Shivnarine Chanderpaul vs Frank Worrell

[Johan]

Better test batter? Obviously Worrell is leagues ahead as a player

 

[DrWolverine]

Frank Worrell

 

[DrWolverine]

Shiv

 

[Johan]

@Thala_0710 another Terrible opinion.

 

[Thala_0710]

@Thala_0710 another Terrible opinion.

Me no care

 

[Thala_0710]

I just don't rate the 3 Ws as highly with the bat as others do here

 

[Johan]

Me no care

You are disrespecting WI cricket here

 

[Thala_0710]

You are disrespecting WI cricket here

Chanderpaul is West Indian btw

 

[Johan]

I just don't rate the 3 Ws as highly with the bat as others do here

there is no statistical or mathematical approach that would result in even the lowest interpretation of the three Ws being inferior to Chanderpaul.

 

[Thala_0710]

there is no statistical or mathematical approach that would result in even the lowest interpretation of the three Ws being inferior to Chanderpaul.

Performance in and against the top nations?

 

[Thala_0710]

Carrying the team for close to a decade?
Being one of the most difficult ever batters to dismiss at their best?

 

[Johan]

Performance in and against the top nations?

Not even, Worrell won an entire series for WI in England and did well in context in Australia, Chanders has no such credentials in Australia or South Africa (England not top in Chanders's era).

 

[Johan]

Carrying the team for close to a decade?
Being one of the most difficult ever batters to dismiss at their best?

The team was losing, he wasn't carrying anything, he was a selfish cancer to the team who refused to come bat up the order even when asked to because he loved his average. Being hard to dismiss means nothing if he just lets you dismiss the tail by giving the strike to them. He might be the progenitor of the "play for yourself" mentality that is so rampant with Carribean cricketers these days.

 

[Thala_0710]

Not even, Worrell won an entire series for WI in England and did well in context in Australia, Chanders has no such credentials in Australia or South Africa (England not top in Chanders's era).

Had an ATG great series in England definitely, but failed pretty poorly the next 2 times definitely as well

 

[Johan]

Had an ATG great series in England definitely, but failed pretty poorly the next 2 times definitely as well

in his last 4 games sure, 39 in England in 1957 with an ATG knock against Trueman/Statham/Laker/Lock being described as a failiure is... Yeah.

 

[Thala_0710]

in his last 4 games sure, 39 in England in 1957 with an ATG knock against Trueman/Statham/Laker/Lock being described as a failiure is... Yeah.

He went big twice in that series, both on flat pitches which ended in draws. Anytime the pitch was a bit tricky, Worrell didn't make runs that series.

 

[Johan]

He went big twice in that series, both on flat pitches which ended in draws. Anytime the pitch was a bit tricky, Worrell didn't make runs that series.

they would've lost the game where he made a hundred if he hadn't made a hundred, and Chanderpaul played his entire career in the flattest era in the history of the sport, he doesn't get tricky wicket points.

 

[Thala_0710]

they would've lost the game where he made a hundred if he hadn't made a hundred, and Chanderpaul played his entire career in the flattest era in the history of the sport, he doesn't get tricky wicket points.

Of course Chanderpaul played on flatter wickets, hid down the order, but his record is also quite better correspondingly (minus the minnow bashing from both).

 

[Johan]

Of course Chanderpaul played on flatter wickets, hid down the order, but his record is also quite better correspondingly (minus the minnow bashing from both).

Worrell never did any minnow bashing.

 

[Thala_0710]

Worrell never did any minnow bashing.

Those 12 matches against Ind and Nz are close enough