Players with misleading averages....

[GIMH]

No. The initial reaction was that ben's comments that Sanga was a class below KP, and KP being kept in the same tier with SRT, Lara and Ponting. KP neither belongs to that class nor a class above Sanga.

Well, see what wdfu_ben91 has said. This was a reaction to his claims. Nothing to concern with your comments

All well and good, why did you bring the weaknesses of the English system into it? Oh that's right, because you're a troll. And I don't care who you were responding to about Pietersen's Oval century, you were talking rubbish, end of discussion really.

And as for the 'unfit c***' comment you made, that was real class. You're bottom of the barrel stuff hey.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

No one in the modern era (and probably history) has played an innings as good as Laxman's, that's a given. Too bad he never came close to replicating that greatness and hence why he is no modern great.

You don't give a **** about batsman having it easy? Easiest bailing out of an arguement tactic in the book. Batsman should be rated on how they do when the going gets tough, not on how big they cash in against moderate or weak opposition in favourable conditions. In that aspect Pietersen has Sangakkara covered. How many runs has Sangakkara made against Bangladesh? A team Pietersen hasn't even played yet.

KS has scored some 900 runs against Bang. Take that from his record he still has 6500+ runs and a better average than KP.

No one called VVS a great stop putting words in my mouth.You are the one implying that KP is the best thing since sliced bread.FTR VVS has a better record against Australia home and away than KP and as you have admitted yourself, VVS' best innings against Australia is easily better than KP's best innings.By your logic of rating players only on the basis of how they play when the going gets tough, Laxman>KP.Not to mention complaining that VVS never played a 281 like innings for a second time when by your admission no one else has is ******** logic.

KP is very much like VVS in that they have great records against Australia and mediocre-poor records in most other places.You were pointing out that Sanga averages only 30 in England.Fair enough that isn't good but KP in the 'favorable conditions' of SL averages 25.I wonder what you make of that.No doubt you will gloss over KP's failure in the subcontinent by saying he feels insulted to bat on 'easy pitches' or some rubbish like that.

You can make a reasonable argument for KP being better than both KS and VVS, but the difference is minimal.Making out the any of the three is in a completely different class to the other two is crap.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

There is a difference, but not a big one. The ball is a bit newer and the bowler is a tad fresher. If they are good enough to play International Cricket then such little immaturies shouldn't affect a batsman that much. If there was such a difference then Hayden, Sehwag, Smith and Gambhir would be better then any middle-order batsman that's ever played the game apart from Bradman.

On another thread

No real difference in the attacks. Sehwag just got found out because he was opening in 2006 and not in 2001.

You owned yourself

 

[wfdu_ben91]

KS has scored some 900 runs against Bang. Take that from his record he still has 6500+ runs and a better average than KP.

No one called VVS a great stop putting words in my mouth.You are the one implying that KP is the best thing since sliced bread.FTR VVS has a better record against Australia home and away than KP and as you have admitted yourself, VVS' best innings against Australia is easily better than KP's best innings.By your logic of rating players only on the basis of how they play when the going gets tough, Laxman>KP.Not to mention complaining that VVS never played a 281 like innings for a second time when by your admission no one else has is ******** logic.

KP is very much like VVS in that they have great records against Australia and mediocre-poor records in most other places.You were pointing out that Sanga averages only 30 in England.Fair enough that isn't good but KP in the 'favorable conditions' of SL averages 25.I wonder what you make of that.No doubt you will gloss over KP's failure in the subcontinent by saying he feels insulted to bat on 'easy pitches' or some rubbish like that.

You can make a reasonable argument for KP being better than both KS and VVS, but the difference is minimal.Making out the any of the three is in a completely different class to the other two is crap.

VVS has a better overall record home and away against Australia, but when both McGrath and Warne are playing Pietersen is the only one to have averaged 50 at his home and 50 away from home, which is better then Laxman's record vs McGrath and Warne. VVS' best innings is better then Pietersen's. So what? VVS' best innings is better then Tendulkar's, Lara's and Ponting... does that make Laxman better then them? No it doesn't. Laxman only did it once, Pietersen did it multiple times.

Pietersen has averaged over 50 for the better part of his career whilst Laxman has averaged low 40's until recently where his average has been boosted up to the mid 40's. Pietersen didn't just succeed against McGrath & Warne but also Muralitharan and Steyn when Pietersen was inform. He also scored a 100 against Asif, a guy who Pietersen was considered 'his bunny'.

On another thread

You owned yourself

No, you did a good job at doing that yourself...

There is a difference, but not a big one. The ball is a bit newer and the bowler is a tad fresher. If they are good enough to play International Cricket then such little immaturies shouldn't affect a batsman that much. If there was such a difference then Hayden, Sehwag, Smith and Gambhir would be better then any middle-order batsman that's ever played the game apart from Bradman.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

VVS has a better overall record home and away against Australia, but when both McGrath and Warne are playing Pietersen is the only one to have averaged 50 at his home and 50 away from home, which is better then Laxman's record vs McGrath and Warne. VVS' best innings is better then Pietersen's. So what? VVS' best innings is better then Tendulkar's, Lara's and Ponting... does that make Laxman better then them? No it doesn't. Laxman only did it once, Pietersen did it multiple times.

