Steyn Vs A Border

[Johan]

Steyn is a myth. Massively overrated by CW. Patchy overseas record and massively, massively benefits from over half his games being in South Africa.

bar India, his away record is definitely a lil patchy that other people get flak for but he doesn't.

 

[kyear2]

Bradman RPI: 87.45

@kyear2 he overrated right.

Why are you tagging me with stupid ****.

 

[kyear2]

bar India, his away record is definitely a lil patchy that other people get flak for but he doesn't.

Fully agree, but many do make excuses, especially for the Australia and England ones.

 

[Johan]

Fully agree, but many do make excuses, especially for the Australia and England ones.

what's the general idea?

 

[kyear2]

what's the general idea?

@HouHsiaoHsien

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Steyn’s record in context in Australia is great. Better record than most of the touring bowlers to Australia in the same time, iconic matchwinning performances. Average of 27ish, WPM of 5 and a great SR against generally good batting lineups on flattish tracks is brilliant(don’t include his last match since he barely bowled before being injured). In England Steyn is not great but decent, especially in his last series where he was the standout bowler in a series where the best bowlers in those sort of conditions(Anderson and Broad) averaged 50. Plus even somewhere like SL where Steyn has an average record, he was the standout bowler during their series win there. If you are the standout bowler in so many away series achievements(two tied series in India, one series won in Australia(2008) and one in England(2012) and one in Sri Lanka as well, along with away victories in countries such as Pakistan, you are great).

 

[Coronis]

Why are you tagging me with stupid ****.

Well you think Bradman is overrated. And the difference between his average and RPI is quite large. I just thought you’d want to know. Just trying to be helpful.

 

[sayon basak]

Well you think Bradman is overrated. And the difference between his average and RPI is quite large. I just thought you’d want to know. Just trying to be helpful.

You are a kind soul. Lord Woakes may protect you.

 

[Johan]

Steyn’s record in context in Australia is great. Better record than most of the touring bowlers to Australia in the same time, iconic matchwinning performances. Average of 27ish, WPM of 5 and a great SR against generally good batting lineups on flattish tracks is brilliant(don’t include his last match since he barely bowled before being injured). In England Steyn is not great but decent, especially in his last series where he was the standout bowler in a series where the best bowlers in those sort of conditions(Anderson and Broad) averaged 50. Plus even somewhere like SL where Steyn has an average record, he was the standout bowler during their series win there. If you are the standout bowler in so many away series achievements(two tied series in India, one series won in Australia(2008) and one in England(2012) and one in Sri Lanka as well, along with away victories in countries such as Pakistan, you are great).

pretty Decent in England, very good in Australia, okay in SL with one good performance. Most I can do.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Steyn was the main reason SA went that entire era unbeaten in overseas tests. He had impactful, game changing spells literally everywhere he played. You can spreadsheet it up all you want (or put in some effort to actually look up how well he did in those games relative to the conditions) or make up some ridiculous reasoning why he wasn't as good as your favourite pace bowler, but he was just better. If you watched him, you know. By a mile the best pacer to debut this century.

Fully agree, but many do make excuses give valid reasons, especially for the Australia and England ones.

Yes true

 

[capt_Luffy]

Steyn was the main reason SA went that entire era unbeaten in overseas tests. He had impactful, game changing spells literally everywhere he played. You can spreadsheet it up all you want (or put in some effort to actually look up how well he did in those games relative to the conditions) or make up some ridiculous reasoning why he wasn't as good as your favourite pace bowler, but he was just better. If you watched him, you know. By a mile the best pacer to debut this century.



Yes true

Bumrah getting close though

 

[BazBall21]

bar India, his away record is definitely a lil patchy that other people get flak for but he doesn't.

Steyn's problem v left handers is his biggest caveat because that wouldn't just go away completely in a different era. It was fundamental rather than conditions-forced.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Steyn was the main reason SA went that entire era unbeaten in overseas tests. He had impactful, game changing spells literally everywhere he played. You can spreadsheet it up all you want (or put in some effort to actually look up how well he did in those games relative to the conditions) or make up some ridiculous reasoning why he wasn't as good as your favourite pace bowler, but he was just better. If you watched him, you know. By a mile the best pacer to debut this century.

Personally, fast bowling has always been the most attractive thing about cricket for me. There's nothing finer than watching a fast bowler send one of the stumps cartwheeling away. It's not as if I haven't watched Steyn bowl. Primarily, I've seen him in England, New Zealand and Australia - which, granted, are not his favourite domains. But impressive though he is, I have never seen anything which would make me put him ahead of Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran in terms of skill and entertainment value. Philander was by far the more skilful bowler in the 2012 tour to NZ, for example and Steyn didn't really have any of those 'game changing' spells (though Philander and Morkel definitely did and even Mark Gillespie). Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that Steyn is anything other than a fine bowler, but I'm definitely doing some hard stirring to offset some of the massive overrating that goes on for him.

