So, Bradman's Invincibles or Waugh's unbeaten team of the early 00s?

[TheJediBrah]

Look I usually accelerate the down arrow when I see your name. Thats the advice I should have stuck to.

Please do so in the future. You are a complete waste of time.

 

[watson]

If you go to Batting Career Summary in Cricinfo then three things stand-out in Mark Waugh's career.

Average in West Indies (1991-1999) = 40.45 after 13 Tests
Average in Pakistan (1994-1998) = 49.77 after 6 Tests
Average in South Africa (1994-2002) = 43.64 after 9 Tests

An average of 40 something doesn't sound overly great but when you consider they were made against Ambrose/Walsh, Wasim/Waqar, and Donald/de Villiers on their home turf then you can forgive some of his obvious sins, and realise that Martyn's CV pales in comparison.

(Anyway, this thread is supposed to be about Bradman's 1948 side and Steve Waugh's side - not Mark Waugh V Damien Martyn)

 

[the big bambino]

Please do so in the future. You are a complete waste of time.

How about we go in opposite directions now? i don't like where this is going. I feel like I suspended my good sense long enough to get sucked down a sewer bcos I inexplicably thought it was worth wrestling a turd.

 

[TheJediBrah]

How about we go in opposite directions now? i don't like where this is going. I feel like I suspended my good sense long enough to get sucked down a sewer bcos I inexplicably thought it was worth wrestling a turd.

Yet you couldn't even name 1 thing I said that wasn't completely correct.

Yet I pointed out several bizarrely obvious errors in your argument, while being a lot more polite about it than you were.

You have been utterly disgraceful, regardless of whether you were trolling or not.

 

[viriya]

Marto played 7 tests in the 90s. Waugh about 90. So waugh was exposed to the stress of that bowling about 10 times as often. Brett Lee averaged 11 with the ball in the 90s. Better than McGrath. So I agree with your point. You point was to be wary of statisical distortions wasn't it?

It was to show that he averaged ~50 for close to 2000 runs in the 90s while Waugh averaged 40. Even though Martyn didn't play nearly as much it at least suggests that Waugh wasn't obviously better. Also, Waugh did worse than a lot of his contemporaries in the 90s which says that the "better bowling attack" argument doesn't really hold.

 

[viriya]

If you go to Batting Career Summary in Cricinfo then three things stand-out in Mark Waugh's career.

Average in West Indies (1991-1999) = 40.45 after 13 Tests
Average in Pakistan (1994-1998) = 49.77 after 6 Tests
Average in South Africa (1994-2002) = 43.64 after 9 Tests

An average of 40 something doesn't sound overly great but when you consider they were made against Ambrose/Walsh, Wasim/Waqar, and Donald/de Villiers on their home turf then you can forgive some of his obvious sins, and realise that Martyn's CV pales in comparison.

(Anyway, this thread is supposed to be about Bradman's 1948 side and Steve Waugh's side - not Mark Waugh V Damien Martyn)

During his career time period vs WI, SA, Pak away Gilly, Ponting, Steve Waugh and Taylor all averaged better:
cricrate | cricinsight

I don't think averaging 40 is a huge achievement comparatively. This would be a good argument for Steve Waugh though since he got way more runs at a ~58 average. Averaging 40 just means Mark didn't perform worse than usual - doesn't mean he did something special imo.

 

[the big bambino]

Let it go brah. Look if its important you win the net for the night m'kay? Go shine your trophy.

It was to show that he averaged ~50 for close to 2000 runs in the 90s while Waugh averaged 40. Even though Martyn didn't play nearly as much it at least suggests that Waugh wasn't obviously better. Also, Waugh did worse than a lot of his contemporaries in the 90s which says that the "better bowling attack" argument doesn't really hold.

Your figures account for the period to 2002. I said the 90s. As you state in the post above. According to statsguru he only played 12 innings scored 317 runs and averaged under 30.

