DoG's Top 100 Test Bowlers Countdown Thread 100-1

[Burner]

He gets a pass for that since he's contesting against Warne who couldn't bowl to players that were actually good against spin. Can you imagine a great batsman having a torrid series against a side and using the excuse "they were really good bowlers so meh".. He would go to his grave with that hanging over him.

 

[Burgey]

Yes, that is a black mark in his resume, just like Warne's against India( Murali hasn't been good against India either). Overall I rate Warne marginally higher, but nothing much between them.

Yeah we were extremely lucky to have them both around at the same time. The only down side is it’s led to a boring era where there’s such an emphasis on spin, which is a turgid discipline to begin with.

The measure of a true batsman has, is and always will be how they handle genuine pace. You might nick off to a dibbly dobbler on a green top or get bowled through the gate on a Bunsen, but they don’t physically threaten your safety. If you can’t cop genuinely quick bowling then I’m afraid you’ll always be less of a batsman, and therefore less of a human being than someone who can.

 

[Burgey]

Hence Aravinda >>>>>> Jayawardene, as an example.

 

[h_hurricane]

Hence Aravinda >>>>>> Jayawardene, as an example.

Very much. Aravinda crushed Indian hopes in 1996 semi final. The image of him threading the off side field ball after ball still stays in my mind. Jayawardene too played an awesome innings in 2011 final, but there was an inevitability about Aravinda's innings. We knew he did it when he left after the most glorious 66 runs ever.

 

[Burgey]

Back to comparing bowlers, I note Nathan Lyon has now completed over 20,000 deliveries in test cricket without bowling a single no ball. Same can’t be said for Murali

 

[Bolo]

Jadeja ending up so high was always going to end up with some great mudslinging, but the list of players being brought into it is great.

Seeing Ashwin beat real quality like Holding and Davidison (or whoever) should be a real treat.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Jadeja ending up so high was always going to end up with some great mudslinging, but the list of players being brought into it is great.

Seeing Ashwin beat real quality like Holding and Davidison (or whoever) should be a real treat.

I can't wait to see where Anderson ends up. Imagine if he is ahead of Lillee.

 

[h_hurricane]

Other possible scenarios: Kumble or Ashwin ahead of Garner, Pollock or Akram( Wickets per match for Akram and Pollock, 5 wicket hauls for Garner are surprisingly low)

 

[Cabinet96]

I think Jadeja is a bit of a glitch because India have produced more bowler friendly tracks in the last five/six years. Maybe in the future there'll be a way to tell this little era apart from other ones where the pitches in India were flatter and tough even for spinners to succeed. Although I don't know if the actual runs per wicket rate in India has gone down during the period of Jadeja's career. Either way it doesn't damage the integrity of the great work DoG has done, like some have seemingly suggested, it's just another reminder of what we already knew would be the case; there are limitations to any rating model in sports. It's really childish to enjoy following the countdown then throw your toys out of the pram when you find out the model rates a player you don't like more than you do.

At the end of the day, if a guy repeatedly and utterly destroy the likes of Australia, England and South Africa in half the tests his team players against those sides, he's obviously going to come up well in any objective measurement of his career. And maybe it's time to admit he might actually be pretty good? I usually hate the idea of bringing fan allegiances into a debate but in cricket I do think there's a genuine snobbishness to foreign players who dominate at home and are average away, that I don't think Australian and English fans (for example) hold the same standards to with their own players (I think it's probably true of a lot of Indian fans too, who look down more on players who do poorly in Asia than they would their own home track bullies). Probably because they're more likely to watch a player like Jadeja when India are touring than they are when they're playing at home. Or maybe they just don't rate Asian cricket as much. Which would be a ridiculous outlook. Cricket in Asia makes up a massive proportion of modern cricket, and Jadeja has been one of the best ever cricketers in Asia.

 

[ankitj]

I think Jadeja is a bit of a glitch because India have produced more bowler friendly tracks in the last five/six years. Maybe in the future there'll be a way to tell this little era apart from other ones where the pitches in India were flatter and tough even for spinners to succeed. Although I don't know if the actual runs per wicket rate in India has gone down during the period of Jadeja's career. Either way it doesn't damage the integrity of the great work DoG has done, like some have seemingly suggested, it's just another reminder of what we already knew would be the case; there are limitations to any rating model in sports. It's really childish to enjoy following the countdown then throw your toys out of the pram when you find out the model rates a player you don't like more than you do.

