• 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.

AB de Villers vs Michael Bevan vs Sachin Tendulkar

Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
McGrath is the best, then Wasim, Garner and Pollock amongst fast bowlers.
Among spinners Murali, Saqlain and then day light.
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
Migara said:
McGrath is the best, then Wasim, Garner and Pollock amongst fast bowlers.
Among spinners Murali, Saqlain and then day light.
Click to expand...
Murali was a wicket-taking machine but I cant seem to recall any big match performance from him in a long career. Hence my hesitation to put him in the spot.

Saqlain was magic but, as much as I am a fan of his, I believe he benefited from a period of the late 90s when batsmen simply hadn't adjusted to the doosra which almost became close to a stock ball of his in ODIs, so I am not sure he would be as successful had he played a decade later.

I think Warne should be in the conversation. Not the prettiest stats but three clutch World Cup knockout performances will always give him a case. Watching him in ODIs, I didn't feel he would run through a side but would take the most important wickets at the key moments.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Murali was a wicket-taking machine but I cant seem to recall any big match performance from him in a long career. Hence my hesitation to put him in the spot.

Saqlain was magic but, as much as I am a fan of his, I believe he benefited from a period of the late 90s when batsmen simply hadn't adjusted to the doosra which almost became close to a stock ball of his in ODIs, so I am not sure he would be as successful had he played a decade later.

I think Warne should be in the conversation. Not the prettiest stats but three clutch World Cup knockout performances will always give him a case. Watching him in ODIs, I didn't feel he would run through a side but would take the most important wickets at the key moments.
Click to expand...
You mean big match performances are the ones against sorry sides who cannot play spin?

1631809527132.png

1631809561310.png

That graphs tell the whole story. Murali has 800+ points in a chunk of matches as half as Warne's career. Saqlain for about 60 matches before he did his knees was absolute magic. The important thing was, they did it against India too.
 
0

_00_deathscar

International Regular
subshakerz said:
Not the prettiest stats but three clutch World Cup knockout performances will always give him a case.
Click to expand...
I know they 'turned up at the right time' but I'm not sure how much importance I place for 'clutch singular performances' for the Aussies (ever since they got good) who had the benefit of not really needing to turn up half the time (as someone else would pick up the slack). Any other team and them not turning up almost every match is the team being knocked out.
 
sunilz

sunilz

International Regular
_00_deathscar said:
I know they 'turned up at the right time' but I'm not sure how much importance I place for 'clutch singular performances' for the Aussies (ever since they got good) who had the benefit of not really needing to turn up half the time (as someone else would pick up the slack). Any other team and them not turning up almost every match is the team being knocked out.
Click to expand...
Aus would have lost both 1996 and 99 WC SF if not for Warne.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
_00_deathscar said:
I know they 'turned up at the right time' but I'm not sure how much importance I place for 'clutch singular performances' for the Aussies (ever since they got good) who had the benefit of not really needing to turn up half the time (as someone else would pick up the slack). Any other team and them not turning up almost every match is the team being knocked out.
Click to expand...
Not a fan of this logic at all. They were such a good team because they generally all did "turn up" all the time. It's a misconception to think that being in a good team means you don't have to try as hard. If even a few of the players thought that way then they wouldn't be as good a team, that's what differentiated them.
 
Pap Finn Keighl

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
TheJediBrah said:
Not a fan of this logic at all. They were such a good team because they generally all did "turn up" all the time. It's a misconception to think that being in a good team means you don't have to try as hard. If even a few of the players thought that way then they wouldn't be as good a team, that's what differentiated them.
Click to expand...
Its easier to get better stats if you are playing in a great team. Ponting, McGrath, Marshall.. All benefitted from that.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
If clutch singular performances in WC finals and semis are the benchmark, the God will be Aravinda de Silva.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Pap Finn Keighl said:
Its easier to get better stats if you are playing in a great team. Ponting, McGrath, Marshall.. All benefitted from that.
Click to expand...
Don't think it is a factor when you7 compare Murali, Warne and Saqlain. All three played at least part of their careers in ATG teams.
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
Migara said:
If clutch singular performances in WC finals and semis are the benchmark, the God will be Aravinda de Silva.
Click to expand...
They are a benchmark, along with overall stats, etc. Because of the surfeit of meaningless ODIs that became more common post 2000, I prefer players who have delivered in the highest pressure matches as well. World Cup, ICC trophies, and knockout matches are higher stake games.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
They are a benchmark, along with overall stats, etc. Because of the surfeit of meaningless ODIs that became more common post 2000, I prefer players who have delivered in the highest pressure matches as well. World Cup, ICC trophies, and knockout matches are higher stake games.
Click to expand...
ODIs post ~2005 became a joke. Outside of world cups you rarely see full strength sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top