• 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.

Joel Garner vs Michael Holding

Joel Garner vs Michael Holding


  • Total voters
    29

subshakerz

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You are making a strawman here that he will average 25 over those games. Warne averages 25+.
Warne is a spinner and gets special treatment.

Actually the strawman was being made by Johan that Holding would take 50 more wickets at the same rate. I merely responded with the obvious caveat.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
What if those last 50 wickets took his average north of 25?
If Garner (who you massively under-rate) averages 30 for 41 wickets, he will end up with 300 @ 22. Similarly if Bumrah averages 30 for 81 wickets, he will end up with 300 @ 22.

May be it is just that those are ATG and Holding isn't.
 

subshakerz

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If Garner (who you massively under-rate) averages 30 for 41 wickets, he will end up with 300 @ 22. Similarly if Bumrah averages 30 for 81 wickets, he will end up with 300 @ 22.

May be it is just that those are ATG and Holding isn't.
But I want ATG to be for those who actually achieved those benchmarks.
 

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Warne is a spinner and gets special treatment.

Actually the strawman was being made by Johan that Holding would take 50 more wickets at the same rate. I merely responded with the obvious caveat.
There is also an equally high if not higher likelihood that he achieves them at an average lower than his career
 

Top