Pietersen has averaged over 50 for the better part of his career whilst Laxman has averaged low 40's until recently where his average has been boosted up to the mid 40's. Pietersen didn't just succeed against McGrath & Warne but also Muralitharan and Steyn when Pietersen was inform. He also scored a 100 against Asif, a guy who Pietersen was considered 'his bunny'.


No, you did a good job at doing that yourself...

So only the record against Warne and McGrath matters? Ijaz Ahmed, Saeed Anwar> KP then.

How long Pietersen averaged 50 is irrelevant.If a person leads 8 out of 9 laps, but his opponent overtakes him in the last one to the finish line, he still wins.

As aforementioned Pietersen is roughly only as good as VVS and KS.The difference if any is minimal.

So the difference is not big but big enough to stop Sehwag scoring a century to that extent that it makes him fail.Hey wait KP is a middle order bat too.Sehwag's better than KP then

 

[wfdu_ben91]

So only the record against Warne and McGrath matters? Ijaz Ahmed, Saeed Anwar> KP then.

How long Pietersen averaged 50 is irrelevant.If a person leads 8 out of 9 laps, but his opponent overtakes him in the last one to the finish line, he still wins.

As aforementioned Pietersen is roughly only as good as VVS and KS.The difference if any is minimal.

So the difference is not big but big enough to stop Sehwag scoring a century to that extent that it makes him fail.Hey wait KP is a middle order bat too.Sehwag's better than KP then

But the difference is that Pietersen did it at home and away against McGrath and Warne - something no other batsman did. Something you keep failing to comprehend. The fact that Sehwag opens does no justice to him being better then Pietersen because the pitches he bats on are best to bat on when the new ball is coming onto the bat. Go outside the subcontinent and it's a different story. Hence, Sehwag's average goes from 60 to 40.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

But the difference is that Pietersen did it at home and away against McGrath and Warne - something no other batsman did. Something you keep failing to comprehend. The fact that Sehwag opens does no justice to him being better then Pietersen because the pitches he bats on are best to bat on when the new ball is coming onto the bat. Go outside the subcontinent and it's a different story. Hence, Sehwag's average goes from 60 to 40.

VVS also played an innings that no one else did. If that can be discounted, then KPs record against Mc-W can be too.

What is your point about KP anyway?Do you claim that he is better than Bradman or something? If not do you agree that he is in the same class as KS, VVS or even Sehwag for that matter?

Sehwag's average outside the subcontinent is 40+
KP's average in the subcontinent is 34

I know who I'd rather have.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

VVS also played an innings that no one else did. If that can be discounted, then KPs record against Mc-W can be too.

What is your point about KP anyway?Do you claim that he is better than Bradman or something? If not do you agree that he is in the same class as KS, VVS or even Sehwag for that matter?

Sehwag's average outside the subcontinent is 40+
KP's average in the subcontinent is 34

I know who I'd rather have.

Now, you're just being ridiculous because I've cut down everything that you've said.

One innings doesn't make a career. Pietersen played 10 Tests, home and away against McGrath and Warne and averaged 50+ in the home series and 50+ in the away series. No one else has done it - why can't you understand this? Laxman played ONE very, very, great innings of note, take that out and his (just watch, you'll go make some stupid arguement about why I would deduct his best innings when I'm obviously doing it to show that he played 1 great innings and that was it) average is very mediocre. The best batsman are rated on how well they do against the best and then on how well they do against the rest. It's not as if Pietersen destroyed McGrath and Warne alone and then averaged 35 overall.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Now, you're just being ridiculous because I've cut down everything that you've said.

One innings doesn't make a career. Pietersen played 10 Tests, home and away against McGrath and Warne and averaged 50+ in the home series and 50+ in the away series. No one else has done it - why can't you understand this? Laxman played ONE very, very, great innings of note, take that out and his (just watch, you'll go make some stupid arguement about why I would deduct his best innings when I'm obviously doing it to show that he played 1 great innings and that was it) average is very mediocre. The best batsman are rated on how well they do against the best and then on how well they do against the rest. It's not as if Pietersen destroyed McGrath and Warne alone and then averaged 35 overall.

Let's break this down :

Laxman's best innings against M-W is better than KP's
Laxman's overall record against Australia home and away is also superior not necessarily with M-W in it.

