Your ATG team pace bowling trio

[kyear2]

Re batting as well, Sachin is coming in for a 30 averaging bat. On average, you can expect an additional RPI of 30 runs with him there. Imran is coming for a sub 10 one. There's atleast a 20 RPI increase. His batting record in India is also bafflingly good, with even winning a MoTS mostly for batting. Jadeja at 7, Imran at 8 and Ashwin 9; and you can expect them to drag your sub par top and middle order to something salvageable. Ofcourse not the same as putting Tendulkar in the team since ofc net RPI increase isn't the only method, but damn would it be a big advantage.

This is just insane.

The most critical and important player for the team has been Bumrah, and you're trading match winning bowling performances away from home, for lower order batting?

You're automatically and critically making your team worst.

 

[capt_Luffy]

This is just insane.

The most critical and important player for the team has been Bumrah, and you're trading match winning bowling performances away from home, for lower order batting?

You're automatically and critically making your team worst.

Ummm...... I ain't chief. Bumrah is also highly injury prone. Playing all 5 matches in a 5 match Series is a genuine challenge for him. And whether Imran is even worse than Bumrah is another matter (spoilers: most think he isn't, not even by skillset). This all before considering we are having Gill as Captain and Imran could legitimately make the team as a batsman........ Think.

 

[kyear2]

You probably need to make up your mind on whether you actually count WSC stats or not. With WSC, Imran averages 23 at a SR of 57 in Australia in that period, which is pretty fantastic by any standard. I am completely ok with excluding WSC from his record but you ignoring it for Imran but constantly bringing up WSC numbers for players you like (the two Richards for example) is so blatantly biased it always makes me chuckle.



None of the strike rate figures you've quoted sound problematic considering other top tier quicks have similar numbers in multiple countries.

Hadlee- SR of 59 in England, 60 in Pakistan, 57 in WI
McGrath- 63 in SA, 63 in Pakistan, 64 in SL, 57 in India.

Imran's SR actually seems kinda better considering the pitches he had to play on in 87 in India.

First of all I referenced strike rate and average, which you conveniently excluded.

McGrath also played half of his career in a decidedly flat pitch era, Imran had the exact opposite and still has challenges away from home. Context.

 

[subshakerz]

No you're just trying to disregard that the other two had higher batting averages/were better players, which called into question your stronger middle order claim. It's just the difference of one elite batsman, not the whole batting line-up. Which means the rest of the batsman/team were just as easy/difficult to get out. I don't think there's anything more to say on this, if you don't agree that's fine.

The other two have marginally better averages, Chappell has a 17 point difference with Hughes and was the best bat of Australia in the era.

One elite batsman makes a hell of a difference and can turn a reasonable lineup into a strong lineup. Yes let's agree to disagree.

I'm not ignoring it at all, I counted all of Gavaskar's dismissals for both players. They're getting him out at a similar ratio but don't you think that getting out a batsman early & for not many is a superior result? Which perhaps suggests they were a more threatening bowler?
The thing is though Imran was always the opening bowler, if he hasn't got a wicket in his first spell that means the advantage is now with the batting side. The reason why I put emphasis on scores of 20 or less is because that suggests they most likely got out in that first spell of bowling.

Bowling support is useful for keeping batsman on lower scores yes but this is more about getting them out early doors before they're set and get a big score. Again there's my earlier point that Marshall was competing with other quality bowlers to get him out whereas Imran should have the lions share due to less competition. I think it's impressive he got Gavaskar out only 3 times fewer than Imran from less matches with more competition for wickets. Similar point for Amaranth. Getting a top class bat out at any score is a good thing, I just think getting them out earlier is better.

My point is that it's much easier for Gavaskar to block out one bowler and score against the other against Imran than Marshall. Hence using the criteria of cheap dismissals is very contextual. But the larger point is that there isn't a big difference between them on the Indian lineups, certainly not enough to draw conclusions. We can't dispute though that Imran who faced Vishwanath in their lineup faced stronger Indian lineups.

