The protege Ravindra Jadeja vs Shane Warne his early days mentor

[h_hurricane]

Mate Smith dominated Jadeja in India. But that's unfair, he's dominated everyone everywhere.

Dominating some one in a different country is hardly a indicator of how they are going to perform in another country. An example would be Kohli vs Anderson.

By the way, I am not too sure if Smith dominated Jadeja in India, though he did really well.

Jadeja averages 18.02 against Australia in India. 49 wickets in 8 matches.

With that kind of a record, I don't think anyone would have dominated him.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It is not a good sample size agreed, still a lot less weird than you extrapolating a no sample size to a large sample size.

A clear example is assuming that Jadeja would average 40 in Australia over a long term. Was he ever dominated by Smith or Warner in Australia before averaging 28 in their absence ?

So, a small sample size > no sample size any day of the week.

Feel like I really need to reiterate just how wrong this is. Forget about the Jadeja example. Extrapolating from small, statistical outlying samples is way worse than making an educated estimate based on other longer term factors.

Using this logic you could think it's fair to say that Adam Voges would average 540 against West Indies over a career. Which is plainly absurd. Much more accurate to base it on other factors like his overall career, first-class career etc.

 

[_00_deathscar]

The best sides in Warne's era were the West Indies, South Africa and Pakistan.

Hence why I said 'one of' (especially post around 2000, when India was clearly better than the Windies save the odd Lara effort and also better than Pakistan).

And his averages vs the Windies (29.95), South Africa (24.16) and Pakistan (20.17) are still worse than Sir Jadeja's against the two best teams of his time.

 

[h_hurricane]

Feel like I really need to reiterate just how wrong this is. Forget about the Jadeja example. Extrapolating from small, statistical outlying samples is way worse than making an educated estimate based on other longer term factors.

Using this logic you could think it's fair to say that Adam Voges would average 540 against West Indies over a career. Which is plainly absurd. Much more accurate to base it on other factors like his overall career, first-class career etc.

Bro, I have been a huge fan of statistics from a very young age, hence know about the fallacy of small sample sizes.

The issue here is about the educated guess part ( it isn't an educated guess by the way). Something which never happened is unwritten and unknown. Shouldn't be extrapolated at all.

 

[_00_deathscar]

You'd hope that Ashwin would get much better figures, look at who each of them they were bowling too

But it's never really actually SERIOUSLY brought up that when Warne bowled to any half decent player of spin he got smacked around to kingdom come? Everyone just goes "yea what a great bowler...averages 20 or something in the Ashes [vs English spuds]".

 

[TheJediBrah]

Bro, I have been a huge fan of statistics from a very young age, hence know about the fallacy of small sample sizes.

The issue here is about the educated guess part ( it isn't an educated guess by the way). Something which never happened is unwritten and unknown. Shouldn't be extrapolated at all.

Your bias is getting in the way of your common sense. Pretty sure Jadeja averages around 40, or more, in SENA countries over his career, and Australia has recently been harder for touring spinners than all the others. Predicting that he's average around 40 in Australia over a larger sample should not be controversial.

But it's never really actually SERIOUSLY brought up that when Warne bowled to any half decent player of spin he got smacked around to kingdom come? Everyone just goes "yea what a great bowler...averages 20 or something in the Ashes [vs English spuds]".

lmao it gets brought up every other day on here. Also has nothing to do with what I said in the post you quoted. I mean seriously guy, "yeah well this guy from your country is bad at this" is never going to be a legitimate debating tool.

 

[h_hurricane]

Every time Warne got tonked by Indians, he went back to the friendly warmth of Ashes so that he could revert back to his mean. A spud basher for sure.

 

[stephen]

Hence why I said 'one of' (especially post around 2000, when India was clearly better than the Windies save the odd Lara effort and also better than Pakistan).

And his averages vs the Windies (29.95), South Africa (24.16) and Pakistan (20.17) are still worse than Sir Jadeja's against the two best teams of his time.

But barring a single test when he was returning from injury and woefully out of form, Warne was not regularly dropped against any off these three sides. Jadeja had mostly only played at home in favourable conditions.

It would be like if Anderson dodged playing outside England, which to his credit he doesn't.

 

[srbhkshk]

Your bias is getting in the way of your common sense. Pretty sure Jadeja averages around 40, or more, in SENA countries over his career, and Australia has recently been harder for touring spinners than all the others. Predicting that he's average around 40 in Australia over a larger sample should not be controversial.

Yeah if Warne never played India, predicting that he'll average less than 35 against India would not have been controversial.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Bro, I have been a huge fan of statistics from a very young age, hence know about the fallacy of small sample sizes.

The issue here is about the educated guess part ( it isn't an educated guess by the way). Something which never happened is unwritten and unknown. Shouldn't be extrapolated at all.

Sorry I'm having a hard time parsing this. Forget about the Jadeja thing. We clearly have different ideas of how he is likely to statistically perform over a larger sample, that's great. So let's just pretend that the Jadeja average 28 isn't even an outlier, but an accurate predictor.

