Keith Miller vs Shane Warne

[Fuller Pilch]

He couldn't bowl a hoop down a hill.

ATG downhill hoop bowler

 

[Coronis]

He couldn't bowl a hoop down a hill.

Have you ever tried? Its not as easy as the saying would have you believe. Neither is shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[kyear2]

And then you said because they don't need them.

Nuance, and I've said this so many times..

Is it an absolute necessity? No.

Does it have overall value and situational importance, of course.

Do I want a tail of rabbits? Definitely not.

But do I believe the no. 8 spot is a designated all rounder position? No. There's 6 & 7 for that.

Would I select a bowling attack factoring in batting averages, no.

I've also said this before, if Bumrah hits 300 wickets, my all time attack (in batting order) is
Marshall | Warne | Bumrah | McGrath

And no one can tell me that isn't the best attack.

But more importantly, you ORS and myself have similar thought processes but for difference disciplines. You're happy with the preferred in one area and average in the next. I go the opposite direction.

I think the history of the game has clearly showed us which of the two should be preferred.

But to be clear, lower order batting has value, doesn't mean you make it a primary consideration for selection.

 

[kyear2]

Such a reductive way of judging ARs.

How?

We all have preferences and I prefer a specialists who can add a secondary contribution.

As a cricketer, I prefer even a Hammond over Miller.

 

[Johan]

....Hammond was an AR

 

[sayon basak]

....Hammond was an AR

Good luck to him at making the top 20 in that.

 

[Johan]

Good luck to him at making the top 20 in that.

Hadlee won't be a top 10 "all rounder" either, but he is an all rounder regardless.

 

[sayon basak]

Hadlee won't be a top 10 "all rounder" either, but he is an all rounder regardless.

He will be.

 

[Johan]

He will be.

he shouldn't

 

[capt_Luffy]

he shouldn't

Not directly related, but damn if Hadlee could convert his CC stats to Test, he might just be above Don himself!! 14 with the ball and 38 with the bat is bonkers

 

[sayon basak]

Not directly related, but damn if Hadlee could convert his CC stats to Test, he might just be above Don himself!! 14 with the ball and 38 with the bat is bonkers

Close to Frank Tarrant

Matches​	Inns​	NO​	Runs​	HS ​	Ave​	50​	100​
194​	325​	24​	11679​	250*​	38.80​	52​	26​

Balls​	Mdns​	Wkts​	BB​	Ave​	Ct​	St​
41760​	1764​	955​	9-41​	17.44​	188​	0​

 

[kyear2]

Even you rate some players as ahead of Sobers in primary discipline. Why do rate him so highly if the advantage in primary can't be made up in secondary? Why do you struggle so much in understanding that the standards you apply to him are standards others people apply consistently?

There are certain posters like Subz and ORS, who I don't particularly get along with and oft disagree with, but I know they understand the game, we just see it differently. That and Subz's primary objective is to defend Imran at all costs, and that gets in the way.
There's a also a couple trolls who post based on personality who I just basically ignore at this point .

But I swear to God that's there's a handful of you that either don't even remotely understand the game or lack understanding of nuance or context, or both.

Shane Warne is a bowler who can potentially be rated as highly as the 4th greatest of all time. Miller, it's an argument if he's an all time great and most come down on the side of no for that argument.
There's a chasm between the two on primary.

Sobers as a batsman is very much the equal of a Hadlee or Tendulkar on primary and definitely in the same tier. Outside of CW Sobers is well ahead of Hadlee on primary.

There's no comparison between these arguments.

 

[Bolo.]

There are certain posters like Subz and ORS, who I don't particularly get along with and oft disagree with, but I know they understand the game, we just see it differently. That and Subz's primary objective is to defend Imran at all costs, and that gets in the way.
There's a also a couple trolls who post based on personality who I just basically ignore at this point .

But I swear to God that's there's a handful of you that either don't even remotely understand the game or lack understanding of nuance or context, or both.

Shane Warne is a bowler who can potentially be rated as highly as the 4th greatest of all time. Miller, it's an argument if he's an all time great and most come down on the side of no for that argument.
There's a chasm between the two on primary.

Sobers as a batsman is very much the equal of a Hadlee or Tendulkar on primary and definitely in the same tier. Outside of CW Sobers is well ahead of Hadlee on primary.

There's no comparison between these arguments.

Look, you don't rate Sobers as the best in primary. You rate a number of players ahead of him.

Contrary to what you were saying, you do recognize that secondary can give a leg up over primary, at least when it comes to Sobers. What you are saying is that people shouldn't apply the same principle in a less diluted form to other players. Why is there some magic tipping point at which this principle stops operating?

 

[kyear2]

Look, you don't rate Sobers as the best in primary. You rate a number of players ahead of him.

Contrary to what you were saying, you do recognize that secondary can give a leg up over primary, at least when it comes to Sobers. What you are saying is that people shouldn't apply the same principle in a less diluted form to other players. Why is there some magic tipping point at which this principle stops operating?

