Keith Miller vs Shane Warne

[subshakerz]

But in this instance the chasm between Warne and Miller in primary is massive.

It's not as massive as you are making it out to be. Miller is actually a much better bowler than Warne in the first half of games.

By his era standards, he is a worldclass bowler.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The Wasim thing for kyear2 is actually hilarious. He rates Wasim lower as a bowler than many of us rate Imran. My selection of Imran doesn't even compromise the perceived bowling quality much because he's extremely close to the very top tier of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee imo. Kyear probably doesn't even have Wasim in his top 11-12 but selects him in the ATG XI while simultaneously screaming into his megaphone about how you can't compromise on bowling quality.

 

[Prince EWS]

The Wasim thing for kyear2 is actually hilarious. He rates Wasim lower as a bowler than many of us rate Imran. My selection of Imran doesn't even compromise the perceived bowling quality much because he's extremely close to the very top tier of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee imo. Kyear probably doesn't even have Wasim in his top 11-12 but selects him in the ATG XI while simultaneously screaming into his megaphone about how you can't compromise on bowling quality.

Not only does he have Wasim even lower than Imran but he thinks the gap between the best ever bowlers is way bigger than most of us do which makes it weirder. Like the vast majority of the time if you had the third best bowler ever or the tenth best bowler ever you're going to get a very similar output in a normal Test but he just doesn't see it that way. I don't think he's giving up on bowling quality a lot by having Wasim ahead of Hadlee but he definitely does and he's doing it anyway for attack balance.

 

[subshakerz]

The Wasim thing for kyear2 is actually hilarious. He rates Wasim lower as a bowler than many of us rate Imran. My selection of Imran doesn't even compromise the perceived bowling quality much because he's extremely close to the very top tier of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee imo. Kyear probably doesn't even have Wasim in his top 11-12 but selects him in the ATG XI while simultaneously screaming into his megaphone about how you can't compromise on bowling quality.

Most pick Imran because:

- He is the best bowling AR of all time
- They don't see a huge bowling difference between him and the top tier
- He can bowl reverse very well unlike Marshall and Hadlee/McGrath

Kyear skips over the last two points and pretends folks are just picking him based on batting average

It's why arguments with him never find resolution. He is only arguing with a strawman.

 

[subshakerz]

Not only does he have Wasim even lower than Imran but he thinks the gap between the best ever bowlers is way bigger than most of us do which makes it weirder. Like the vast majority of the time if you had the third best bowler ever or the tenth best bowler ever you're going to get a very similar output in a normal Test but he just doesn't see it that way. I don't think he's giving up on bowling quality a lot by having Wasim ahead of Hadlee but he definitely does and he's doing it anyway for attack balance.

It's why I think that Kyears style of argument is so reductive. He doesn't look at actual match impact.

You can pretend 5-8 places of difference in ranking is some vast chasm in bowling ability but it's not and in many cases the one ranked lower will succeed better in certain situations and roles.

Funnily enough he makes an exception on this for Wasim but can't tolerate folks doing that for Imran who has always been an obvious candidate for no.8.

 

[Bolo.]

My God, you're not even trying.

Large gaps, for me it can't make up the large gaps that exists in this scenario.

I've been asked about McGrath and Hadlee. For me overall they're really close, but I mostly prefer Pigeon over Paddles.

It's not that I don't think that lower order batting can overcome a gap, I don't think Hadlee's is good enough to supercede one of the only two bowlers I rate as being in the GOAT discussion.

But in this instance the chasm between Warne and Miller in primary is massive.

With regards to the example you give, I have Sobers over Hobbs, so that doesn't factor in.

With Imran, I'm not rating my 9th rated bowler over someone I have as top 2 and in the GOAT debate. Same with Tendulkar and Kallis. Now Hammond tempts me, but yeah, even him I'm not rating above Sachin.

