The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[bagapath]

There used to be an option in Cricinfo, on the scorecard page, to check the career stats of players up to that match. I cant find it anymore in old scorecards. Is there anyway it is still accessible?

 

[akilana]

Discounting the advantages afforded to one bowler while ignoring the disadvantages doesn't work. Murali bowled at some minnows. He also bowled at arguably the strongest batting unit of all time. Remove both of these and his stats for the period are just as good as if you remove neither.

It especially makes little sense to remove his wickets against minnows when looking at the total number of wickets in the period given the fact that he took the same number per match against top opposition and minnows alike. If he'd played the same number of matches in the period against top opposition he would have ended up with the same number of wickets.

His average is secondary. Lots of bowlers would have managed an average either side of 20 in a given period. What really sets Murali apart is his number of wickets in the period and WPM. He was helped in this by having little competition for wickets, and by playing a fairly higher number of tests in the period (in historical terms, not compared to his own era). But the number of wickets is just insane. You have to send down over after over regardless of conditions, form, injury etc to get these numbers. You are comparing him to Imran and Mcgrath who took half as many wickets as him in 5 years. The gulf between Murali and these two is far greater than that of Kallis from 2003-2007 and these two.

I think you are overstating the home pitch issue. You can't doctor all your pitches to suit a single player. Even if you could, the fact that you would consider putting the fate of your team in the hands of one player by doing so says enough about how they are performing. Home advantage is a big thing though, and while Murali benefitted from it significantly, he was insanely good away at his peak.

Ponting averaged 70 overall and 60 away. Kallis averaged 67 overall and 68 away, 8 hundreds in 21 tests. Without further info, these two sets of numbers are exactly equal in my book. Outside of your data snapshot, you could raise plenty of legitimate arguments either way in favour of each having had a better batting period. Ponting definitely wins in my mind, but it's close. Kallis clearly was a superior player though and it's not close- the advantage he gave his team by allowing them an extra bat is enormous.

Don’t forget you are arguing with the brigadier of anti-murali army. He always comes up with lots of excuses to degrade Murali.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Don’t forget you are arguing with the brigadier of anti-murali army. He always comes up with lots of excuses to degrade Murali.

Calling them "excuses" doesn't make them untrue. Murali playing a lot against minnows, and the statistical benefits he got from it, is a fact. Bowling a lot in spin friendly conditions helping him is a fact.

Whether you think it should count against him in a comparison is up to you, but going around calling them "excuses" as if they have no merit is disingenuous.

 

[Bolo]

I think you are overstating Murali's record during this time. Even with minnows he's only 40 wickets ahead of Kumble.

Removing minnows his record looks very similar to Warne's record during this period (And Warne didn't play in 2003).

High wpm generally says more about the quality of the other players in your team than it does about the bowler themself.

Hadlee is another guy who had a radically higher wpm ratio than other bowlers.

Murali's home average was 18 and his away average was 25. This mainly shows that Sri Lankan wickets of the time were prepared for his bowling. There was never any green tops, never any bounce, just spin.

It's a small sample size but Warne averaged 20 in Sri Lanka during the time in question.

I just don't think Murali was as far ahead of the pack as his stats made him appear.

I'll concede on the Ponting vs Kallis debate. Despite Ponting betting fractionally better with the bat during this time, Kallis would have been better in most teams. Certainly his average in wins vs losses speaks to how vital he was to South Africa.

Ponting is probably remembered better during this time because he was the best in possibly the best side ever assembled.

Murali definitely wasn't as far ahead as his unfiltered stats suggest. He's a long way ahead in stats though, and at his peak he's an enormous distance ahead by stats. Your criticisms are all valid. More so when he wasnt at his peak, but somewhat so at his peak as well. No matter how you try to discount his record though, he's insane at his peak. Maybe not 7+ WPM @19 good over this number of tests, but still more or less undeniably better than any bowler ever over a comparable amount of matches.

Warne also had an insane 4 years. But he played nearly the same number of matches for way fewer wickets. No free passes for only playing 4 of the 5- he got himself banned.

Its not worth comparing anyone other than Warne for the period. Murali is too far ahead.

I don't think Ponting gets more credit for being part of a strong team. If anything the opposite tends to be true. Ponting gets more praise because he was from a more prominent cricket country, and one that likes hyperbole when assessing its players more. But also because Kallis was slow, boring and selfish. The criticisms are exaggerated (particularly when looking at utilitarian value), but still correct. From 2003-2007 RSA really needed a slow, and boring Kallis though. The team was very weak, spending most of these years hovering around 6th ranked. Kallis was better off being slow, because the team spent a lot of their time playing for draws and because there was an absence of other bats who could grind the opposition bowlers down. RSA were strong for the rest of Kallis's career though, and a quicker scoring bat like Ponting is a lot more useful most of the time.

