You are saying that there is no additional value brought by winning games? Or that you simply don't rate a player on the value they bring?
and ATG innings/test that led to a win for india. I know his fans would find a good innings from him and hype it up as an ATG innings to counter this
I am saying winning games is more than just one individual effort so I care more about how they perform under pressure individually than rating them based on the result which can't be solely attributed to them.
It would depend how we would define an ATG innings. But that isn't really a good criteria to rate someone over an entire career.
If pressure is your argument, you should rate bats who performed against opponents of comparable strength higher. Who is under more pressure- a player involved in a missmatch, where their own performance won't change the result, or one in a tight game whose performance will?
Davidson took 33 wickets in 4 games in 1960 series, Trueman averaged 20 odd against the mighty windies after his debut.
Where do you get these stats from?
How did you define low scoring games?
Statsguru
avg rpw less than or equal to 30
These are the stats of Steve Smith in low scoring series.
That is high imo, the all time RPW aggregate is 31.93. Make it less than or equal to 25 imo.
Can you give the link of statsguru,?
Where did you find these?
I'm not aware of this. I used Statsguru for it.
Indeed. However, I choose not to do that because there are relatively few games in which 'X' player participates and has an average of less than 25 runs per wicket.
He scored 103 vs england in chennai chasing 387. Might not be atg but matchwinning. Has atg 136 at same ground vs wasim waqar and saqlain where he choked and india lost by 12 runs otherwise would have been there with lara 153*