Who's Done the Most Damage?

[Randomfan]

What about in that period regardless of if Ambrose and Lillee were there or not and the averages not including Ambrose and Lillee in the lineup?

Ambrose alone was not making them average 27. If Ambrose alone was helping to bring down team bowling avg to 27 it then entire debate is useless by making Ambrose second half drastically better than Lillee. Aus with even greater support for Lillee( your claim and I don't agree) had Aus averging 29.xx.

I personally don't think that Ambrose was drastically better than Lillee in second half of his career. I also don't agree that Ambrose had less competition for wickets in second half than Lillee. There is no evidence to suggest that.

Collective support for Ambrose > Collective support for Lileee during first half or second half of Ambrose career.

Lillee did not had a bigger competition for wickets otherwise it will show up in stats.

 

[kyear2]

Lillee has a better SR and bowling more is also to his credit.



Let's not debate Imran we know how effective you are at swaying opinion on it




I'm surprised Marshall and Ambrose aren't no 1 and 2 for you.

Ok, let's look at the numbers

Lillee s/r of 52
Ambrose s/r of 54
Imran s/r 53

There's no difference in the level of penetrative abilities there.

But let's go a step further. Away from home.

Lillee s/r 55
Ambrose s/r 53
Imran s/r 59

Is Ambrose really less penetrative? Or had greater support or just had a slightly reduced work load after the surgery. And if you want to use the less penetrative argument, you may have selected the wrong target.

Use some common sense please.

You mean how despite your reasonings, bargaining, pleasing and at various points begging, Imran still made the same 2nd AT team that Lara did? Which team did he make last time?
You mean how despite every attempt to, and this is in your own words, downgrade Ambrose, the forum still easily rates him ahead of Imran and many a tier ahead at that? How is the bowling trio poll how McGrath and Hadlee nearly doubled up Imran's vote total.
Basically, because your circle jerk echo chamber, hasn't changed their minds, doesn't mean the rest of the forum hasn't moved on. Louder doesn't mean consensus apparently.

Ohh, you're taking Hurricane approach of attacking based on country, that's a little sad and pathetic. Especially considering how you were pleading for Imran just a few days ago. I don't only advocate for west indians or childhood heroes, I push McGrath far harder than I do for Ambrose, Steyn I rate slightly higher despite they're perceived practically equally, even here.
I don't defend cheating, blatant cheating at that, or systematic decades long corrupt umpiring with attempts at false equivalency.

Really shouldn't throw stones from.glass houses.

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose alone was not making them average 27. If Ambrose alone was helping to bring down team bowling avg to 27 it then entire debate is useless by making Ambrose second half becomes dratically better than Lillee. Aus with even greater support for Lillee( your claim and I don't agree) had Aus averging 29.xx.

Wait so you included Ambrose numbers in that? Obviously that's misleading the guy averages 20.

 

[mackembhoy]

WTF is this and how is it 19 pages.

Is it worth reading

 

[subshakerz]

Ok, let's look at the numbers

Lillee s/r of 52
Ambrose s/r of 54
Imran s/r 53

There's no difference in the level of penetrative abilities there.

But let's go a step further. Away from home.

Lillee s/r 55
Ambrose s/r 53
Imran s/r 59

Is Ambrose really less penetrative? Or had greater support or just had a slightly reduced work load after the surgery. And if you want to use the less penetrative argument, you may have selected the wrong target.

Use some common sense please.

You mean how despite your reasonings, bargaining, pleasing and at various points begging, Imran still made the same 2nd AT team that Lara did? Which team did he make last time?
You mean how despite every attempt to, and this is in your own words, downgrade Ambrose, the forum still easily rates him ahead of Imran and many a tier ahead at that? How is the bowling trio poll how McGrath and Hadlee nearly doubled up Imran's vote total.
Basically, because your circle jerk echo chamber, hasn't changed their minds, doesn't mean the rest of the forum hasn't moved on. Louder doesn't mean consensus apparently.

Ohh, you're taking Hurricane approach of attacking based on country, that's a little sad and pathetic. Especially considering how you were pleading for Imran just a few days ago. I don't only advocate for west indians or childhood heroes, I push McGrath far harder than I do for Ambrose, Steyn I rate slightly higher despite they're perceived practically equally, even here.
I don't defend cheating, blatant cheating at that, or systematic decades long corrupt umpiring with attempts at false equivalency.