You don't think, being a huge fan of statistics, that extraoplating from a small sample size that is almost certainly an outlier (I get that you don't think the Jadeja example is an outlier) is more accurate than guessing from "nothing", ( ie. stats in other countries, against other teams etc.) right?

 

[h_hurricane]

Sorry I'm having a hard time parsing this. Forget about the Jadeja thing. We clearly have different ideas of how he is likely to statistically perform over a larger sample, that's great. So let's just pretend that the Jadeja average 28 isn't even an outlier, but an accurate predictor.

You don't think, being a huge fan of statistics, that extraoplating from a small sample size that is almost certainly an outlier (I get that you don't think the Jadeja example is an outlier) is more accurate than guessing from "nothing", ( ie. stats in other countries, against other teams etc.) right?

I didn't extrapolate anything from the 28 average lol. All I said was, since he has averaged 28 there, you couldn't say that over a large sample size, he would do far worse than that like averaging 40. There is absolutely no indicator there.

By the way, he also averaged 25 in SA over a very small sample size. Did far worse in NZ and Eng(again over a small sample size) but has progressively improved in those conditions from being a nothing bowler 6 years back to someone better equipped to handle those conditions. So clubbing together all those countries into a single forecasted average is inaccurate prediction.

 

[h_hurricane]

But barring a single test when he was returning from injury and woefully out of form, Warne was not regularly dropped against any off these three sides. Jadeja had mostly only played at home in favourable conditions.

It would be like if Anderson dodged playing outside England, which to his credit he doesn't.

Anderson does dodge playing outside England. 89 matches at home vs 61 abroad. Whether it is deliberate or not, or if it is because the clouds hesitate to travel alongside him anywhere he goes, that is a different debate altogether.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I didn't extrapolate anything from the 28 average lol. All I said was, since he has averaged 28 there, you couldn't say that over a large sample size, he would do far worse than that like averaging 40. There is absolutely no indicator there.

Of course there is. His stats in similar conditions, corresponding stats of other subcontinental spinners and how they compared to their home stats etc. You could literally just look at Ashwin's stats in Aus compared to at home. That alone would be a better indicator than 2 Tests against a 2nd XI batting line-up.

By the way, he also averaged 25 in SA over a very small sample size.
Did far worse in NZ and Eng(again over a small sample size) but has progressively improved in those conditions from being a nothing bowler 6 years back to someone better equipped to handle those conditions. So clubbing together all those countries into a single forecasted average is inaccurate prediction.

But still more accurate than the 28 average IMO

But, again, as I said but you ignored, forgetting Jadeja. Do you accept, as a fan of statistics, that hypothetically extrapolating from a small sample that is an outlier is likely a less accurate predictor than extrapolating from (as you put it) "nothing"? In this case "nothing" consisting of First-class stats, stats in similar conditions etc.

 

[h_hurricane]

Historically some of the most celebrated ashes cricketers have dodged overseas tours, and I am surprised it hasn't been brought up enough here.

Below are some glaring anomalies that I could find in the home and away matches played by some of them

Anderson - 89 home, 61 abroad
Botham - 59 home, 43 abroad
Lillee - 44 home, 26 abroad
Chappell - 55 home, 32 abroad

On the other hand, a lot of India's best cricketers have toured everywhere.

Gavaskar -65 home, 60 abroad
Kapil - 65 home, 66 abroad
Tendulkar - 94 home, 106 abroad
Dravid - 70 home, 94 abroad

Very interesting indeed that everyone brings up only Ashwin and Jadeja(never mind that there is a natural disadvantage in that only one of them could be picked abroad keeping in mind team balance).

 

[Spark]

It's almost as if England plays most of their Test matches at home, hey.

Of course you actually checked that first, surely, because you're not coming up with spurious reasons to fit a prefabricated conclusion as opposed to arguing honestly from the evidence, right?

 

[TheJediBrah]

The England ones are pretty easy to explain. The team play more Tests at home. It doesn't mean they're dodging tours. Similar explanation for India's players I'd guess.

As for why people bring up Ashwin and Jadeja it's because their style as cricketers is much more dependant on helpful conditions than the others*. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure that out. So, no, it's not interesting at all.

The real question is why you're trying so hard to create nationalistic conflict out of nothing. It's not healthy or conducive to an enjoyable forum environment IMO.

*possibly with the exception of Anderson. But his reliance on home conditions is, if anything, discussed here more than Ashwin/Jadeja.

 

[Shady Slim]

lol hurricane took the bit too far hey

 

[honestbharani]

lol hurricane took the bit too far hey

the bit still true though.

 

[Spark]

Anderson has indeed been deliberately rested for some overseas tours in the last few years. Why this should be held against him given that (a) from best public knowledge that wasn't exactly his preferred choice and (b) England's clear priority was preserving his body now that he's in his mid-to-late 30s rather than winning spurious internet points is not clear to me.

I would like to see evidence of a single overseas tour Anderson skipped in his prime years when fitness wasn't an issue. Say between 2007 and 2017.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It's almost as if England plays most of their Test matches at home, hey.

That was his sort of his point wasn't it? They have a lopsided proportion of matches at home which means they have a big advantage statistically.