Watching him in South Africa is a different prospect - he was at times unplayable there.... yet still averaged more than Philander. I can't recall having watched Steyn in India, though I suspect I have. That is the thing that massively stands out to me - his record there is phenomenal.

 

[Johan]

Steyn was the main reason SA went that entire era unbeaten in overseas tests. He had impactful, game changing spells literally everywhere he played. You can spreadsheet it up all you want (or put in some effort to actually look up how well he did in those games relative to the conditions) or make up some ridiculous reasoning why he wasn't as good as your favourite pace bowler, but he was just better. If you watched him, you know. By a mile the best pacer to debut this century.



Yes true

don't think anyone is particularly contesting that part.

 

[kyear2]

Steyn’s record in context in Australia is great. Better record than most of the touring bowlers to Australia in the same time, iconic matchwinning performances. Average of 27ish, WPM of 5 and a great SR against generally good batting lineups on flattish tracks is brilliant(don’t include his last match since he barely bowled before being injured). In England Steyn is not great but decent, especially in his last series where he was the standout bowler in a series where the best bowlers in those sort of conditions(Anderson and Broad) averaged 50. Plus even somewhere like SL where Steyn has an average record, he was the standout bowler during their series win there. If you are the standout bowler in so many away series achievements(two tied series in India, one series won in Australia(2008) and one in England(2012) and one in Sri Lanka as well, along with away victories in countries such as Pakistan, you are great).

First off, no one's saying he wasn't great,he's legit up there ATG. He just for the most part wasn't that outside of South Africa except for India.
He did really well and had match winning performances in Australia, he was very good, it wasn't an ATG record there. With all due respect to Broad and Anderson, they aren't who we're comparing Steyn to, and he's held to a higher standard.

I would also hope Steyn was the standout guy in SL.

No doubt he is an elite ATG, but it's not quite to have him in the same category as my top 3. You do and that's fine, but I have him bracketed with Ambrose and the 3 spinners. Not bad company either.

 

[kyear2]

Well you think Bradman is overrated. And the difference between his average and RPI is quite large. I just thought you’d want to know. Just trying to be helpful.

I only think Bradman is overrated if one believes he was twice as good as every other top tier batsmen and would have scored as he did in the 80's / 90's etc.

I have no issue with him being seen as the GOAT, none what so ever.

 

[kyear2]

Personally, fast bowling has always been the most attractive thing about cricket for me. There's nothing finer than watching a fast bowler send one of the stumps cartwheeling away. It's not as if I haven't watched Steyn bowl. Primarily, I've seen him in England, New Zealand and Australia - which, granted, are not his favourite domains. But impressive though he is, I have never seen anything which would make me put him ahead of Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran in terms of skill and entertainment value. Philander was by far the more skilful bowler in the 2012 tour to NZ, for example and Steyn didn't really have any of those 'game changing' spells (though Philander and Morkel definitely did and even Mark Gillespie). Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that Steyn is anything other than a fine bowler, but I'm definitely doing some hard stirring to offset some of the massive overrating that goes on for him.

Watching him in South Africa is a different prospect - he was at times unplayable there.... yet still averaged more than Philander. I can't recall having watched Steyn in India, though I suspect I have. That is the thing that massively stands out to me - his record there is phenomenal.

As always, well said.

 

[Coronis]

I only think Bradman is overrated if one believes he was twice as good as every other top tier batsmen and would have scored as he did in the 80's / 90's etc.

I have no issue with him being seen as the GOAT, none what so ever.

Nah. He would’ve been more than twice as good imo.

 

[kyear2]

Nah. He would’ve been more than twice as good imo.

And we will continue to disagree.

The one factor that impacts bowlers than anything else is The wicket.

The one factor that impacts batsmen are the bowlers faced.

When one compares the bowlers and surfaces he contended with in the flattest era of cricket to what occured in the 90's, 80's etc.

We adjust for batsmen in the 2000's when there were still good to great bowlers and a few spicy surfaces, but not the late 20's and 30's with even flatter surfaces and the only two great bowlers on his own team. Not to add the two minnows.

Doesn't compute.

 

[sayon basak]

Nah. He would’ve been more than twice as good imo.

DoG Ratings:-
Bradman= 1361
2nd best (Hobbs)= 949
so, Bradman= 1.434*second best batter
PEWS Ratings:-
Bradman= 5.24
2nd best (Hammond)= 3.28
So, Bradman= 1.598*second best batter
WISDEN:-
Bradman= 1349
2nd best (Tendulkar)= 921.5
So, Bradman= 1.464*second best batter

Averaging the ratios,
(1.434+1.597+1.464)/3= 1.49854

So, it'd be fair if one says Bradman is 1.5 times greater than the next best batsman, and I'd tend to agree.