 

[Pratters]

For me, the biggest redeeming factor for Murali is that he started doing well v India, a team against whom he struggled earlier in his career. However, the laws changed were crappy. It isn't about just angles when bowling, it is about thrux and the new law change went against the spirit of the earlier law. I can't really respect Murali as a test bowler like I can a Shane Warne or a Mushtaq Ahmed, say. Not that I would go as far as calling him a cheat or some thing.

 

[a massive zebra]

Must confess that Lohmann's prowess as a slipper had passed me by

Plum Warner, writing in The Cricketer on 25 August 1925, said of Lohmann's fielding:

Many great slip fieldsmen have appeared since his day but never a greater, his activity being cat-like, and his hands extremely safe.

In Cricket, his autobiographical book of 1891, W.G. Grace described Lohmann's fielding as:

a marvel: he seems to be able to get to everything within six feet of him; and everything he can reach he can hold. Time after time I have seen him go head over heels in trying for an almost impossible catch; but rarely if ever did he loose hold of the ball.

Henry Wood, the Surrey wicket keeper of Lohmann's time was perhaps better qualified to comment on Lohmann's fielding than most. In W.A. Bettesworth's Chats on the Cricket Field, published in 1894, he said:

Men like Lohmann are like cats, and in addition to taking what comes straight to them manage somehow or other to bring off the most astounding catches. Lohmann had a way of throwing himself at the ball, and seemed to be able to stretch almost any distance. He would sometimes throw himself right off his feet and land on his knees, and make a catch which no other man would have thought of. I have sometimes wondered whether his illness is not partly caused by the great strain which he must often have put upon himself at slip.

Lohmann's reputation as a fielder was such that he was invited to contribute a feature to the 1893 edition of Wisden, titled A Few Words on Fielding.

 

[Red]

Great stuff Zebra

 

[stephen]

Don’t forget you are arguing with the brigadier of anti-murali army. He always comes up with lots of excuses to degrade Murali.

I still think Murali is the best off spinner ever and one of the two best spinners ever.

I think that his statistics flatter him enormously. Other bowlers have very high wpm figures (Lillee and Hadlee). Other bowlers have had exceptional home records (Kumble) on decks tailor made for their style. What actually makes Murali special is that he has a very strong away record as well as his exceptional home record. Very few off spinners can average under 30 away.

If you remove Murali's record against minnows his record looks very similar to Warne's record. (Warne was better away, Murali better at home).

Contrary to what you may think, I do rate Murali. I'd take Warne ahead of him in tests because I think Warne was more versatile and offered more with the bat but I wouldn't think anyone was stupid for including Murali ahead of Warne.

What I do object to is people citing Murali's high wpm and low average as reasons why he was better than Warne, when it's clear that Murali had a lot more assistance from the surface for his career and hee also had no serious competition for wickets.

 

[Pratters]

How about Swann ahead of Murali?

 

[stephen]

How about Swann ahead of Murali?

Swann is a couple of tiers below Murali. Even if you ignore the difference in their averages, Swann had very poor longevity.

 

[Pratters]

Longevity aside, purely on an ability of an off spinner.. Murali did have a long career but his first 6-7 years he was nothing special and extremely average v India..

 

[mr_mister]

Murali had 800 run outs

 

[TheJediBrah]

800 run outs would actually be an insane record. Much more impressive than 800 wickets.

 

[Bolo]

I had a look at Botham and Sobers, who I figured probably had the best runs of the allrounders and picked what were likely their best 5 year periods to compare to Kallis 2003-2007.

Kallis 47 matches 4827 runs @67 (67/68) 86 wickets@ 36 (33/40), 1.82wpm

Sobers 1958-62 28 matches 3104 runs @ 78 (103/55) 61 wickets @ 35 (34/38), 2.18 wpm

Botham 1977-81 38 matches 1811 runs @ 33 (33/32) 181 wickets (21/21), 4.76 wpm

It's hard not to give this to Sobers looking at this set of numbers alone. His level of htb is insane, and there are some questions over workload, but that's a mean set of numbers. But 10 of these 28 matches were against India, who were plenty weak.

