Ian Botham vs Dennis Lillee

[sayon basak]

Not those who aren't stat nerds. My father knows him, but don't think that much of him. Never touring India and getting dropped consistently doesn't helps in that regard. If it makes it feel better, he does rate Sydney Barnes the Greatest bowler Ever.

Your father is the GoAT.

 

[kyear2]

So your response to my post is to repost your original response? Ok.

Yes.

As it will be every time going forward.

 

[kyear2]

Woah. This post has many fascinating insights and new information that it encourages me to change my mind.

That's where you get it wrong, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind or opinions.

Just showing how ignorant and wrong they are.

And no matter how snide and sarcastic your comments are, it doesn't make them any more right or less stubborn in their denial..

 

[kyear2]

he'll overlook this post and ask you again to make the same post..

yes, because he doesn't have an answer for it. He can't defend his positions in that regard.

 

[DrWolverine]

But if you twisted my arm I would say:

Tier 1 - Well rounded ATG bowlers
Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, Imran, Warne, Murali

Tier 2 - ATG bowlers with gaps
Lillee, Ambrose, Akram, Trueman, Donald, Lindwall, O'Reilly

Tier 3 - Greats short of ATG
Holding, Garner, Cummins, etc.

I feel Holding should be in second tier

 

[subshakerz]

I feel Holding should be in second tier

Not enough wickets.

 

[kyear2]

Am I the only one?

Wasn't referring to you, but yes, you fit in quite nicely as well.

This is a cricket forum where ideas are to be shared and discussed.

But that only seemingly applies if everyone toes the line and believes what everyone else does.

So instead of argue on merit and strength of argument, you use sarcasm and try to denigrate. It's easier to maintain the status quo and belittle what you disagree with.

All of these arguments, Barry being seen and recognized as an ATG, that heaven forbid another West Indian could be seen as an automatic in such a team, slip fielding can't possibly be as important as lower order batting, look at the stats, it's all a level of group think and established standards that seems impossible to challenge.

And I mentioned 3 guys as locks, but the only one that was challenged was Marshall. Not Hobbs, not Tendy.

Even the ESPN list that @subshakerz loves to use as his sole source to prove Pollock is undisputably better than Richards, still has Barry in the top 25. Marshall has as perfect and well rounded a record and skill set as anyone in the history of the game, better actually, and his impact was as great as anyone's. And anyone who's watched a game of test cricket would know the value of a cordon.
But I don't agree with everyone, don't play nice and one of about 4 from the Caribbean, so be free to have a go. Nah.

 

[subshakerz]

@kyear2 please don't post eight times in a row on a page. Just bad manners.

 

[DrWolverine]

Not enough wickets.

250 in Tests and 35 in WSC
I think that should be enough

He took 50+ wickets in 1976.
He didn’t play in 1977, 1978 and just 2 Tests in 1979.
He missed out on his peak years(23, 24 & 25 years).

It reminds me of tennis legend Chris Evert.
She won 18 Slams. But missed out playing her favourite Slam 3 times and AO like 8-9 times at peak.

 

[subshakerz]

So instead of argue on merit and strength of argument, you use sarcasm and try to denigrate. It's easier to maintain the status quo and belittle what you disagree with.

Yeah about that...

No one's taking away credit for his home performances you jackass.

His problem was that he was not quality too many places away from home.

You do make some **** arguments sometimes

Worrell is there as the all rounder you jackass.

It's a jackass that makes a point, states two outlier examples to support same then responds with criticism when I provide evidence to the contrary.

I know you always try to get a response, but this is too idiotic for words.

I know you're a child, but the stupid **** you hang onto is petty as hell.

 

[subshakerz]

250 in Tests and 35 in WSC
I think that should be enough

He took 50+ wickets in 1976.
He didn’t play in 1977, 1978 and just 2 Tests in 1979.
He missed out on his peak years(23, 24 & 25 years).

It reminds me of tennis legend Chris Evert.
She won 18 Slams. But missed out playing her favourite Slam 3 times and AO like 8-9 times at peak.

He is borderline and just misses out as n ATG.

 

[subshakerz]

yes, because he doesn't have an answer for it. He can't defend his positions in that regard.

I already replied it but it's not related to the thread on Lillee vs Botham.

And I mentioned 3 guys as locks, but the only one that was challenged was Marshall. Not Hobbs, not Tendy.

Even the ESPN list that @subshakerz loves to use as his sole source to prove Pollock is undisputably better than Richards, still has Barry in the top 25. Marshall has as perfect and well rounded a record and skill set as anyone in the history of the game, better actually, and his impact was as great as anyone's. And anyone who's watched a game of test cricket would know the value of a cordon.

When convenient you use peer or pundit rating, when convenient you say it's your personal selection. It's the same tired shtick.