Not a big difference no, which is why I originally said he was a tad better at getting the best out. But when you put together all these records of being slightly better together: better average, WPM, S/R, lower scores at dismissal, similar or better dismissals per innings (despite competition) it does paint a picture of being better at getting top batsman out.

Dude, I already consider Marshall a better bowler based on some of those measures which are much more notable than against best bats. But as you concede, there isn't a clear advantage for Marshall in this regard.

 

[kyear2]

Wow sr of 45 vs wi imran

Imran and Kapil both had among their best records in the WI.

As I've repeatedly said, the '88 squad wasn't the world class batting unit that it's made out to be and by average over the decade, Pakistan was just as tough.

Also the way the WI went after the oppositions best pacers, it lead the them having better strike rates.

It was a good performance, no doubt, but not the ATG batting lineup it's made out to be.

 

[subshakerz]

First of all I referenced strike rate and average, which you conveniently excluded.

McGrath also played half of his career in a decidedly flat pitch era, Imran had the exact opposite and still has challenges away from home. Context.

Lol Overrated did reference average and SR for Imran

And McGraths high SR countries are those he overwhelmingly toured in the 90s not the 2000s. Context.

 

[kyear2]

Bullshit. You’re assuming he just dropped in at the same level as the bowler he peaked as. It’s a stupid presumption.

He basically averaged the same as Hadlee and Marshall while bowling half the time in a tougher era. That halff coincided with his peak. People want to give Imran a couple of extra pint s because muh pitches (never mind muh umpires) but won’t run the same rule over a bloke who excelled on flat decks for over half a decade.

The thing is that for Imran everyone has a barrel full of provisions and exclusions that isn't extended to another bowler.

We have to cut off the 5 years and the last 3. You have to ignore the fact that he had the most biased home umpires in the history of the game, you have to ignore the rampant and u paralleled ball tampering that he engaged in, you have to ignore the away record and make excuses for all of them.

But everyone else is taken at face value.

Last week Ambrose wasn't penetrative enough, this week, even worse strike rates "aren't that bad"

Anyways, the argument that somehow Imran was as effective or even just as good or great a bowler as McGrath is just nonsense that they don't even believe.

 

[subshakerz]

I already removed those two games hence the brackets (where he bowled).

Ok but I concede his advantage over Border.

That is not quite correct, although I was partially wrong too.
The 1st game of '86 had two Pakistani umpires. The following 2 matches did not.
However the 1990 series did not have neutral umpres at all, you can look the scorecards on cricinfo to prove this.
So including the 80's series (which you left out) 7 out of 9 games he did have home umpires, you cannot rule out that argument.

Fine then but let's just say for the sake of arguing it's roughly equal between Viv and Miandad. Which is my point. No real big advantage for Marshall.

The gap between that '76 series and the series against Pakistan in early '77 was 6 months, form can absolutely change in that period of time. It wasn't just Imran getting him out either, Nawaz, Mushtaq Mohammed, Raja & Altaf also managed to get him & they aren't the same calibre of bowler that Imran was. The fact he only averaged 28.55 that series/didn't score a century/got out to lower quality bowlers to me suggests he was out of form but yes Imran took 25 wickets that series (albeit at 31.60) so he was taking wickets.

Viv was in the middle of a historic batting peak between 76 to 81 and this series was right in the middle of that. Bad form is no excuse anyways to discredit Imran taking his wicket like you are doing.

Already talked about support which can cut both ways, but Marshall had a better away record than Imran as well so I don't think you can put it down to better bowling conditions.

Marshall overall doesn't have any notable advantage over Imran against best bats except Border.

Anyways there are better arguments for Marshall.

 

[subshakerz]

Also the way the WI went after the oppositions best pacers, it lead the them having better strike rates.

Hahaha man I have to give it you, you always find new ways to downplay Imran. Kudos.

