-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Recent NZ best bowling attack...
- Thread starter piquet67
- Start date
Mingster
State Regular
Like your lovechild Vaas?
OK so past players, and well respected at that, like Barry Richards, Ian Smith, Martin Crowe and among many other international commentators.
So you are right?
Well I have probably seen more of Tuffey than you, and have heard many write about his accuracy as well. Obviously all of the media is talking absolute crap.
Who cares if Tuffey has a RPO of 4.6? He has a bloody great first-chance bowling average of 15 anyway.
Yes I watched all the games and calculated all the chances. Its hard work just for one player, Richard, how do you do it for all the players around the World? Isn't that like over 150? Wow. What a shame Cricinfo does not recognise this and put your well thoughted averages on profiles.
OK so past players, and well respected at that, like Barry Richards, Ian Smith, Martin Crowe and among many other international commentators.
So you are right?
Well I have probably seen more of Tuffey than you, and have heard many write about his accuracy as well. Obviously all of the media is talking absolute crap.
Who cares if Tuffey has a RPO of 4.6? He has a bloody great first-chance bowling average of 15 anyway.
Yes I watched all the games and calculated all the chances. Its hard work just for one player, Richard, how do you do it for all the players around the World? Isn't that like over 150? Wow. What a shame Cricinfo does not recognise this and put your well thoughted averages on profiles.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
First-chance bowling average?
If you can't even make-up something that makes some sense (ie all-chance bowling average - counting all chances instead of just the ones that are taken) then you're seriously running-out of arguments.
And not many people have actually disputed the validity of my claims about first-chance averages - just disputed whether they're as important as I say they are. Your rather poor attempts seem to be trying that.
I repeat what I said - why would I bother saying "I think this" if I didn't think it was right? I'm not the only one, people disagree with sages of renown all the time. And they've got every right to if they've studied the stuff well.
I consider I have.
And no, Tuffey's economy-rate is nothing like "my lovechild" Chaminda's. Chaminda's is far, far, far better. Despite the fact that the conditions he routinely plays in make wicket-taking a lot harder for bowlers of his style.
If you can't even make-up something that makes some sense (ie all-chance bowling average - counting all chances instead of just the ones that are taken) then you're seriously running-out of arguments.
And not many people have actually disputed the validity of my claims about first-chance averages - just disputed whether they're as important as I say they are. Your rather poor attempts seem to be trying that.
I repeat what I said - why would I bother saying "I think this" if I didn't think it was right? I'm not the only one, people disagree with sages of renown all the time. And they've got every right to if they've studied the stuff well.
I consider I have.
And no, Tuffey's economy-rate is nothing like "my lovechild" Chaminda's. Chaminda's is far, far, far better. Despite the fact that the conditions he routinely plays in make wicket-taking a lot harder for bowlers of his style.
Last edited:
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
He is argument?!Richard said:
Mingster
State Regular
I wasn't arguing. Stop accusing me of these things. I was stating my statistics and you start saying they are wrong. I never said in this thread yours were wrong. Jeez...
If someone has a first chance batting average of 35, and a career of 55. And person B has a first chance batting average of 12 but a career average of 78. You would take A would you not? Because he has the better first chance average?
If someone has a first chance batting average of 35, and a career of 55. And person B has a first chance batting average of 12 but a career average of 78. You would take A would you not? Because he has the better first chance average?
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
When on Earth have I said McGrath, Pollock, Murali, Chaminda, Warne, Gillespie, etc. don't deserve their ODI economy-rates?marc71178 said:
That's just an assumption you've made given that I say that some of them don't deserve the averages they've got against their names in Tests.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I was stating that your statistics don't exist, or at least your phrasing of them was very poor. And in case you didn't notice, you were accusing me of making-up the statistics I use to judge, and p***-take that by blatantly making-up stuff of your own. I was saying that this stuff doesn't cut the mustard.Mingster said:I wasn't arguing. Stop accusing me of these things. I was stating my statistics and you start saying they are wrong. I never said in this thread yours were wrong. Jeez...
I'd rate the one with the better first-chance average as the superior batsman. But both situations are realistically impossible.