When you deduct a score like 281, obviously the average is going to go down.FTR that wasn't his only century against M-W. Oh wait,let's deduct that too

Point is Laxman's average in Australia is 54 to KP's 50 and 40 to KP's 25 in SA. In the subcontinent, KP averages..well do you want to go there

You still haven't made your point. I assume your deliberately ignoring it because you don;t have a point.If you say that KP is better than VVS and KS, but not in a difference class, you won't get any arguments from me.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Let's break this down :

Laxman's best innings against M-W is better than KP's
Laxman's overall record against Australia home and away is also superior not necessarily with M-W in it.

When you deduct a score like 281, obviously the average is going to go down.FTR that wasn't his only century against M-W. Oh wait,let's deduct that too

Point is Laxman's average in Australia is 54 to KP's 50 and 40 to KP's 25 in SA. In the subcontinent, KP averages..well do you want to go there

You still haven't made your point. I assume your deliberately ignoring it because you don;t have a point.If you say that KP is better than VVS and KS, but not in a difference class, you won't get any arguments from me.

Because Australia can only be considered the best bowling attack over the past decade when McGrath and Warne are apart of it. Without them then runs scored against Australia aren't anywhere near as worthy as runs scored when they are both are apart of the attack. Even without one of them, the credibility of the success against Australia takes a massive blow.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Because Australia can only be considered the best bowling attack over the past decade when McGrath and Warne are apart of it. Without them then runs scored against Australia aren't anywhere near as worthy as runs scored when they are both are apart of the attack. Even without one of them, the credibility of the success against Australia takes a massive blow.

Credibility is again very subjective.M-W have retired and by your logic every run scored against Aus now is not to be counted?
I'll ask one last time - Is KP better than Bradman according to you?If not where do you rate him?

 

[Avada Kedavra]

And of course let's ignore Laxman's superior record in SA,Pak,SL etc whatever rocks your boat.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Because Australia can only be considered the best bowling attack over the past decade when McGrath and Warne are apart of it. Without them then runs scored against Australia aren't anywhere near as worthy as runs scored when they are both are apart of the attack. Even without one of them, the credibility of the success against Australia takes a massive blow.

Btw both KP and VVS have scored 2 centuries against M-W

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Credibility is again very subjective.M-W have retired and by your logic every run scored against Aus now is not to be counted?
I'll ask one last time - Is KP better than Bradman according to you?If not where do you rate him?

No runs should be deducted, but only stats of when Warne & McGrath are playing should be taken into consideration when discussing a batsman's success against Australia over the past decade. Runs against Australia without McGrath & Warne being apart of the bowling attack is equal to scoring runs against a team like England's bowling attack.

If you go back a few pages, I didn't even rate KP amongst Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, etc... what makes you think I think that KP is better then Bradman?

 

[Shri]

Sehwag is a converted opener.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

No runs should be deducted, but only stats of when Warne & McGrath are playing should be taken into consideration when discussing a batsman's success against Australia over the past decade. Runs against Australia without McGrath & Warne being apart of the bowling attack is equal to scoring runs against a team like England's bowling attack.

If you go back a few pages, I didn't even rate KP amongst Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, etc... what makes you think I think that KP is better then Bradman?

Something about KP's record against M-W : - 8 tests not 10 as you claimed. Yeah still very impressive record though. But just to emphasize on the folly of removing the best innings, if I remove KP's 2 best innings against M-W, then his average drops to a mediocre 33 against them.

KP has 2 centuries against M-W. 2 158s IIRC. Laxman has a 281 and 167 against M-W. More importantly neither of KP's 100s were match winning. Laxman's 281 was...

As aforementioned VVS has a better record in SA, Pak, SL etc To claim that KP is in a different league to Sanga and VVS as you did is just bollocks. If you agree that they are all in the same class then cool.

 

[GIMH]

It is irrelevant that the first 158 wasn't matchwinning, as it was series-winning

 

[Sir Alex]

It is irrelevant that the first 158 wasn't matchwinning, as it was series-winning

The 100,000 drops regardless

 

[zaremba]

WG Grace's Test batting average of 32.29. And (especially to modern eyes) his FC average of 39.45.

 

[zaremba]

Okay, you can give credit to a batsman for scoring not outs in reasonable doses, I just don't rate the stats of players who dine out off them. For example, batsman A and batsman B play 4 innings each-

A: 50. 50. 50. 50

B: 50, 25no, 25no, 50

A has scored 25% more runs but has an average 25% less. If you are coming in at number 6 and spend your time batting with the tail or often come in late on a one-day innings you can hold off a bit, score a few runs and take a not out which boosts your average.

I just don't buy this at all. Apologies to everyone who's heard me (and Uppercut) whistling in the wind on this point in the past, but here goes anyway.

In some ways not outs artificially depress a batsman's average. To give a slightly different example:

X: 50. 50. 50. 50
Y: 50. 50. 50. 25. 25no.

Both players average the same (50). Both have scored the same number of runs and have been dismissed the same number of times.

However in scoring those runs Y has had the disadvantage of having to start his innings (when batting is far and away more difficult) more often than X. So his achievement in that sense is the greater.