shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
Yes.
-
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.
Viv vs Warne
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Not even Hayden?
Agonizingly Awkward
School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Yet you still voted for Viv
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Viv for his chewing gum.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
DrWolverine
International Vice-Captain
I rate Murali higher than Warne.
Johan
International Coach
even if, they still have to be next to each other as bowlsrs alone, it's the biggest debate in Cricketing history, you can't have multiple names stuffed inbetween.
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Yes he can. He can have them as super close and still have 1 or 2 bowlers between them.
Johan
International Coach
just widening a non existent gap.
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Having 1 or 2 players between them doesn't mean that their gap is widened.
Johan
International Coach
That is exactly what it means dude.
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Why does the gap between player X and player Y depend on player Z? Let's say, there comes a bowler who is exactly as good as Warne/Murali, and is placed between them. Does their gap suddenly become bigger?
Johan
International Coach
Guess I can put 5 players between both and pretend that's not me widening the gap.
shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, I decided to play CW's game. Viv is imo a better batsman than Warne is a bowler. Warne definitely had a greater impact in winning matches though.
shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
In a given Test match or even series, would you rather have your top 2 bowlers be better than theirs while their top 3 bats are better than yours, or vice versa?
I think you definitely know the answer to this. The reason we could play India pretty even in Tests while that was still a thing is precisely because this imbalance between bowler and batsman impact. If you counted the match ups 1-11 all equally, vast majority of the time we seemed pretty hopelessly outmatched.
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
You can, as long as you believe all 5 of those bowlers and Warne/Murali are practically equal, otherwise you'd be lying. The Gap doesn't depend on how many players are between them, it just depends on the difference between the compared players. Let's say, there's no bowler between Warne and Murali, and there's not batter between Bradman and Hobbs. Does that mean that the gap is same?
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Sorry, who’s the we in this situation?
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No doubt bowlers are more valuable. But I don't think that makes them defacto better cricketers. I assume parity between bowlers and bats.
shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
Bro, look at my avatar.
Anyway, the timeframe for "fairly even" is late 90s to when Tests stopped between the two nations, i.e. from when I could perceive and follow cricket in a somewhat analytical human brain. My perception of relatively competitive matches (with a **** ton of bore draws mixed in too, no doubt) is from that, and the pattern of better fast bowling vs better batting lineup, is from that time too.