Hmm, you may actually have a point. Not a good one, but one I should have considered that you were trying to make. It's not the first time you have said this. I should have realised that your primary disclaimer came with context.

All of the big 4 ARs are close to people of the same primary discipline. There are varying degrees of gap from Hadlee down to Kallis, but the gap isn't big for any of them.

Anyway, back to the base form of the principle. If we can consider any player ahead on secondary, you can consider multiple ahead on secondary. Do you consider any of the big 4 (besides Sobers) ahead of players that you rate ahead on primary? I don't necessarily meant the top tier Goats in this context.

 

[Coronis]

Hmm, you may actually have a point. Not a good one, but one I should have considered that you were trying to make. It's not the first time you have said this. I should have realised that your primary disclaimer came with context.

All of the big 4 ARs are close to people of the same primary discipline. There are varying degrees of gap from Hadlee down to Kallis, but the gap isn't big for any of them.

Anyway, back to the base form of the principle. If we can consider any player ahead on secondary, you can consider multiple ahead on secondary. Do you consider any of the big 4 (besides Sobers) ahead of players that you rate ahead on primary? I don't necessarily meant the top tier Goats in this context.

iirc at least with Hadlee he doesn’t.

 

[Bolo.]

iirc at least with Hadlee he doesn’t.

He rates Hadlee in the top 3 bowlers ever. He doesn't rate Sobers in the top 3 bats.

 

[subshakerz]

He rates Hadlee in the top 3 bowlers ever. He doesn't rate Sobers in the top 3 bats.

He rates McGrath a better cricketer than Hadlee.

 

[Coronis]

He rates Hadlee in the top 3 bowlers ever. He doesn't rate Sobers in the top 3 bats.

He rates McGrath a better cricketer than Hadlee.

Yeah this was my point

 

[DrWolverine]

He rates Hadlee in the top 3 bowlers ever.

He doesn't rate Sobers in the top 3 bats.

Both are correct in my opinion.

 

[Bolo.]

Both are correct in my opinion.

This is default opinion for most.

 

[kyear2]

Why is bowling ranking relevant for Imran but not relevant for Wasim who you actually select but rate even lower than Imran?

If you think it's because Wasim is best with the old ball, then surely Imran is very close to him in that (I would argue more effective) and a better overall bowler, enough that Imrans much superior batting can overcome him.

So whichever way you look at it you are contradicting yourself.

Hey.

1. This isn't about selection for anything, this is about how I rank them overall.

2. I have Imran and Wasim in the same tier and I'm in the process of reevaluating Wasim again, because not only is his general peer rating high, everyone I ask rates him higher as well. Kimber the other day also said as much.

I've explained to you why Wasim is my selection. Yes he's higher rated with the old ball, but it goes beyond that.

1. Not only was Wasim better with the old ball utilizing reverse swing, he well above when it didn't.

2. Regardless of how you want to spin it, Imran wasn't as good away from home. He also heavily relied on reverse swing to be effective, and in an era where it's infinitely harder to prepare the ball, is he as effective.

3. He relied heavily on reverse swing to be effective, in an era where it is infinitely hard to prepare the ball, he's not quite as effective.

4. But the main reason as to why Wasim is my choice over Imran is (and it's similar to why Sachin is still my choice over Hammond, in that Hammond had his challenges with short pitches stuff), is that Wasim could move the ball both ways, old and new, reverse or conventional swing, he was immensely skilled.

Now with regards to the batting. For the millionth time, yes it is very important. No, it's not going to over ride my selection of the bowler who I believe to be more effective.

And I'll get into this a bit more later, the issue with lower order batting is that it's not reliable, and primarily based on taking advantage of favorable conditions, but in scenarios like this morning, it's very rare that your no. 8 shows in in tricky conditions and crucial situations.

And a tail of Wasim, Marshall and Warne behind Gilchrist is really damn good.

Now if Bumrah gets there, it's a bit more tricky, but let's see if he does first.

