SJS said:
People also get entangled in statistics. No Viv's greatness does not lie in his flair though he had oodles of it. BTW, did you see him bat?
We dont know but are you aware of the quality of bowlers around the world when Viv was playing? Do you think Ponting gets to face anyone like Lillee, Imran, Hadlee ?
The quality of bowling, particularly pace bowling, around the world is the lowest one has seen in a very very long time. The exception is in the Aussie attack who also have one of the all time great spinners playing for them (and most would call that an understatement of great magnitude). The difference between Aussie bowling of the last decade and more and the rest of the world is too glaring.
Yes Windies had a better fast attack then any other team in the world and that was NOT BECAUSE other countries did not have quality fast bowlers but because they did not have Windies QUANTITY and seemingly inexhaustible supply !
No they dont but without clear perspective of the context they can be (mis)used to draw completely misleading conclusions
So the greatest innings ever played in test cricket are :
1. Lara - 400*
2. Hayden - 380
3. Lara - 375
4. Sobers - 365
5. Hutton 364.....blah blah blah
The past few threads have highlighted and proved my point exactly as i knew they would.
As I said, we can all take snippets of a career and disect it (IE: Pontings "Failure" in ONE series). I Bet i could dig up a series or 20 of Lara's and make an outlandish statement that proves he's a hack.
Here's a sample of taking a snippet for your own gain
...Ponting has only been dismissed once by the "one day to be Best Bowler? in history" (Murili of course). So wow! He must be good...Funny thing is, someone could twist that around and make the argument look like ponting isn't very good...Selective Statistics!
And as for the above absurdity of the greatest innings based on score alone...another example of ONE snippet to suit...More Selective Statistics!
I assume that was a joke.
If you read my posts i mention Stats do not lie over a PERIOD of time. They can lie for one innings, one series, one year, or even a few years. They do not lie over a Career...
Another post said did i see Viv play. I did...and he was a cool dude... So by SEEING someone who looks cool, doesn't wear a helmut, has an arrogant swagger, that means it makes him a better batsman?
FYI...Viv's Avereage against Australia(Lillie, Thomo)....44...
The last half of his career Viv played against the MIGHT of "...Lawson, Alderman, Tuffnell, McDermott, Matthews, Whitney, Hughes, Pringle..." He didnt even play against Pakistan in his last 30 Tests!
More selective stats
As for Ponting early in his career not performing against 'quality bowling' (BTW...Someone mentioned Hogg!!!! I'll ignore any future posts from them)
You'll note that Steve Waugh failed badly early in his career. So I assume we'll all downplay his achievements?...
Viv averaged 30 after 12 Tests.....Even more Selective Statistics!
Your Logic would dictate that Alan Border runs rings around anyone now...He faced them all...
Oh...I'm about to mount a case for the Don being overated (Have you seen the footage. Those blokes are bowling half trackers that dont get over **** high! I could have averaged 100 playing then).
I assume i'd get full support???
The posts just re-iterate my point. Opposition, snippets of careers, Selective Statistics,
looks, technique are ALL subjective, and no-one is right or wrong.
If you delve deep enough you can always find something to 'Prove' your point.
STATS over a period of time are NOT selective...People are.
BTW...Is Andre Nel the biggest Tosser ever to play the game?