 

[subshakerz]

Bullshit. You’re assuming he just dropped in at the same level as the bowler he peaked as. It’s a stupid presumption.

He basically averaged the same as Hadlee and Marshall while bowling half the time in a tougher era. That halff coincided with his peak. People want to give Imran a couple of extra pint s because muh pitches (never mind muh umpires) but won’t run the same rule over a bloke who excelled on flat decks for over half a decade.

McGraths peak started from 95 till career end. You said he would average in the teens, he averages 21.5 from 95 to 2000. Basically career average.

 

[kyear2]

I already removed those two games hence the brackets (where he bowled).


That is not quite correct, although I was partially wrong too.
The 1st game of '86 had two Pakistani umpires. The following 2 matches did not.
However the 1990 series did not have neutral umpres at all, you can look the scorecards on cricinfo to prove this.
So including the 80's series (which you left out) 7 out of 9 games he did have home umpires, you cannot rule out that argument.

The gap between that '76 series and the series against Pakistan in early '77 was 6 months, form can absolutely change in that period of time. It wasn't just Imran getting him out either, Nawaz, Mushtaq Mohammed, Raja & Altaf also managed to get him & they aren't the same calibre of bowler that Imran was. The fact he only averaged 28.55 that series/didn't score a century/got out to lower quality bowlers to me suggests he was out of form but yes Imran took 25 wickets that series (albeit at 31.60) so he was taking wickets.

Already talked about support which can cut both ways, but Marshall had a better away record than Imran as well so I don't think you can put it down to better bowling conditions.

View attachment 47766

Nice post

 

[kyear2]

Ummm...... I ain't chief. Bumrah is also highly injury prone. Playing all 5 matches in a 5 match Series is a genuine challenge for him. And whether Imran is even worse than Bumrah is another matter (spoilers: most think he isn't, not even by skillset). This all before considering we are having Gill as Captain and Imran could legitimately make the team as a batsman........ Think.

Winning tests consistently overseas with a brilliant record, think.....

I do not select by bowlers by their batting averages.

 

[Cipher]

My point is that it's much easier for Gavaskar to block out one bowler and score against the other against Imran than Marshall. Hence using the criteria of cheap dismissals is very contextual.

So does that mean you think the main reason why Marshall got Gavaskar out cheaply/earlier more often compared to Imran is because his bowling partners were better? I'm not ruling it out because I don't have a formed opinion on it, but for someone of Gavaskar's disciplined reputation especially during a test match where run rate is less important, I'm not seeing why he would be taking risky shots considerably more than normal.

That aside, why doesn't Imran have these batsman out more often than Marshall when he was considerably better than the other bowlers in the side? If we look at how players such as Hadlee, Murali & Bumrah have performed carrying their attack it doesn't seem like just waiting them out stops you from getting out to them. Pure quality was getting them wickets not just scoring pressure.

But the larger point is that there isn't a big difference between them on the Indian lineups, certainly not enough to draw conclusions. We can't dispute though that Imran who faced Vishwanath in their lineup faced stronger Indian lineups.

I think there is a difference in wicket taking ability given Marshall's better average against India & better ratios against Amarnath & Vengsarkar but that's fine if you disagree on those ratios. I think we have a difference of opinion about what the bearing that one batsman has on the strength of a side/whether that means you're better at getting batsmen out. There are still 5 other recognised batsman in the team you need to get out.
Does the appearance of one batsman averaging just shy of 42 affect your bowling effectiveness against a side that much over another batsman?
To add to this point why was Imran less effective in 1987 & 1989 against them when playing as you described weaker lineups?

If you think that Marshall is a better bowler, why do you think so if he wasn't any better (not even slightly better) at getting batsman out?

Apologies if I'm testing you, I appreciate the replies.

 

[smash84]

To add to this point why was Imran less effective in 1987 & 1989 against them when playing as you described weaker lineups?

