Sobers rates Subash Gupte over Shane Warne

[vcs]

WRT to the two all-time teams, I don't think it's really a talking point if you rate either one over the other. Saying one wouldn't even win one test is going over the top though.

Agree. I think it's fair to say that particular statement's a bit ridiculous and possibly biased. And using that Ashes series against Harmison and co. as "evidence" hardly even qualifies as an argument.

 

[weldone]

WRT to the two all-time teams, I don't think it's really a talking point if you rate either one over the other. Saying one wouldn't even win one test is going over the top though.

And I hope you understand that he didn't mean ONE literally. That's one way of placing stress on one's opinion.

It's just like saying that Viv Richards was a great batsman but he didn't have to face Marshall. If he had to, he wouldn't have a clue. If someone makes such a statement, of course he doesn't mean it literally. He would mean that most of the times Marshall would have dominated Viv. This is similar.

 

[Teja.]

Agree. I think it's fair to say that particular statement's a bit ridiculous and possibly biased. And using that Ashes series against Harmison and co. as "evidence" hardly even qualifies as an argument.

Yeppers.

 

[Teja.]

And I hope you understand he didn't mean it. That's one way of placing stress on his opinion.

It's just like saying that Viv Richards was a great batsman but he didn't have to face Marshall. If he had to, he wouldn't have a clue. If someone makes such a statement, of course he doesn't mean it literally. He would mean that most of the times Marshall would have dominated Viv. This is similar.

Nah an equivalent statement for that scenario would be similar to 'Marshall would have gotten Viv for a duck everytime"

 

[akilana]

Murali bowled without much support, a lot more overs per match than Warne and against the minnows far moe often. Put into the proper perspective, they're very close statistically. It's as fallacious to compare Warne's and Murali's stats prima facie as it is to compare a spinner's and a fast bowler's.

tfb, Warne bowled a lot at England in the 90s who weren't better than Bangaladesh in terms of being good against spinners.

The other point is when you bowl without much support, your average and the strike rates suffer.

 

[Ikki]

And I hope you understand that he didn't mean ONE literally. That's one way of placing stress on one's opinion.

It's just like saying that Viv Richards was a great batsman but he didn't have to face Marshall. If he had to, he wouldn't have a clue. If someone makes such a statement, of course he doesn't mean it literally. He would mean that most of the times Marshall would have dominated Viv. This is similar.

What makes you think he didn't mean it like that? It seems he did mean one - he even adds "to tell you the truth". What made it even more ridiculous is his evidence - the Ashes in 05. That kind of statement is intended to hurt feelings.

And with all due respect to Gupte (because he certainly deserves it) I think comparing him with Warne and saying he is better because Warne didn't really use the Googly is another statement looking to just start a flame war.

tfb, Warne bowled a lot at England in the 90s who weren't better than Bangaladesh in terms of being good against spinners.

The other point is when you bowl without much support, your average and the strike rates suffer.

Murali himself averaged about 20 vs England and about 13 against Bangladesh. Without support you're also able to take more wickets which can help both your average and SR.

Anyway, this is not the discussion for this thread.

 

[weldone]

Nah an equivalent statement for that scenario would be similar to 'Marshall would have gotten Viv for a duck everytime"

An equivalent statement for this one would be 'Lloyd's WI would have got innings victory in every match against Waugh's Australia after enforcing follow-on in every match and without losing any wicket."

 

[ankitj]

Murali bowled without much support, a lot more overs per match than Warne and against the minnows far moe often. Put into the proper perspective, they're very close statistically. It's as fallacious to compare Warne's and Murali's stats prima facie as it is to compare a spinner's and a fast bowler's.

Their test records give less to tell them apart (of course if you introduce the criterion of performance against the best players of spin, which I will definitely do). But comparing their records in ODIs clearly puts Murali ahead and by some distance. Murali gives about 0.3 runs per over fewer than Warne (and that's statistically significant difference!) even though (1) Murali played most of his matches in subcontinent where 300+ totals are posted regularly and (2) Murali played right through the 2000s while Warne played his last ODI in 2003. So that's the decisive difference. Murali is much harder to attack!

 

[pasag]

Why can't the thread be used to praise Gupte instead of denigrating Warne?

 

[fredfertang]

I haven't checked but given they all played a lot of County cricket I'm sure Viv Richards faced plenty of chin music from all his fast bowlers, albeit only in the nets at Taunton from Garner

 

[Matt79]

^^ Great question.

 

[Teja.]

Why can't the thread be used to praise Gupte instead of denigrating Warne?

While I agree with the sentiment, Fact is most of us know Sweet Fanny Adams about Gupte except for knowing he was ruddy brilliant. We cannot relate as much in our 'praise' as to someone like Viv or Warne. That makes SJS's info about Gupte even more awesome.

 

[Matt79]

8ankitj, you probably aren't aware, having only recently joined, but there is a separate thread for discussing Murali vs Warne, as it is a discussion that tends to otherwise takeover multiple unrelated threads. Grateful if you, and others wanting to debate that specific question could have that discussion here:
http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/15733-official-warne-vs-murali-discussion-228.html

 

[Furball]

I haven't checked but given they all played a lot of County cricket I'm sure Viv Richards faced plenty of chin music from all his fast bowlers, albeit only in the nets at Taunton from Garner

I'm pretty sure SJS has in the past written about Sir Viv's mediocre domestic record against Barbados.

edit: have found the thread in question but it seems that Sir Viv, whilst being poor against Barbados, tended to get out to your average journeyman Bajan, rather than the greats such as Marshall, Garner et al.

 

[Top_Cat]

Retired great douchebag makes derogatory statement about another retired great douchebag. Barely news, ain't it?

Sobers does seem to be from the school of thought that says a leg-spinner can't be a great unless they have an awesome wrong'un, though.

 

[gwo]

gwo, personal insults like these are not appropriate at all. You can disagree with what the poster's said all you like, but there's no need to be abusive about it or insult the actual poster.

Would like to put it out there that the only insult I leveled against weldone is "drongo". Which, albeit a horrible word, is no where near the level of insults I see leveled on this board from time to time.

Regardless, shall try to keep my rage to a minimum in the future.

 

[honestbharani]

I have no issue with Sir Gary rating Gupte over Warne, although i disagree. This is why i'd always take the view of a cricket historian like a John Arlott, Neville Carduss etc over past players.

I find this statement from him stunning:



Sir Gary should check that back, since Warne certainly bowled ALOT of good googlies in his career.

yeah??????

 

[honestbharani]

Think it's pretty similar to Warne's wrong'un in a way, it's not a great slower ball but it will get the odd wicket when you take as many wickets as those guys did. I mean, big Curtly just slowed his arm up!

But yeah, I think we've come to a fair agreement.

Juz out of curiosity Jack... Disrespecting former great cricketers and calling them "idiots" and "trolls" are not warnable or something?

 

[Teja.]

Juz out of curiosity Jack... Disrespecting former great cricketers and calling them "idiots" and "trolls" are not warnable or something?

When it is perfectly alright to call Bedi/Harvey idiots, It should apply to all cricketers IMO irrespective of the subjective 'respect' that they have earned.

 

[Jono]

Nah that'd be taking it too far HB. We have the right to say what we want about cricketers as long as it is 'fair comment/opinion' and not defamatory.