Really shouldn't throw stones from.glass houses.

Dude will you for God's sake stop bringing in Imran? We aren't talking about Imran.

I know you are butt hurt that all your anti-Imran advocacy turns people off but please just move on.

 

[subshakerz]

WTF is this and how is it 19 pages.

Is it worth reading

No.

 

[kyear2]

Sure. Ambrose was a machine. He was still very good in the second half, especially if the pitch offered something. I don't deny that.

I think the point I try to bring up with Lillee is that in his second half, even with declining pace, his rate of taking wickets was still very much impressive.

And I think that doesn't get enough credit. The skill to keep taking wickets even when your pace goes down.

It also goes into the heart of what we think impacts the game more.

To me, taking wickets more per game does even if a slight bit more expensive.

To others, keeping it tight and cheap matters more, even at reduced wicket level.

Again, all you're talking about is higher bowling loads, not greater effectiveness.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Wait so you included Ambrose numbers in that? Obviously that's misleading the guy averages 20.

He also included Lillee's numbers in that. It's not Ambrose's fault Lillee does 3 runs more. If anything, high WPM should favour Lillee here equally.

 

[sayon basak]

WTF is this and how is it 19 pages.

Is it worth reading

No it's not.

 

[subshakerz]

He also included Lillee's numbers in that. It's not Ambrose's fault Lillee does 3 runs more. If anything, high WPM should favour Lillee here equally.

Yeah but that's a separate point we are trying to determine quality of other bowlers

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah but that's a separate point we are trying to determine quality of other bowlers

Point is, including both shan't change the numbers drastically. If they do, one is clearly a superior bowler.

 

[sayon basak]

Trying to use a "Who has done more damage" thread to do more damage is just...

 

[subshakerz]

Again, all you're talking about is higher bowling loads, not greater effectiveness.

Higher bowling load is a definite plus especially since Ambrose didn't take a huge load latter career half much when frankly he should have.

Lillee bowls almost 10 extra overs per match over Ambrose that period.

 

[subshakerz]

Point is, including both shan't change the numbers drastically. If they do, one is clearly a superior bowler.

It would though especially with a 2 point difference. Like I said, let's see numbers of overall career for that period without Ambrose

 

[Johan]

WTF is this and how is it 19 pages.

Is it worth reading

Nah unless you want people to debate Dennis Lillee vs Curtly Ambrose in 5000 differnet ways

 

[Randomfan]

Wait so you included Ambrose numbers in that? Obviously that's misleading the guy averages 20.

What are you arguing here?

Claim : You are claiming Lillee > Ambrose & support bowlers of Aus > support bowlers of WI

Results: WI in second half of Ambrose career had bowling avg 27.xx and Lillee Aus had bowling average of 29.xx. Clearly, something is drastically wrong with claim.

You can't argue that WI bowling avg is so low mainly due to Ambrose despite him having lesser bowler to support and then declare Lillee was better in that phase.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It would though especially with a 2 point difference. Like I said, let's see numbers of overall career for that period without Ambrose

But according to you their WPM difference offsets that average difference!?

 

[Johan]

I'll rate Lillee over Ambrose if Lillee went to West Indies 2 or 3 times and averaged something like 22-23 with bunch of fifers and match winning performances.

 

[subshakerz]

What are you arguing here?

Claim : You are claiming Lillee > Ambrose & support bowlers of Aus > support bowlers of WI

Results: WI in second half of Ambrose career had bowling avg 27.xx and Lillee Aus had bowling average of 29.xx. Clearly, something is drastically wrong with claim.

You can't argue that WI bowling avg is so low mainly due to Ambrose despite him having lesser bowler to support and then declare Lillee was better in that phase.

I am disputing the stat itself because you are mixing their figures and should include all games

 

[subshakerz]

I'll rate Lillee over Ambrose if Lillee went to West Indies 2 or 3 times and averaged something like 22-23 with bunch of fifers and match winning performances.

Sure that's fine. I don't think he needs that with Ambrose.