At the end of the day, if a guy repeatedly and utterly destroy the likes of Australia, England and South Africa in half the tests his team players against those sides, he's obviously going to come up well in any objective measurement of his career. And maybe it's time to admit he might actually be pretty good? I usually hate the idea of bringing fan allegiances into a debate but in cricket I do think there's a genuine snobbishness to foreign players who dominate at home and are average away, that I don't think Australian and English fans (for example) hold the same standards to with their own players (I think it's probably true of a lot of Indian fans too, who look down more on players who do poorly in Asia than they would their own home track bullies). Probably because they're more likely to watch a player like Jadeja when India are touring than they are when they're playing at home. Or maybe they just don't rate Asian cricket as much. Which would be a ridiculous outlook. Cricket in Asia makes up a massive proportion of modern cricket, and Jadeja has been one of the best ever cricketers in Asia.

Bolded part is not true. Indian fans treat performance outside of subcontinent real test of our players and undervalue home performances almost to an unfair degree. It is this reason why we don't rate Kumble highly at all. Same is true of Jadeja and Ashwin. All the deliberately trollish posting in last few pages aside, none of us consider them top 30 where they will end up in this countdown.

 

[Cabinet96]

Tbh the only Indian fans I've really engaged with have been people on CW who are obviously smart and knowledgable enough to not do that. I basically included that in the interest of fairness because I've had a lot more experience of Australia fans who are quite bad in that respect.

 

[ankitj]

Fans outside of cw are also similar in this respect. Home performances are undervalued for both batsmen and bowlers given wins overseas are so hard to come by for India.

 

[Borges]

Either way it doesn't damage the integrity of the great work DoG has done, like some have seemingly suggested, it's just another reminder of what we already knew would be the case; there are limitations to any rating model in sports. It's really childish to enjoy following the countdown then throw your toys out of the pram when you find out the model rates a player you don't like more than you do.

Yes. Yes. Yes.
Following these ratings by DoG has been a thoroughly enjoyable, and enlightening experience for me.

Indian fans treat performance outside of subcontinent real test of our players and undervalue home performances almost to an unfair degree.

To an utterly unfair degree, if you ask me. There is no other explanation for rating Rahane so highly.

 

[Bolo]

Yes. Yes. Yes.
Following these ratings by DoG has been a thoroughly enjoyable, and enlightening experience for me.




To an utterly unfair degree, if you ask me. There is no other explanation for rating Rahane so highly.

Agreed on your first paragraph.

The Indian fan rating is pragmatic, more than anything. It doesn't really matter how Indians perform in Asia. They win anyway. A Maharaj would be far more valuable to India than Jadeja, although he has actually done his job better than Maharaj has.

Anyway, I think fans from every country don't really give the SC it's due, except (sometimes) when it comes to fast bowlers. The entire SC seems reduced to the importance of one or two countries outside of it. Yes, there are more countries outside Asia, but it still makes more sense to look at performances in and outside the SC.

 

[ankitj]

Probable 30:

McGrath, Warne, Lillee, O'Reilly, Grimmett, Davidson,
Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh, Holding, Garner,
Steyn, Donald, S. Pollock, Rabada, Philander
Barnes, Trueman, Andersen, Laker,
Imran, Wasim, Waqar,
Kumble, Ashwin,
Muralitharan, Herath,
Hadlee.

That's 28. Who am I missing? May be some of the pre-WWI bowlers? Turner and Spofforth?

With Jadeja taking one of the top 30 spots, there is one mystery entry left. Looking at Akhtar's record I feel he can't miss out top 100. Average of 25.xx, 178 wickets, 12 fivers and 2 ten-fers is a pretty strong showing. And I suspect his quality points will be high because he had tendency to bowl killer spells which will translate into lot of gold performances.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

With Jadeja taking one of the top 30 spots, there is one mystery entry left. Looking at Akhtar's record I feel he can't miss out top 100. Average of 25.xx, 178 wickets, 12 fivers and 2 ten-fers is a pretty strong showing. And I suspect his quality points will be high because he had tendency to bowl killer spells which will translate into lot of gold performances.

How many points do you lose for throwing in the towel when the track is a good batting one? Might cost him.

 

[ankitj]

How many points do you lose for throwing in the towel when the track is a good batting one? Might cost him.

Not enough to be ranked behind Neil Wagner, Peter Siddle and Zaheer Khan. Akhtar also has superb SR of 45.7 and iirc this methodology rewards SR separately.

 

[Migara]

With Jadeja taking one of the top 30 spots, there is one mystery entry left. Looking at Akhtar's record I feel he can't miss out top 100. Average of 25.xx, 178 wickets, 12 fivers and 2 ten-fers is a pretty strong showing. And I suspect his quality points will be high because he had tendency to bowl killer spells which will translate into lot of gold performances.

If Thommo makes it Akthar definitely should. Superior bowler in every aspect.

 

[trundler]

Akhtar should lose as many points for durability as someone like Anderson gains. The most matches he played in a row was 7!

 

[Brian Lara]

Because he launched it faster than anyone in history. Not everyone can put that much in and have Brett Lee level durability.