Why is McGrath NOT an all-time great?

[nightprowler10]

How do you arrive at that 22 figure? Tendulkar averages close to 50 in matches against McGrath.

The figure SS provided is what Sachin averages against McGrath alone.

 

[aussie tragic]

The figure SS provided is what Sachin averages against McGrath alone.

Thanks for providing the list as I was starting to get a bit worried with the Dravid & Kallis stats, but the list shows that this stat is just as meaningless as Rutherford averaging 86 and Lewis averaging 40 against him

 

[shankar]

The figure SS provided is what Sachin averages against McGrath alone.

That's hilarious. This stat just takes all the scores a batsman made in an innings in which he was dismissed by McGrath and posits that as his average against him. So if a batsman scored a 100 against him but got out to another bowler, that innings wouldn't figure in the analysis at all.

 

[silentstriker]

Thanks for providing the list as I was starting to get a bit worried with the Dravid & Kallis stats, but the list shows that this stat is just as meaningless as Rutherford averaging 86 and Lewis averaging 40 against him

Is it really? Rutherford was only dismissed once, so its not an accurate representation. Tendulkar has been dismissed 6 times, Dravid and Kallis 6 and 5 times. Atherton 19 times (LOL!).

 

[silentstriker]

That's hilarious. This stat just takes all the scores a batsman made in an innings in which he was dismissed by McGrath and posits that as his average against him. So if a batsman scored a 100 against him but got out to another bowler, that innings wouldnt enter the analysis at all.

Yup, and it wouldn't be accurate. It would be accurate when the batsman faces him repeatedly.

 

[shankar]

Yup, and it wouldn't be accurate. It would be accurate when the batsman faces him repeatedly.

No it wouldnt. Let's say a batsman faces Mcgrath 10 times and gets out to him in 4 of the innings, scoring 100 runs in total in those 4 innings. In the remaining 6 innings he scores 400 runs. So even though this batsman has actually done extremely well, he averages only 25 against McGrath if you go by this method.

 

[silentstriker]

No it wouldnt. Let's say a batsman faces Mcgrath 10 times and gets out to him in 4 of the innings, scoring 100 runs in total in those 4 innings. In the remaining 6 innings he scores 400 runs. So even though this batsman has actually done extremely well, he averages only 25 against McGrath if you go by this method.

Um, if he scores 500 runs against McGrath, and is dismissed only 4 times, then his average against McGrath would be 500/4 = 125.

 

[shankar]

Um, if he scores 500 runs against McGrath, and is dismissed only 4 times, then his average against McGrath would be 500/4 = 125.

Yes that would be the logical way to calculate the average. But that cricinfo stat doesnt do that. It takes only the runs scored in the innings in which the batsman was dismissed by McGrath into account. Hence the hilarious conclusions reached such as S.S.Das and Ganguly being better against McGrath than Sachin.

 

[silentstriker]

Yes that would be the logical way to calculate the average. But that cricinfo stat doesnt do that. It takes only the runs scored in the innings in which the batsman was dismissed by McGrath into account.

Are you sure that it does that? If so, then I agree that it is useless and I apologize. I wasn't aware thats the way it worked.

 

[shankar]

Are you sure that it does that? If so, then I agree that it is useless and I apologize. I wasn't aware thats the way it worked.

Yep that's what it does

 

[nightprowler10]

Yep that's what it does

I don't think it works that way. It takes into account the number of runs a batsman has made against him divided by the number of times McGrath has dismissed each batsman.

Can you provide a link where it states otherwise?

 

[shankar]

I don't think it works that way. It takes into account the number of runs a batsman has made against him divided by the number of times McGrath has dismissed each batsman.

Can you provide a link where it states otherwise?

I calculated the figure for Sachin using my interpretation of how it works and got 22.16 as the average same as given.

 

[shankar]

If you look at Rutherford' case it's quite clear. He played against McGrath only in the 92-93 series and got out to him only in his last inning of the series scoring 86 - So he ends up with an average of 86 against McGrath.

 

[nightprowler10]

Well if that's the case, then they really are useless.

 

[aussie tragic]

If you look at Rutherford' case it's quite clear. He played against McGrath only in the 92-93 series and got out to him only in his last inning of the series scoring 86 - So he ends up with an average of 86 against McGrath.

Crap, you're right. I just checked Vettori's games against McGrath where he scored 8*, 0, 41*, 65, 45, 24*, 20 and then out by McGrath for 20 and 59....and yep, the stat chart shows McGrath has Vettori out once with an average of 20

...so it's the most useless stat info that I've ever seen...

 

[silentstriker]

Yup I just checked it too. Useless stat, why is it even on there? I had assumed it worked logically.

 

[morgieb]

McGrath is an all time great, but his batting needed to be better to make an All-Time XI.

 

[Burgey]

McGrath is an all time great, but his batting needed to be better to make an All-Time XI.

Do you exclude Murali, Ambrose, Lillee, Donald, etc. for the same reasons?

 

[NUFAN]

You would hope not.

Surely the top 7 could make a few runs more often then not.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I thought the pointless digging of threads had been outlawed or at least a request had been made to stop doing it.