What low rep?

By players of the era he was recognized as the best bowler in the world from '83 till the end of the decade.

As usual you're making **** up.

Low relative rep among pundits of the era.

That's literally what you did.

You do see that right? Or do you.lack even the slightest amount of self awareness
?

I don't use others ATGs XIs to justify my rankings.

You're free to name the ones you would place ahead of him for a space.

Strawman.

 

[Johan]

Batsmen damaged by Statsguru would be people like Weekes, Walcott, Compton and Ponting. all rated as fantastic batsmen in their times just for some random pencil pushing nerds from 2020 to term them HTBs and hacks on the basis of blind average reading.

 

[Coronis]

That's where you get it wrong, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind or opinions.

Just showing how ignorant and wrong they are.

And no matter how snide and sarcastic your comments are, it doesn't make them any more right or less stubborn in their denial..

Ah yes showing very successfully. And yeah… stubborn in denial. I guess I’m a black kettle, Mr. Pot.

Wasn't referring to you, but yes, you fit in quite nicely as well.

This is a cricket forum where ideas are to be shared and discussed.

But that only seemingly applies if everyone toes the line and believes what everyone else does.

So instead of argue on merit and strength of argument, you use sarcasm and try to denigrate. It's easier to maintain the status quo and belittle what you disagree with.

All of these arguments, Barry being seen and recognized as an ATG, that heaven forbid another West Indian could be seen as an automatic in such a team, slip fielding can't possibly be as important as lower order batting, look at the stats, it's all a level of group think and established standards that seems impossible to challenge.

And I mentioned 3 guys as locks, but the only one that was challenged was Marshall. Not Hobbs, not Tendy.

Even the ESPN list that @subshakerz loves to use as his sole source to prove Pollock is undisputably better than Richards, still has Barry in the top 25. Marshall has as perfect and well rounded a record and skill set as anyone in the history of the game, better actually, and his impact was as great as anyone's. And anyone who's watched a game of test cricket would know the value of a cordon.
But I don't agree with everyone, don't play nice and one of about 4 from the Caribbean, so be free to have a go. Nah.

Mate. I was talking about the irony of you of all people on here posting about someone having a lack of self awareness. Unsurprisingly it went over your head.

 

[subshakerz]

@kyear2 I probably agree with you way more on most cricket stuff than @Coronis yet the latter and I are still able to engage in argumentation somewhat productively.

Please understand the pushback you get isn't on your views but on how you argue. So stop playing this victim and engaging in long diatribes and whining. It's tiresome and a drag on this forum.

Aren't you tired of saying the same thing about the same players endlessly? I for one would rather not have to argue with you on Imran anymore. It goes nowhere.

You are much better to engage with when you just deal directly with a topic.

Please reflect.

 

[The Sean]

In any event I went though the names and teams you provided. Woodcock and TMS I'm familiar with.

I could find nothing for Peter Baxter and Gemini said there's no evidence that he made one.

I've read CMJ's rankings and Marshall is no. 11 and the 2nd fast bowler I believe.

Henry Blofeld, his team was interesting.
Bradman | Hobbs | Sobers | Richards | Lloyd | Botham | Knott | Warne | Trueman | Spofforth | Laker

Again I can't find anything for Bill Frindall,.or Jonathan Agnew neither could the AI. Not saying they didn't, just couldn't find anything. Was probably rolled into the TMS effort.

Bradman, ahh the one that opens with Barry and an attack of Lindwall, Lillee, Grimmett, Warne and Bedser. But again, he opens with Barry so I'll allow it.

Ashley Mallet also named a test XI, and from what I've seen Marshall does make it. Along with Lillee, Warne and Grimmett.

I won't take up too much more space here, but the Baxter, CMJ, Agnew, Frindall and Blofeld teams were all published in the same book, as well as the TMS 40th anniversary team (which was separate and not something any of the others were "rolled in" to). The Blofeld team you've quoted there isn't the one he picked.

I in fact list and discuss all of them in "The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread" on Oct 25 and 26 2021 if you want to have a look (you engaged in the discussion at the time).

Mallet didn't pick Marshall or Lillee in his XI in the book he published.

Anyway, I'll leave you to look at it or not as you want to, I don't want to go around in circles taking up more space.

 

[Johan]

Compton is someone who was damaged by statsguru

He's likely the largest point of disagreement between PEWS and Cotonis isn't he?

 

[Prince EWS]

He's likely the largest point of disagreement between PEWS and Cotonis isn't he?

Nah that's probably James Anderson.

 

[Coronis]

He's likely the largest point of disagreement between PEWS and Cotonis isn't he?

I hate when people call me that.

Nah that's probably James Anderson.

Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[Coronis]

I don’t think I even know your Anderson views tbh