    Over 0.2: Putland to Nevill, OUT, no run, full ball swings in late to crash into his pads. Nevill is almost falling over trying to get bat on it but can't. Huge shout for LBW and Umpire Martell eventually raises the finger! P.Nevill - lbw b:Putland 0 (1 ball, 1 minute).

  3. #3
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Yessss Bring it on DoG, start it immediately following the batting one (maybe enjoy a Belgian beer and salad first for all your hard work).
    Would be great.

    What I have noticed though is most bowler ratings seem to focus too much on longevity/total wickets and WPM. Once the WPM is 5 or over that's good enough and points should max out there, as it seems to reward bowlers who had little support otherwise. For mine, the most important role of bowlers is to win matches, so wins, average and s/r followed by wpm should be the focus.

    Just my humble opinion.
    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 | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

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

  4. #4
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,077
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Would be great.

    What I have noticed though is most bowler ratings seem to focus too much on longevity/total wickets and WPM. Once the WPM is 5 or over that's good enough and points should max out there, as it seems to reward bowlers who had little support otherwise. For mine, the most important role of bowlers is to win matches, so wins, average and s/r followed by wpm should be the focus.

    Just my humble opinion.
    I actually agree about WPM (it needs to be a factor to stop someone who took 15 wickets in 100 Tests at a decent average from being rated extremely highly for example, but I don't think Hadlee should really be getting extra points for having a greater WPM when compared to Marshall for example) but I completely disagree about wins. Any rating system should look to standardise and remove the variables that exist as a result of bowlers playing in different teams and factoring in wins would just exaggerate them. You talk about WPM favouring bowlers who had no support; a win function would just favour the opposite.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09

    Quote Originally Posted by John Singleton
    Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a manís right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of oneís own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain oneís life and to keep the results of oneís own efforts.



  5. #5
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    I actually agree about WPM (it needs to be a factor to stop someone who took 15 wickets in 100 Tests at a decent average from being rated extremely highly for example, but I don't think Hadlee should really be getting extra points for having a greater WPM when compared to Marshall for example) but I completely disagree about wins. Any rating system should look to standardise and remove the variables that exist as a result of bowlers playing in different teams and factoring in wins would just exaggerate them. You talk about WPM favouring bowlers who had no support; a win function would just favour the opposite.
    Fully agree with that argument, what I was saying with regard to wins though is that the same way that DoG rates hundreds more in wins than in high scoring draws, then performances and 5fors should count more in wins.

    But yes cap wpm after 5 and also cap longevity similar to the batting ratings.

    Of equally great importance, place greater weight on percentage of top order wickets taken over lower order wickets, especially #9-11.
    Last edited by kyear2; 28-08-2013 at 07:21 PM.

  6. #6
    State Vice-Captain Coronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Fully agree with that argument, what I was saying with regard to wins though is that the same way that DoG rates hundreds more in wins than in high scoring draws, then performances and 5fors should count more in wins.

    But yes cap wpm after 5 and also cap longevity similar to the batting ratings.

    Of equally great importance, place greater weight on percentage of top order wickets taken over lower order wickets, especially #9-11.
    Grimmett had O'Reilly supporting/leading the attack. Still averaged 5.82 wpm. Gonna cut off that .82? Kinda hurts Barnes too, the bowlers he played with were no slouches iirc. Excellent to see Hammond above Viv and Sachin.
    ATG World XI
    1. J.B Hobbs 2. H. Sutcliffe 3. D.G Bradman 4. W.R Hammond 5. G.S Sobers 6. M.J Procter 7. A.C Gilchrist 8. M.D Marshall 9. S.K Warne 10. M. Muralitharan 11. G.D McGrath

  7. #7
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,786
    Quote Originally Posted by Coronis View Post
    Grimmett had O'Reilly supporting/leading the attack. Still averaged 5.82 wpm. Gonna cut off that .82? Kinda hurts Barnes too, the bowlers he played with were no slouches iirc. Excellent to see Hammond above Viv and Sachin.
    I guess it should factor in whether his teammates (bowlers) were good. For example, if you are in a great attack and yet still have a high wpm then it should definitely count in your favour IMO.
    Last edited by Ikki; 28-08-2013 at 09:16 PM.
    ★★★★★

  8. #8
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    For example, if you are in a great attack and yet still have a high wpm then it should definitely count in your favour IMO.
    why?

    You're already getting the advantage of simply having taking a bunch of wickets. There's no need to give an additional factor there.
    Last edited by hendrix; 28-08-2013 at 10:05 PM.

  9. #9
    International Vice-Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    4,592
    Bowling averages, strike-rates, and WPM have all been adjusted.

    But let's discuss all that when I reveal the bowlers.

  10. #10
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Bowling averages, strike-rates, and WPM have all been adjusted.

    But let's discuss all that when I reveal the bowlers.
    You just made mine and especially Nufan's day.

    I eagerly anticipate.

  11. #11
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,786
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    why?

    You're already getting the advantage of simply having taking a bunch of wickets. There's no need to give an additional factor there.
    How do you mean? If you are in a bowling line-up with great competition it is harder to accumulate wickets in the sense of wpm. There are a finite amount of wickets one can take, to have to share them amongst your teammates means there'll be less for you.
    Last edited by Ikki; 29-08-2013 at 01:06 AM.

  12. #12
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    How do you mean? If you are in a bowling line-up with great competition it is harder to accumulate wickets in the sense of wpm. There are a finite amount of wickets one can take, to have to share them amongst your teammates means there'll be less for you.
    yeah, but you also get the advantage of not having to bowl long spells or bowl too much against batsmen who have settled in - that's a significant advantage in terms of average.

  13. #13
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    7,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    How do you mean? If you are in a bowling line-up with great competition it is harder to accumulate wickets in the sense of wpm. There are a finite amount of wickets one can take, to have to share them amongst your teammates means there'll be less for you.
    if you're getting high wickets per match, you're taking a lot of wickets. You've already proven your worth by taking wickets. The skill in taking wickets as part of a good attack is already reflected by the number of wickets you have!

    you also get the advantage of not having to bowl long spells or bowl too much against batsmen who have settled in - that's a significant advantage in terms of average.

  14. #14
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    5,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    How do you mean? If you are in a bowling line-up with great competition it is harder to accumulate wickets in the sense of wpm. There are a finite amount of wickets one can take, to have to share them amongst your teammates means there'll be less for you.
    already done and dusted argument. Better bowling units will have more chances to bowl at the tail as they hunt in a pack and do itconsistently. But lone rangers will get to the tail less often and have more top / middle order wickets. Hence good bowling units bowlers will have better averages and SRs offsetting the advantages of WPM. The other use of WPI or overs per innings to show how fit was the said bowler. Unfit fat ****s cannot bowl long spells and cannot have high WPIs unless they are uber talented.
    Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)

  15. #15
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Swimming in the cry water of Antarctica
    Posts
    29,068
    cant think of any unfit fat **** atg bowlers tbh
    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

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 64
    Last Post: 03-02-2012, 02:11 PM
  2. Replies: 77
    Last Post: 11-01-2010, 06:31 PM
  3. CW's Ranking of Batsmen and Bowlers - A Discussion
    By The Sean in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 24-04-2009, 12:18 AM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 27-04-2005, 05:19 AM
  5. Test only batsmen
    By Ford_GTHO351 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 01-06-2004, 07:20 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
  •