This one is pretty simple. Those pitches were some of the flattest ever, even by subcontinental standards and by 1989 Imran was on his way downhill.

Funny enough Imran was the man of the series in that 1987 series.

 

[Cipher]

Viv was in the middle of a historic batting peak between 76 to 81 and this series was right in the middle of that. Bad form is no excuse anyways to discredit Imran taking his wicket like you are doing.

Even in prolonged peaks you are going to have dips in form, performing brilliantly without failure for 5 years straight is highly irregular. His following games against Australia he didn't perform either. I disagree, my argument has been about needing Marshall in your AT team because he would be able to get out the best batsman of all eras regardless of form. Not saying Imran couldn't outright do that, just providing context to his record vs Marshall's.

Marshall overall doesn't have any notable advantage over Imran against best bats except Border.

An easily identifiable difference in pure dismissal numbers no, but I think with nuance there are some differences there (the ratios & low scores) + other overall metrics I've mentioned earlier. I still think you'd rather have Marshall bowling than Imran to get a wicket but I suppose there are easier ways to prove this such as talking about their qualities rather than stats.

 

[Burgey]

McGraths peak started from 95 till career end. You said he would average in the teens, he averages 21.5 from 95 to 2000. Basically career average.

McGrath's peak didn't start in 95 ffs. In November 1994 he was dropped from the test side and he didn't even take the new rock in the Windies in 95. He was a very promising and potentially great bowler but he really began to dominate from about the 97 Ashes. Then he missed the 98 Indian tour with an injury as well.

 

[Burgey]

Marshall overall doesn't have any notable advantage over Imran against best bats except Border.

For any keen student of the game, having an advatage against the greatest batsman of that (or indeed any) era would be enough to give him the edge.

 

[honestbharani]

haha, I see @Burgey has finally met salty.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Winning tests consistently overseas with a brilliant record, think.....

I do not select by bowlers by their batting averages.

Like Imran did in Australia, England, NZ, India and WI...... Think.

Imran is literally the most allroundest of all all-rounders after Sobers.

 

[Bolo.]

Distinctly ahead means that there are better bowlers than Imran and as a bowler alone he isn't being picked as a bowler alone.

I can very easily argue that if you aren't getting picked as a bowler alone, then you shouldn't be at all.

And it's strange that you mention sacrifice, when you're clearly making a bowling sacrifice in bowling to include Imran.

And to even mention a sacrifice in batting when discussing a bowling attack relied upon to bowl out the opposition is counter initiative.

So to be absolutely clear, for a bowling attack that's playing for a championship and responsible for taking 20 wickets, you're more willing to make a sacrifice with regards to the bowling more so for the batting? Even when said batsman is batting at no. 11.

With regards to the Marshall being "clearly not as good a player as the other two"

I would say that one was universally seen as the best bowler in the world from the time he took the new ball, which happens to coincide with the careers of the other two. He's also widely acknowledged as the greatest bowler of all time, with only Lillee, Barnes, and of late McGrath even being mentioned as alternatives by varying constituencies.

We can also look at the amount of AT teams where either are selected above him. Are they any? I also find it hard to rationalize a bowler thanks ranked by most at best in the lower echelons of the top ten, being a greater player than the one ranked as the best. By such logic, Hammond, Kallis, Chappell, Lara, Ponting are all greater than Sachin. In fact just put every all rounder ahead of every specialist.

If you aren't picking 11 bowlers, you are compromising on bowling quality. You aren't even picking 5.

You are perfectly fine with compromising the bowling quality. You just don't like this compromise.

If Ambrose had the batting career of Lara, you would pick him. See last paragraph.

Pick the 4 best bowlers (and a balanced attack) is a principle that often holds true in real world teams. They lack the resources. At a hypothetical level, you don't believe this principle would hold true, unless you want to argue you wouldn't pick Ambrose/Lara. Imran and Hadlee are real world examples of where this principle breaks down for a lot of people.