There are tiers between Warne and Miller as bowlers, like multiple tiers.

Meanwhile there's only 3 players that I definitively rank above Sobers based on primary.

There are 4 batsmen I rate in the BAB tier and I rate them all equally and rank them by best bowlers faced. So even with Viv and Tendulkar, they're in the same sub tier as peers.

 

[Coronis]

Nuance, and I've said this so many times..

Is it an absolute necessity? No.

Does it have overall value and situational importance, of course.

Do I want a tail of rabbits? Definitely not.

But do I believe the no. 8 spot is a designated all rounder position? No. There's 6 & 7 for that.

Would I select a bowling attack factoring in batting averages, no.

I've also said this before, if Bumrah hits 300 wickets, my all time attack (in batting order) is
Marshall | Warne | Bumrah | McGrath

And no one can tell me that isn't the best attack.

But more importantly, you ORS and myself have similar thought processes but for difference disciplines. You're happy with the preferred in one area and average in the next. I go the opposite direction.

I think the history of the game has clearly showed us which of the two should be preferred.

But to be clear, lower order batting has value, doesn't mean you make it a primary consideration for selection.

Just say OS please

 

[Johan]

There are tiers between Warne and Miller as bowlers, like multiple tiers.

Meanwhile there's only 3 players that I definitively rank above Sobers based on primary.

There are 4 batsmen I rate in the BAB tier and I rate them all equally and rank them by best bowlers faced. So even with Viv and Tendulkar, they're in the same sub tier as peers.

so if you're asked between Ian Botham and James Anderson, you'd pick Anderson as a Cricketer because he's a much better bowler and by your formula you shouldn't pay any mind to Botham'e batting.

 

[Bolo.]

There are tiers between Warne and Miller as bowlers, like multiple tiers.

Meanwhile there's only 3 players that I definitively rank above Sobers based on primary.

There are 4 batsmen I rate in the BAB tier and I rate them all equally and rank them by best bowlers faced. So even with Viv and Tendulkar, they're in the same sub tier as peers.

If you rate even 1 player ahead of Sobers on primary (who you consider Sobers ahead of as a player), you believe in rating a player on more than just primary. For Sobers, you are following the same principle as people who rate more ARs highly. And complaining when they apply that principle to extra players.

 

[Johan]

Just say OS please

+1

 

[kyear2]

If you rate even 1 player ahead of Sobers on primary (who you consider Sobers ahead of as a player), you believe in rating a player on more than just primary. For Sobers, you are following the same principle as people who rate more ARs highly. And complaining when they apply that principle to extra players.

I swear you are just trolling at this point, otherwise just incredibly obtuse.

Coronis in another thread explained it perfectly, be it for rankings or selection for an XI, you generally start with who's the better specialist and on tie breakers you then progress to secondary. I've said this in the past as well, it's close you use these skills as tie breakers.
Unlike those who selectively only use that adage for some skills, it can be used for all 3.

Now Miller is a special case because as some has said, on secondary skill he's probably the best there's been. The problem there though, at least for me, is that Warne is one of the very best in primary as well, and it's not remotely close. As I said in a previous post, he's multiple tiers ahead of Miller on primary and that's not easy to overcome. It's not like Warne is the 5th best bowler and Miller is 15th, one's a top tier ATG and the other, on the judgement of most, isn't. And primary to primary, Miller's batting at best rates out as average if not below for a top order batsman.

So one is at best an borderline top order quality batsman who quite honestly underachieved in the role, who was also at best the 3rd most utilized bowler for those teams.

Warne is contrast is a player who as referenced wasn't only one of the great bowlers of all time and one of the two greatest spinners, he's one of the greatest match winners

There is no comparison between these two players and Sobers and Sachin or Sobers and Hadlee. I have Sobers ahead of Hadlee on primary and miles ahead in secondary, either of them.
With Sachin, ones 2nd and one 4th all time as batsmen, while the other was a top 5 slip of all time and a legitimate front line bowler who peaked out as the 6th best bowler in the world and around that for a decade averaging 27.

Id you can't grasp the differences between those examples, it genuinely doesn't make sense continuing the conversation.

 

[subshakerz]

The problem there though, at least for me, is that Warne is one of the very best in primary as well, and it's not remotely close. As I said in a previous post, he's multiple tiers ahead of Miller on primary and that's not easy to overcome. It's not like Warne is the 5th best bowler and Miller is 15th, one's a top tier ATG and the other, on the judgement of most, isn't. And primary to primary, Miller's batting at best rates out as average if not below for a top order batsman.

The problem in judging based on rankings is that it doesn't match real world results.

In terms of rankings there is a big difference between Warne and Miller as bowlers. But so much as match impact.

Miller allows a team an extra bowler in the side by virtue of batting in the top six.