Thoughts on these three 5 year periods, or can anyone else top these?q

 

[AndrewB]

I had a look at Botham and Sobers, who I figured probably had the best runs of the allrounders and picked what were likely their best 5 year periods to compare to Kallis 2003-2007.

Kallis 47 matches 4827 runs @67 (67/68) 86 wickets@ 36 (33/40), 1.82wpm

Sobers 1968-72 28 matches 3104 runs @ 78 (103/55) 61 wickets @ 35 (34/38), 2.18 wpm

Botham 1977-81 38 matches 1811 runs @ 33 (33/32) 181 wickets (21/21), 4.76 wpm

It's hard not to give this to Sobers looking at this set of numbers alone. His level of htb is insane, and there are some questions over workload, but that's a mean set of numbers. But 10 of these 28 matches were against India, who were plenty weak.

Thoughts on these three 5 year periods, or can anyone else top these?q

(Typo for "1958-62" for Sobers).

You could take the spell Jan 1960 to mid-Feb 1969 to give Sobers a comparable number of matches, against stronger opposition, and bowling more: 43 matches: 20 against England, 15 against Australia, 8 against India; 4343 @ 66 and 144 @ 32.

You've only looked at 4 years for Botham; in his first 5 years he played 51 matches and averaged 39 batting, 23 bowling.

 

[a massive zebra]

Imran Khan 1982-86 24 matches 964 runs @ 42 138 wickets @ 14
Or if we want to look at comparable matches 1980-87 45 matches 1938 runs @ 41 213 wickets @ 17

 

[jimmy101]

I'd be interested to see how Frank Foster's peak period stacks up against the aforementioned.

 

[Bolo]

(Typo for "1958-62" for Sobers).

You could take the spell Jan 1960 to mid-Feb 1969 to give Sobers a comparable number of matches, against stronger opposition, and bowling more: 43 matches: 20 against England, 15 against Australia, 8 against India; 4343 @ 66 and 144 @ 32.

You've only looked at 4 years for Botham; in his first 5 years he played 51 matches and averaged 39 batting, 23 bowling.

Fixed the typo.

I'm looking at 5 calender years following on from the earlier team suggestion of one player per period. I'm cherry picking the period to find something that competes with Kallis- those were likely his best 5 years, and its not likely anyone will be able to compete on the original year parameters, but not cherry picking further to keep the contest within the original bounds.

Calendar years for Botham. He didn't play much in 77, and it's a bit of a cheat, but had a bad 82 with the ball and I don't want to use it.

Edit: do you think Sobers had a better 5? I'm not too sure how to rate his opponent quality.

Imran Khan 1982-86 24 matches 964 runs @ 42 138 wickets @ 14
Or if we want to look at comparable matches 1980-87 45 matches 1938 runs @ 41 213 wickets @ 17

82-86 isn't really enough games or runs for my taste. He missed a big chunk through injury afair, and while he performed superbly when he took the field, it takes a lot of the luster off.

The games played is a monster run, just not the original criteria.

 

[stephen]

Updated team:

Boycott 68-73
Gavaskar 78-83
Richards 73-78
Smith 13-18
Barrington 63-68
Kallis 03-08
Gilchrist 98-03
Warne 93-98
Marshall 83-88
Steyn 08-13
Ambrose 88-93

Hard to find space for Imran, Sobers, Botham and a number of others, since team balance has to be considered.

It makes me happy that we could get 3 of my top 5 fast bowlers plus Warne and Gilchrist in the team without sacrificing batting at all. In fact the only batsman who might not be considered an ATG bat is Boycott. And he's not that far off.

 

[Bolo]

Updated team:

Boycott 68-73
Gavaskar 78-83
Richards 73-78
Smith 13-18
Barrington 63-68
Kallis 03-08
Gilchrist 98-03
Warne 93-98
Marshall 83-88
Steyn 08-13
Ambrose 88-93

Hard to find space for Imran, Sobers, Botham and a number of others, since team balance has to be considered.

It makes me happy that we could get 3 of my top 5 fast bowlers plus Warne and Gilchrist in the team without sacrificing batting at all. In fact the only batsman who might not be considered an ATG bat is Boycott. And he's not that far off.

Hadlee 83-87 35 matches 1492 runs @ 36 204 wickets@19 5.82 WPM. I reckon it beats Marshall, the other allrounders for best 5 and even Murali. Insane run.

I liked your Gooch idea. Gavaskar and Ambrose out for Botham and Gooch and it looks right to me. Leaving Murali out feels like a sin, but this is probably the best team.

Gilchrist, Steyn and Smith are the only locks in this IMO