 

[subshakerz]

Hey.

1. This isn't about selection for anything, this is about how I rank them overall.

2. I have Imran and Wasim in the same tier and I'm in the process of reevaluating Wasim again, because not only is his general peer rating high, everyone I ask rates him higher as well. Kimber the other day also said as much.

I've explained to you why Wasim is my selection. Yes he's higher rated with the old ball, but it goes beyond that.

1. Not only was Wasim better with the old ball utilizing reverse swing, he well above when it didn't.

2. Regardless of how you want to spin it, Imran wasn't as good away from home. He also heavily relied on reverse swing to be effective, and in an era where it's infinitely harder to prepare the ball, is he as effective.

3. He relied heavily on reverse swing to be effective, in an era where it is infinitely hard to prepare the ball, he's not quite as effective.

4. But the main reason as to why Wasim is my choice over Imran is (and it's similar to why Sachin is still my choice over Hammond, in that Hammond had his challenges with short pitches stuff), is that Wasim could move the ball both ways, old and new, reverse or conventional swing, he was immensely skilled.

Now with regards to the batting. For the millionth time, yes it is very important. No, it's not going to over ride my selection of the bowler who I believe to be more effective.

And I'll get into this a bit more later, the issue with lower order batting is that it's not reliable, and primarily based on taking advantage of favorable conditions, but in scenarios like this morning, it's very rare that your no. 8 shows in in tricky conditions and crucial situations.

And a tail of Wasim, Marshall and Warne behind Gilchrist is really damn good.

Now if Bumrah gets there, it's a bit more tricky, but let's see if he does first.

1. It is about selection because you protest why a 9th ranked bowler can be put in an ATG XI all the time. Wasim is higher.

2. Imran was better than Wasim away from home. At the very least, you can't say you are selecting Wasim because of away record so why is it an issue with Imran?

3. Imran whatever way you want to cut is still one of the top reverse swing bowlers ever and the difference with Wasim isn't great at all.

4. That's all well and good but doesn't explain why ranking gulf with the rest of the attack is an issue for Imran but not Wasim.

There are plenty of situations where a no.8 and tail makes a difference. I gave you over a dozen examples from Aus 2000.

 

[kyear2]

The Wasim thing for kyear2 is actually hilarious. He rates Wasim lower as a bowler than many of us rate Imran. My selection of Imran doesn't even compromise the perceived bowling quality much because he's extremely close to the very top tier of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee imo. Kyear probably doesn't even have Wasim in his top 11-12 but selects him in the ATG XI while simultaneously screaming into his megaphone about how you can't compromise on bowling quality.

I've answered to that above.

But there's this snippet from Gideon Haigh that I adore, that helped to forge my opinion with regards to how to select these things.



He's the best bowler with the old ball and one ilof the most skilled ever and could do everything.

 

[subshakerz]

I've answered to that above.

But there's this snippet from Gideon Haigh that I adore, that helped to forge my opinion with regards to how to select these things.

View attachment 48620

He's the best bowler with the old ball and one ilof the most skilled ever and could do everything.

You realise Imran being an old ball specialist is exactly why many also pick him? Along with being the best lower order bat.

Yet you ignore that and critique his ranking.

 

[Coronis]

Hey.

1. This isn't about selection for anything, this is about how I rank them overall.

2. I have Imran and Wasim in the same tier and I'm in the process of reevaluating Wasim again, because not only is his general peer rating high, everyone I ask rates him higher as well. Kimber the other day also said as much.

I've explained to you why Wasim is my selection. Yes he's higher rated with the old ball, but it goes beyond that.

1. Not only was Wasim better with the old ball utilizing reverse swing, he well above when it didn't.

2. Regardless of how you want to spin it, Imran wasn't as good away from home. He also heavily relied on reverse swing to be effective, and in an era where it's infinitely harder to prepare the ball, is he as effective.

