Ashwin's streak and position

[weldone]

You'd have to give Swann credit for not playing as much of his cricket in helpful conditions

That's the only way to make them comparable. Otherwise, you wouldn't compare a 29-average bowler with a 24-average one.

 

[marc71178]

You'd have to give Swann credit for not playing as much of his cricket in helpful conditions

Wait, so Swann didn't play 75% of his games in helpful conditions?

Makes the 24 vs 29 comment look predictably misinformed and inaccurate.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I've always held Swann's ridiculously short career against him when rating him overall. He played barely a full 5 years of test cricket. I don't think his career can even be considered as impressive as Harbhajan's, even though Swann was clearly a better bowler.

 

[honestbharani]

Hmmm. Better bowler Vs bowler with better career.. But honestly, if we open up that distinction, it wont be too long before we reach some ridiculous arguments and counter-arguments.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hmmm. Better bowler Vs bowler with better career.. But honestly, if we open up that distinction, it wont be too long before we reach some ridiculous arguments and counter-arguments.

It's relevant though, because one of the things that was put forward as evidence for Anderson's case for being "great" was his overall wicket tally and longevity. Someone like Swann doesn't have that in his favor, even in comparison to bhajji.

 

[Jono]

Yeah you'd take Harbhajan's career over Swann's, but Swann in a one-off test..

 

[weldone]

Yes Bhajji vs Swann is a good comparison.

 

[honestbharani]

It's relevant though, because one of the things that was put forward as evidence for Anderson's case for being "great" was his overall wicket tally and longevity. Someone like Swann doesn't have that in his favor, even in comparison to bhajji.

Fair enough.. It surely is relevant and a totally valid point with respect to this comparison but it just opens people up to so many other arguments. Anyways it is a good point about Swann. Was he also not dropped after he was **** in his debut or was his debut itself only in 2008?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Nah, he was never dropped afaik. Got sehwag and Dravid out on debut too and was world class pretty much from the beginning.

 

[honestbharani]

Juz seem to recall him at least having been in the squad or something way earlier than the 2008 debut though...

 

[TheJediBrah]

Nah, he was never dropped afaik. Got sehwag and Dravid out on debut too and was world class pretty much from the beginning.

Yeah pretty sure he had a decade of First class cricket under his belt by then though

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I have been a bit critical of Ashwin previously and while he does need to do it away from home to prove he is great there is no doubting his ability at home and the amount of wickets he is getting of late. Given the fact that half the time away the Indian side as a whole doesn't show up then it is a bit harsh to single out Ashwin for criticism, he is picking up wickets as quickly as Murali and Warne used to at present so you have to give him credit. Will be fascinating to see how England play him as he has had very little success against us in comparison to other sides.

 

[Daemon]

If his pitches are so bowler friendly in India why can't every other dumb **** spinner bowl well on them? Not buying the "doesnt grow up on them" argument because if its a turner you still shouldn't be ****. Sure Ashwin is more used to it that you won't outperform him but why are you ****? And I don't buy the "Indian batsmen are great against spin and Ashwin doesn't bowl to them" line, because India's batsmen aren't that good against spin anymore. Nowhere near what they were 5-8 years ago.

There is daylight between Ashwin and Herath and the rest, and Herath won't be around for much longer. Ashwin is a one of a kind spinner in today's age in that he's not a ****ing embarrassment like all the other ****s.

Yasir you ****

ftr Jadeja still averages a decent bit less than Ashwin in india I think, but is nowhere close to Ashwin's wpm.

Also Ashwin got KW and Sanga every single time they faced off in their last 2 series iirc? That's huge too.

 

[Jono]

I'm not counting drug cheats obviously

 

[viriya]

Harbhajan vs Swann is an interesting comparison. I don't think there's much between them at all.
cricrate | Harbhajan Singh vs Graeme Swann - Test Bowling

^ Swann had a slightly better first 60 tests, but Harbhajan was around much longer. Just got worse with time though so that's why Bhajji isn't clearly better.

 

[morgieb]

Fair enough.. It surely is relevant and a totally valid point with respect to this comparison but it just opens people up to so many other arguments. Anyways it is a good point about Swann. Was he also not dropped after he was **** in his debut or was his debut itself only in 2008?

From memory he made his ODI debut in 1999 but got jettisioned for about another 8 years because of a lack of puncuality (amongst other things). Shame because during the 2000's England could have really done with him.

 

[viriya]

last i checked he's still a finger spinner. good luck with that in nz. not even herath had much enjoyment and he's light years ahead of ashwin

lyon did pretty well last year from memory

I'm the biggest Herath fanboy but there's no way he's light years ahead of Ashwin. Ashwin actually outbowled him the last time India toured SL.

 

[viriya]

But seriously though, looking at him objectively without bias, I would legitimately call him a great bowler when he does something in conditions he finds different than what he is used to. Warne averaged 21 in England apart from being good at Australia, two completely different set of conditions(though the England players were **** players of spin bowling). Once he does that, I will get behind him even more.

The big difference is that Eng in the 90s were walking wickets for spinners. Still not great but not as terrible anymore. That's why Warne's Ashes stats aren't that impressive - Murali dominated Eng in Eng even more he just didn't play as much.

 

[morgieb]

The big difference is that Eng in the 90s were walking wickets for spinners. Still not great but not as terrible anymore. That's why Warne's Ashes stats aren't that impressive - Murali dominated Eng in Eng even more he just didn't play as much.

If that's the case, why are Warne's stats in the 2000's in England better than the 90's?

 

[viriya]

It's apples and oranges tho. Warne's a wrist spinner. Murali used his wrist. You can get so much more on the ball and extract so much more off the wicket if you do that. A googly is way easier to bowl than a carrom ball or a (legal) doosra.

Even Ashwin vs someone like Herath isn't a fair comparison, because Herath is a lefty with the benefits of bowling to all these right handed batsmen. We've seen how Ashwin eats left handers alive. Imagine if the bulk of the batsmen he bowled to were lefty? How many quality left handed batsmen has Herath bowled to?

If we're going to compare Ashwin, we need to compare him to right handed finger spinners. And I struggle to think of one who clearly better than Ashwin. I haven't seen Laker or Gibbs, Bhajji isn't better, Saqlain at his peak was as good as Ashwin is right now, Lyon isn't better, Swann was fantastic but again, Ashwin seems as good...he's really right up there with the best right handed finger spinners of all time.

The limitations of his bowling style are what they are. Shouldn't make him less of a great bowler IMO.

I think he has a very good claim for being the GOAT finger spinner already. Tayfield and Gibbs (and Herath if you include left) the closest competition.