 

[viriya]

Your figures account for the period to 2002. I said the 90s. As you state in the post above. According to statsguru he only played 12 innings scored 317 runs and averaged under 30.

If you're happy with the argument that Mark Waugh was clearly better than Damien Martyn because he averaged 10 more runs vs certain opposition where the sample size for Martyn is around 5 tests, that's up to you.

I myself don't judge player careers like that.

 

[the big bambino]

Wha??? That was your argument. I was simply pointing out its absurdity. The point being Marto wasn't good enough to even get into the test side for the best part of a very competitive decade let alone be compared with Waugh.

 

[viriya]

My argument was that he averaged better than Mark Waugh throughout Mark's career. I didn't bring up specific away games for comparison. I just pointed out that Mark didn't do exceptionally well in them, and that comparing that 40 average vs Martyn's 10 innings is not how I would evaluate a career.

What you're effectively saying is that because Martyn didn't do as well over a specific 5-6 tests, Mark is clearly better? If you're honestly going with that argument I have nothing to add to this discussion.

 

[viriya]

Also note that Waugh was 30 in 1995 and Martyn was 24. 30 is usually when batsmen peak, so it's not even a fair comparison in that regard.

 

[the big bambino]

My argument was that he averaged better than Mark Waugh throughout Mark's career. I didn't bring up specific away games for comparison. I just pointed out that Mark didn't do exceptionally well in them, and that comparing that 40 average vs Martyn's 10 innings is not how I would evaluate a career.

What you're effectively saying is that because Martyn didn't do as well over a specific 5-6 tests, Mark is clearly better? If you're honestly going with that argument I have nothing to add to this discussion.

No you didn't.

It was to show that he averaged ~50 for close to 2000 runs in the 90s while Waugh averaged 40. Even though Martyn didn't play nearly as much it at least suggests that Waugh wasn't obviously better. Also, Waugh did worse than a lot of his contemporaries in the 90s which says that the "better bowling attack" argument doesn't really hold.

I just showed you the numbers that show Martyn did as well if not better than Mark during the 90s. That "better bowling in the 90s" argument doesn't really hold if Waugh has the 10th highest average of Aussies during that period.

You clearly said the 90s on more than one occasion.

And (to repeat) he didn't do as well in the 90s bcos he wasn't even good enough to be selected. Let alone be compared to Waugh.

 

[viriya]

No you didn't.






You clearly said the 90s on more than one occasion.

My mistake for saying 90s when I meant over Mark's career which was effectively 90s in 1991-2002. My link to the stats shows that I was considering Mark's whole career.

Martyn only played 12 innings when he was 22-24 in the 90s so I took that as an unfair comparison.

 

[watson]

Dragged up an old Junior V Marto thread with a poll. Might want to continue the discussion there.

 

[the big bambino]

My mistake for saying 90s when I meant over Mark's career which was effectively 90s in 1991-2002. My link to the stats shows that I was considering Mark's whole career.

Martyn only played 12 innings when he was 22-24 in the 90s so I took that as an unfair comparison.

So may I please have my other point in favour of Waugh; that he faced better bowling in a more competitive decade, acknowledged at last?

 

[viriya]

So may I please have my other point in favour of Waugh; that he faced better bowling in a more competitive decade, acknowledged at last?

Like I said I think it's not a good argument because:

• Martyn can't be fairly compared because he only played 12 innings during that period when he was a 22 year old rookie compared to Mark being 25-35 during that decade (best years).
• Mark didn't actually do that well (just didn't do worse than usual) for that to be significant.

 

[Red]

i already stated he was riding on the reputation he had built in the 90s by then. there were calls for him to be dropped for most of the '00s


He was eventually dropped for Boof IIRC since Martyn was already in the team, but if Martyn hadn't broken thru in ashes '01 coz of Slater unexpectedly being tossed to the kerb(so Langer moved from middle order to opener, freeing up a spot) then I reckon Waugh would have had to step down for Martyn

It must have been a pretty good reputation for him to ride on...