Debate thread for 2024 ranking of bowlers poll

[honestbharani]

Is there a way to create a thread to discuss current Indian side and Indian players where salty is banned?

 

[subshakerz]

Is there a way to create a thread to discuss current Indian side and Indian players where salty is banned?

You mean censoring me for not rating your favorites?

 

[honestbharani]

I mean leaving out a biased idiot who inserts himself into every mention of certain players' names even though its clear there is no way anyone is changing their opinions based on his envy and jealousy.

 

[subshakerz]

I mean leaving out a biased idiot who inserts himself into every mention of certain players' names even though its clear there is no way anyone is changing their opinions based on his envy and jealousy.

You're killing the mood here.

 

[Xix2565]

There is no mood when people make big posts about there being no vote manipulation and actually one player just isn't good.

 

[Coronis]

I mean leaving out a biased idiot who inserts himself into every mention of certain players' names even though its clear there is no way anyone is changing their opinions based on his envy and jealousy.

Don’t leave yourself out man.

There is no mood when people make big posts about there being no vote manipulation and actually one player just isn't good.

You’re not fun at parties

 

[honestbharani]

Don’t leave yourself out man.



You’re not fun at parties

Nah just leaving you out

 

[shortpitched713]

Because the mod tampered his vote to get a SENA player ahead of a SC player.

Personally, I think it's ****ed too, but I don't think the reason is necessarily this.

Some people insist on rating old time spinners with "good stats", where they never really rate pacers from previous eras. It's absolutely bonkers and inconsistent for them to attempt to hold out these spinners as ATGs who will be overlooked in history, and Ashwin will be rated ahead of Verity in the grand scheme of Test cricket consensus, eventually. But yeah, it's a bit ****ed imo.

 

[Coronis]

Personally, I think it's ****ed too, but I don't think the reason is necessarily this.

Some people insist on rating old time spinners with "good stats", where they never really rate pacers from previous eras. It's absolutely bonkers and inconsistent for them to attempt to hold out these spinners as ATGs who will be overlooked in history, and Ashwin will be rated ahead of Verity in the grand scheme of Test cricket consensus, eventually. But yeah, it's a bit ****ed imo.

Davidson is criminally underrated imo.

I can understand arguments for Lillee over him since they’re very different bowlers and can be rated for very different things…

Davidson only played 17 of his 44 tests at home. He has a better average (20.53 vs 23.03), the best economy of any great pacer post WWI (by some margin), and a marginally worse SR (62.2 vs 59.8)

Their careers largely overlapped so era difference is neglible. Davidson took more wickets per match/innings, took 14 5’fers and 2 10’fers in his 44 matches compared to Lindwall’s 12 5’fers and 0 10’fers.

I’m just… not seeing an objective reason for putting Lindwall above tbh.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Davidson was to Lindwall what Pollock was to Donald

 

[Coronis]

Davidson was to Lindwall what Pollock was to Donald

Yeah nah… Donald had a lower average, higher wpm/wpi and more 5’fers and 10’fers

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Am I supposed to blindly believe the opinion of a handful of stats nerds on CW over the widespread opinion of the cricketing community as well as my own on Wasim Akram?

If all former cricketers were to vote today, Wasim Akram would turn out to be in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time. He is at worst top 6 or top 7.

Here's cricinfo's all time xi-

The World XI: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Dennis Lillee


Jury -The jury comprised one former captain from each of the top Test-playing teams - Ian Chappell, Clive Lloyd, Tony Greig, Duleep Mendis, Ali Bacher, Intikhab Alam, John Wright, Ajit Wadekar - and four cricket historians and writers.

Lillee would be no.1 quick ever by same metric used. And he finished no.12 here.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

current players are subjected to incredible scrutiny for

failing to turn up not only in a series or even a test but even sessions that live long in memory because they’re so ****ing recent

when they have on paper stats like Rabada in Aus they’re rightly exposed as fraud series

hyperfocus on their tiniest failures

tax for benefitting from bowler friendly pitches

tax for not playing against the great behemoths of 20th century because cricket is the only sport that has evolved backwards

and now they also get **** on in advance because they’ll be **** eventually at a point

while older players

- dont get any black marks for any failures because those only exist as bad stats on paper and hey you can explain them away too

- tend to have nostalgia merchants who only remember their best moments and retain them with time because it takes them back to their favourite cricket moments

- benefit from favourable checklist analysis. have a sketchy record against strong opposition or an absent record in some places? well dont worry, we can always make favourable assumptions for you to say how you would have rolled over everyone because you are O L D and O L D is G O L D

- boost from playing against 20th century behemoths

Australia is still the powerhouse of cricket and England is still a decent team. And there is just a two guys in half of cricket history in the top 10/ top 20, Barnes (9) and O’Reilly (10).

 

[ma1978]

Australia is still the powerhouse of cricket and England is still a decent team. And there is just a two guys in half of cricket history in the top 10/ top 20, Barnes (9) and O’Reilly (10).

Australia hasn’t won a test series against Jndia in nearly a decade, how are they the powerhouse of cricket

 

[ma1978]

Lillee would be no.1 quick ever by same metric used. And he finished no.12 here.

nothing wrong with the idea of Lillee being the number one quick. He has just as much of a claim as Akram, Marshall, Mcgrath, Hadlee etc

 

[shortpitched713]

Davidson is criminally underrated imo.

I can understand arguments for Lillee over him since they’re very different bowlers and can be rated for very different things…

Davidson only played 17 of his 44 tests at home. He has a better average (20.53 vs 23.03), the best economy of any great pacer post WWI (by some margin), and a marginally worse SR (62.2 vs 59.8)

Their careers largely overlapped so era difference is neglible. Davidson took more wickets per match/innings, took 14 5’fers and 2 10’fers in his 44 matches compared to Lindwall’s 12 5’fers and 0 10’fers.

I’m just… not seeing an objective reason for putting Lindwall above tbh.

Only thing is Lindwall played 17 more Tests than Davidson, which doesn't seem like a lot, but they each only played 61 and 44 respectively. I think you could make a pretty good case that Lindwall's career is more substantial.

 

[subshakerz]

I’m just… not seeing an objective reason for putting Lindwall above tbh.

Rep

 

[TheJediBrah]

I mean leaving out a biased idiot who inserts himself into every mention of certain players' names even though its clear there is no way anyone is changing their opinions based on his envy and jealousy.

Ffs can you stop this cringe ****

Every post you've made in the last couple weeks has been "Subs is biased against India". Everyone knows what you think about it. Surely after the first 9 or 10 times you can stop. If you're not going to add something worthwhile why post?

 

[Xix2565]

This forum may as well not exist then tbh.

 

[Coronis]

Rep

Note the word objective