• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who Is The Second Greatest Batsman Ever?

Who Is The Second Greatest Batsman Ever?

  • Total voters
    106
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ikki

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
G.I.Joe said:
I actually think the bowling attack is a far greater factor here than the batting teammates. I don't entirely agree with the 'bowlers win matches' cliche, but its true to a great extent. A stronger bowling attack is more likely to convert PD's to wins than a stronger batting lineup.
Click to expand...
Well, even if it was it does not detract from the point. What hasn't been mentioned is just that the bowlers can turn a draw into a win when Viv had batted well, they can also do so when he has batted badly.

The player in a weaker team is just much more likely to improve from his career record in wins because it is much more likely the win occurred by said player's performance. The player in the dominant team far less because the sample in his wins will be diluted with performances his teammates will have had more of a hand in than him.

As examples, compare: Warne and Murali or Marshall and Hadlee.

It would be more relevant to compare players that played in comparable teams.
 
Last edited:
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
Ikki said:
Well, even if it was it does not detract from the point. What hasn't been mentioned is just that the bowlers can turn a draw into a win when Viv had batted well, they can also do so when he has batted badly.

The player in a weaker team is just much more likely to improve from his careers in wins because it is much more likely the win occurred by said player's performance. The player in the dominant team far less because the sample in his wins will be diluted with performances his teammates will have had more of a hand in than him.

As examples, compare: Warne and Murali or Marshall and Hadlee.

It would be more relevant to compare players that played in comparable teams.
Click to expand...
They can, but its much more likely that Viv batted better than he usually does in those converted matches because potential draws as a rule tend to occur on pitches that favour the batsmen more than the bowlers, which is why they're potential draws in the first place. Any evening out tends to happen with the batsman walking away with a better average from those matches.
 
Ikki

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
G.I.Joe said:
They can, but its much more likely that Viv batted better than he usually does in those converted matches because potential draws as a rule tend to occur on pitches that favour the batsmen more than the bowlers, which is why they're potential draws in the first place. Any evening out tends to happen with the batsman walking away with a better average from those matches.
Click to expand...
That's probably why I mentioned sure draws apart from potential draws. You can go through his list of wins and see for yourself. I don't think it'll be enough to make much of a difference. For still the greater jump in averages will occur for the player in an inferior team. Actually, if anything, if it occured often enough that his good innings came in these matches, of which wins he has plenty, then his average would be much much higher. It's doubtful there are many and there is also a danger in some whimsical definitions of a "potential draw" if many are found. As it basically says the Windies were routinely rescued by their bowlers which I think would be hardly the case - more likely that they're dominant for most of the match.

You bring a valid point, but I really doubt it makes up the difference.
 
Last edited:
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
satyam said:
I agree with you on this point. The amount of time Australia have fluked away against India is amazing . If Kumble had a support bowler at the other end, India would have surely won a series in Australia in 2003. They fluked in 2004 tour also when rain saved them in chennai.
Again they got away in adelaide in 2008 and India in 2008. So Australia have consistently
got away with a draw against India when a one more great bowler would have converted those draws into a victory
Click to expand...
India DID NOT have a support bowler to Kumble in 2003... So how is that Australia "fluking" a win? I do agree that we were robbed in Sydney both in 2003 and 2008 though..
 
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Sir Alex said:
Yeah robbed is a harsh word there. Had there been some support for Kumble at the other end (with and without the gloves), India could've won that series.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah, Patel with the gloves, hehe.

Was trying to think of whether there was umpire controversy in that game, after it was grouped with '08 by HB.
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
vic_orthdox said:
Robbed in Sydney '03?

Obviously were the better side, certainly not questioning that.
Click to expand...
Ganguly damns Bucknor in his report

Ganguly slams 'very poor' Bucknor

Excerpt from the article-


In the column of the report where an umpire is to be judged on his conduct and decision-making -- the ratings are very good, good, average, poor, and very poor -- Ganguly has given Bucknor 'very poor'.

The Indians were peeved with the 57 year-old Jamaican for turning down leg-before appeals against Justin Langer and Damien Martyn on the final day. Almost everyone watching thought both batsmen were plumb in front.

Langer survived two confident shouts from Ajit Agarkar [ Images ] while Martyn benefited from Bucknor's largesse after left-arm spinner Murali Kartik [ Images ] had hit him in front of the stumps.

The Indians have also not taken kindly to an angry Bucknor upbraiding teenage wicketkeeper Parthiv Patel [ Images ] with a raised finger, rather like a headmaster scolding an errant schoolboy, in front of thousands of spectators at the Sydney Cricket Ground and millions watching on television.

"Patel was not wrong in [jumping] up and down as his view was obstructed by the batsman's back," a senior Indian team member said, and characterised the umpire's reaction as downright rude.

The Indians believe that not only at the SCG but also in the first Test at Brisbane [ Images ], Bucknor's umpiring has been anything but satisfactory. Bucknor had ruled Sachin Tendulkar [ Images ] out leg before wicket when he had shouldered arms to a rising delivery outside the off stump from Jason Gillespie in India's [ Images ] first innings, a decision that was slammed around the cricketing world.

"He was not like this before, but now he seems to be riding a thing against us," remarked the senior cricketer.

....................

There was also the Rahuld dravid Toffee incident and the case of Bucknor allegedly teasing Dravid in 2003/04 series.The same year, in Lahore, then Indian coach John Wright complained to match referee Ranjan Madugalle over Bucknor's decisions.

Bucknor cost India two matches and two series consecutively in Australia.The 2008 series what happened was the culmination of the long Dispute dating way before even 2003.At the end the patience went and India took a stand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top