Shivnarine Chanderpaul vs Kane Williamson

[BazBall21]

All true. But would he help us get wins today? Or only lose 2-0 in a 5 match series?

Would need a Marshall or an Ambrose to make a real difference in truth. Chanderpaul would raise respectability levels but even Lara would only be able to flip a game so much with zero batting support (and poor bowling support away from home).

Shiv wouldn't have got out in the series against Woakes and Overton two years ago.

 

[Coronis]

I also said it often could be at the detriment of the team in terms of wins.

Barrington didn't play for an especially weak team, Shiv did, but that didn't factor into his reasoning. Kallis didn't have to go as slowly as he did. It was I'm playing for myself, wins be damned.

And turning losses into draws has its merit, but not close to being as important as turning draws into wins, or as some of the great ones did, turn loses into wins.

Please show some examples of when Kallis cost SA a win.

Who wants keep drawing contests and trying not to lose.

Saving draws are in close contests where you have a chance to come back, for a legitimately bad team, draws mean nothing in between the loses. Go for wins, no one remembers the draws in those instances. Lara's 153....

I think if you’d ask a weak/minnow team at any point in cricket history they’d unanimously disagree with you.

 

[kyear2]

Please show some examples of when Kallis cost SA a win.



I think if you’d ask a weak/minnow team at any point in cricket history they’d unanimously disagree with you.

Do you remember when I live, that's where we are. Draws don't move the needle at this point.

This era doesn't inspire this or even the previous generations to watch cricket far less play it. It was the Richards, Lloyds and the fast bowlers that inspired the next generation. The Chanderpaul didn't inspire anyone to turn towards the sport, draws doesn't inspire, it's resignation to mediocrity.

 

[Coronis]

Do you remember when I live, that's where we are. Draws don't move the needle at this point.

This era doesn't inspire this or even the previous generations to watch cricket far less play it. It was the Richards, Lloyds and the fast bowlers that inspired the next generation. The Chanderpaul didn't inspire anyone to turn towards the sport, draws doesn't inspire, it's resignation to mediocrity.

So he should have batted faster and caused more losses. Cool. That’s far better.

You’re obviously not inspiring much with just draws and losses but as a member of the team or coaching staff a draw is absolutely far more valuable than a loss. You can try and ignore that if you want but thats a fact.

 

[kyear2]

So he should have batted faster and caused more losses. Cool. That’s far better.

You’re obviously not inspiring much with just draws and losses but as a member of the team or coaching staff a draw is absolutely far more valuable than a loss. You can try and ignore that if you want but thats a fact.

A draw when you're backed up against a wall, and trying to survive yes.

Meekly shutting shop in a 50 50 proposition instead of taking a chance when you don't have many victories to your name, nah.

But most importantly, having someone who can do both, up the tempo as required is what's ideal. And a lot of these guys either couldn't or were reluctant to.

And also, we can just agree to disagree
That's ok too.

 

[thierry henry]

I still don't understand how you can reduce the perceived significance of a loss (i.e. a draw is closer to a loss than a win) without reducing the perceived significance of a win. If both teams are going all out for the win then the win reduces in value because neither team is trying very hard to not lose. If you've got two teams removing the draw as a real possibility but then acting like the win, which they've just made far more likely, is of increased significance, it's legitimately just a shared fantasy between the participants.

 

[thierry henry]

Anyway, the answer is still Kane regardless. He can be rightfully criticised for not making runs away against the toughest opponents, but I also think how prolific he has been for most of his career, and the importance of some of his runs which on paper were against lesser opponents, tends to be underestimated.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Anyway, the answer is still Kane regardless. He can be rightfully criticised for not making runs away against the toughest opponents, but I also think how prolific he has been for most of his career, and the importance of some of his runs which on paper were against lesser opponents, tends to be underestimated.

It’s just India and England that he’s really struggled against away anyways. He’s done well in Aus and SA in his prime.

 

[thierry henry]

It’s just India and England that he’s really struggled against away anyways. He’s done well in Aus and SA in his prime.

His record against SA away is poor, although it’s a small sample size and he did ok in the 1 completed test we’ve had there in the last decade. In the same period he had 1 good series and 1 bad series in Australia (only played 2 tests though), and the bad series hurt because we expected a lot. Still, you’re basically right.

 

[Johan]

Williamson by far.

 

[Johan]

Truth be told, The earlier conversation about turning losses into draws is probably inaccurate as Shiv won't make any conscious effort to shield the tail anyway, I doubt he would have consistent impact on matches one way or the other.

 

[ataraxia]

Truth be told, The earlier conversation about turning losses into draws is probably inaccurate as Shiv won't make any conscious effort to shield the tail anyway, I doubt he would have consistent impact on matches one way or the other.

He'd definitely turn losses into wins.

 

[Johan]

He'd definitely turn losses into wins.

for the opposition, Yes.

 

[ataraxia]

for the opposition, Yes.

Yeah uh I don't exactly rate him but he was a more valuable member of the West Indies team than Devon Smith.

 

[Johan]

Yeah uh I don't exactly rate him but he was a more valuable member of the West Indies team than Devon Smith.

I would put Chanderpaul on the same level as Darren Ganga in regards to match impact

 

[Agonizingly Awkward]

I would put Chanderpaul on the same level as Darren Ganga in regards to match impact

Then you are just wrong.

 

[Johan]

Then you are just wrong.

did I exaggerate Shiv's match impact?

 

[Coronis]

Well. At least Johan doesn’t hide it when he hates a player, unlike some on the forum. Bonus points for that, but minus points for letting personal bias affect ranking.

 

[Agonizingly Awkward]

did I exaggerate Shiv's match impact?

No just your stupidity

Well. At least Johan doesn’t hide it when he hates a player, unlike some on the forum. Bonus points for that, but minus points for letting personal bias affect ranking.

Who are they?

 

[Coronis]

Who are they?

I don’t name names. Its much more fun that way. Also it could make things just like your username between me and other people. I don’t want that. I wuv all my forum peeps, despite their eccentricities.