3. He relied heavily on reverse swing to be effective, in an era where it is infinitely hard to prepare the ball, he's not quite as effective.

4. But the main reason as to why Wasim is my choice over Imran is (and it's similar to why Sachin is still my choice over Hammond, in that Hammond had his challenges with short pitches stuff), is that Wasim could move the ball both ways, old and new, reverse or conventional swing, he was immensely skilled.

Now with regards to the batting. For the millionth time, yes it is very important. No, it's not going to over ride my selection of the bowler who I believe to be more effective.

And I'll get into this a bit more later, the issue with lower order batting is that it's not reliable, and primarily based on taking advantage of favorable conditions, but in scenarios like this morning, it's very rare that your no. 8 shows in in tricky conditions and crucial situations.

And a tail of Wasim, Marshall and Warne behind Gilchrist is really damn good.

Now if Bumrah gets there, it's a bit more tricky, but let's see if he does first.

So I might be the only one here who’s never seen a Kimber video (I’m still waiting on that book btw) but jeez he’s getting over referenced here and used as some font of cricketing knowledge, even by you who enjoys peer and media rating.. Whilst I’m presuming he’s obviously a more than decent writer (otherwise he wouldn’t have gotten where he is), his credentials for cricketing knowledge are about as valuable as many members here.

Also seems like you’re reducing Imran to reverse swing as his only effective weapon, which is simply not true, and in fact iirc it was utilised far more by Wasim himself than Imran.

 

[kyear2]

Not only does he have Wasim even lower than Imran but he thinks the gap between the best ever bowlers is way bigger than most of us do which makes it weirder. Like the vast majority of the time if you had the third best bowler ever or the tenth best bowler ever you're going to get a very similar output in a normal Test but he just doesn't see it that way. I don't think he's giving up on bowling quality a lot by having Wasim ahead of Hadlee but he definitely does and he's doing it anyway for attack balance.

I find it amazing that my little selection is getting so much attention, but not like there's anything going on.

But shocking that someone would select the player who makes the all time first team selection of Cricinfo, Wisden, Crowe and many more.

That even in our poll that Imran was 4th and Wasim right behind him in 5th.

So what's the case for Imran, if I'm selecting the outright best 3 bowlers, there's Hadlee, Steyn and Ambrose ahead of him.

Best old ball bowlers, I still have Wasim and Steyn ahead.

So there are two arguments you're making, not only as to why Imran is the automatic choice, here but why you think he's the 2nd best cricketer if all time.

The first is that there's not a meaningful gap between the top 10 guys.

Ask, listen, or read when any of the top batsmen of the era speak about who's the best bowler they faced. They're quite a few names ahead of his.

As much as we pretend it didn't exist, the shenanigans that he hit up to everywhere and especially at home are a thing. I think it's undeniable that he was an exceptional fast bowler, I also don't think that that period when we was averaging 13 at home was unsullied. I also don't think that on quality, skill set and record that he's as good a bowler as the top tier fast bowlers.

The 2nd is that his batting makes a palpable difference and even if there is one, offsets any loss of quality as bowlers. If this was as straight forward as some here profess, than Imran would be in a lot more XI's than he currently is represented in.
First off, it's a preference based on how valuable one see's lower order batting to be, and if it factors into such discussions.

It's just not for me, And I prefer an attack that I believe works best together.

And please for the love of God stop pretending that I'm the only person who doesn't choose Imran for such XIs

 

[sayon basak]

I have Imran and Wasim in the same tier and I'm in the process of reevaluating Wasim again, because not only is his general peer rating high, everyone I ask rates him higher as well. Kimber the other day also said as much.

You're gonna rate Wasim higher, because others rate him highly?

 

[Coronis]

You're gonna rate Wasim higher, because others rate him highly?

Yes, thats the whole point of being influenced by peer and media rating.

That’s why Pant is comparable to Gilchrist right kyear?