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

[Burgey]

Mate he was dropped two tests ago because he can’t bowl outside Asia.

 

[Burgey]

Do we genuinely believe batsmanship in that era was better or worse? I mean it's possible to say that Kohli, Pujara and Rahane are not as good players of spin aa Sehwag, Tendulkar and Laxman. But can we confidently say Sobers and Harvey were better than Kohli and Smith?

I think it’s fair to say both of them, Sobers in particular, were not terrible.

Great players are great players. They adapt. When they play for a long enough period you can see them do it. I don’t know why you would think Sobers or Harvey would be spuds in this era yet not question whether Kohli and Smith would struggle if you put a toothpick in their hands on uncovered decks.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.26

Vernon Philander (South Africa) 806

Quality Points: 744
Career Points: 62

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad9WvlqIKkc

Career: 2011-
Wickets: 205
Gold Performances: 6
5/15 vs. Australia at Cape Town 2011 (18.89)
5/30 vs. England at Lord's 2012 (16.45)
5/7 vs. New Zealand at Cape Town 2013 (19.32)
5/21 vs. Australia at Hobart 2016 (15.08)
6/42 vs. India at Cape Town 2018 (16.59)
6/21 vs. Australia at Johannesburg (18.67)
Silver Performances: 7
Bronze Performances: 2

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 20.12 (21.54) 51.35 (48.63) 4.56 (rank 11)
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (2011-2014): 19.54 46.73 5.47 (rank 26)
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.26 63.71 3.32 (rank 59)
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 20.22 51.78 4.54 (rank 18)

Vernon Philander has no doubt benefited from the relatively friendly pitches in South Africa but he has also achieved a gold performance overseas, which would put him ahead of Laker and Jadeja in many CW posters' minds. He has slowed down in terms of wicket taking in the second half of his career (121 wickets in his first 28 matches, 84 in his next 27). It will be interesting how the career stats of Mohammad Abbas, having had a similar outstanding beginning like Philander, will look after playing 50 test matches.

After 10 matches:
Philander: 14.86 (15.97) 34.57 (33.19) 7.83 (63 wickets, 795 overall points)
Mohammad Abbas 15.69 (15.64) 41.96 (38.03) 6.63 (59 wickets, 715 overall points).

Philander had played 7 of his first 10 matches against quality opposition, Mohammad Abbas has only played 2 matches against quality opposition so far.

 

[h_hurricane]

Mate he was dropped two tests ago because he can’t bowl outside Asia.

Interesting to note that on the 2013 tour of South Africa, Ashwin spared himself of an impossibly high bowling average by not taking any wickets, matching the feat of DKL in West Indies 40 years previously.

 

[Burgey]

I wasn't aware Ashwin suffered a multi-level stress fracture to his lumbar spine in SA on that tour.

To his credit, I can't think of a more successful lazy-eyed bowler in cricket history though.

Good to see Big Vern getting a run this high up.

 

[ankitj]

So Rabada edges out Philander in this countdown. Superb!

 

[Migara]

* Averages and strike-rates are adjusted by era, quality of opposition, and match conditions.
** All innings by a batsmen or bowler are given a rating (see my top 100 test batting and bowling performances thread). The PPI is the average of all innings' performances.
***I have given historical ratings to all teams across all matches. Teams with ratings of 100.00 or above are seen as quality opposition.

Few issues.

1. Is the away averages / average against quality oppositions standardized? Various bowlers have played various amounts of matches against oppositions. Hence if a bowler has a "favorite opposition" and played heavily against them, then the numbers will be skewed.

2. In team ratings why a distinction between founder teams and new teams? If the issue was the experience then Pakistan may very well start as a founder team, because they were a breakaway from Indian teams and was quite strong to start with.

 

[marc71178]

Few issues.

1. Is the away averages / average against quality oppositions standardized? Various bowlers have played various amounts of matches against oppositions. Hence if a bowler has a "favorite opposition" and played heavily against them, then the numbers will be skewed.

Hmm, I wonder who you could be referring to there...

 

[Starfighter]

Hmm, I wonder who you could be referring to there...

Shoaib and NZ maybe?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Few issues.

1. Is the away averages / average against quality oppositions standardized? Various bowlers have played various amounts of matches against oppositions. Hence if a bowler has a "favorite opposition" and played heavily against them, then the numbers will be skewed.

2. In team ratings why a distinction between founder teams and new teams? If the issue was the experience then Pakistan may very well start as a founder team, because they were a breakaway from Indian teams and was quite strong to start with.

3. Should give extra points to players with controversial bowling actions

4. Should take points away for being overweight and blonde

 

[stephen]

3. Should give extra points to players with controversial bowling actions

4. Should take points away for being overweight and blonde

Credit where credit is due, I think
Migara is suggesting that Murali's huge number of wickets against Bangladesh should not count for much. They were a genuine minnow, unlike Pakistan, England and Australia when they were just founded. And being a favourite opposition shouldn't count for as much. And rightly he should be marked down by relatively poor overseas performances.

You can't judge the guy with the Murali avatar for playing favourites here when he's so clearly asking to put Murali's stats into perspective.

 

[Days of Grace]

Few issues.

1. Is the away averages / average against quality oppositions standardized? Various bowlers have played various amounts of matches against oppositions. Hence if a bowler has a "favorite opposition" and played heavily against them, then the numbers will be skewed.

2. In team ratings why a distinction between founder teams and new teams? If the issue was the experience then Pakistan may very well start as a founder team, because they were a breakaway from Indian teams and was quite strong to start with.

1. Yes, they are.

2. Because Australia and England were much stronger when they started playing test cricket in 1877 then South Africa, India, West Indies, and New Zealand. Pakistan are an exception. Also, the system works better when two foundation teams start on 90 rather than 75.

 

[Migara]

Because Australia and England were much stronger when they started playing test cricket in 1877 then South Africa, India, West Indies, and New Zealand. Pakistan are an exception. Also, the system works better when two foundation teams start on 90 rather than 75.

This doesn't make sense. Yes Aus and Eng were stronger than newer teams, but that was after playing some matches. There s no way to say on absolute terms, the English and Aussie teams played their first matches is stronger than that, say of Pakistan or Afghanisthan. I suggest that every one should start from same number, or to make a system that the existing teams are benefited with additional points when a new team debuts.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.25

Rangana Herath (Sri Lanka) 814

Quality Points: 676
Career Points: 138

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw_rw8QOYu8

Career: 1999-
Wickets: 430
Gold Performances: 11
7/157 vs. Australia at Colombo (SSC) 2011 (15.86)
6/74 vs. England at Galle 2012 (16.07)
6/97 vs. England at Galle 2012 (15.60)
6/48 vs. Pakistan at Galle 2014 (15.44)
9/127 vs. Pakistan at Colombo (SSC) 2014 (18.18)
7/48 vs. India at Galle 2015 (18.31)
6/81 vs. Australia at Colombo (SSC) 2016 (15.07)
7/64 vs. Australia at Colombo (SSC) 2016(16.57)
8/63 vs. Zimbabwe at Harare 2016 (15.55)
6/43 vs. Pakistan at Abu Dubai 2017 (17.33)
6/98 vs. South Africa at Colombo (SSC) 2018 (15.02)
Silver Performances: 11
Bronze Performances: 15

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.70 (27.95) 62.27 (59.78) 5.26 (rank 40)
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (2014-2017): 21.93 53.62 6.36 (rank 32)
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 32.57 78.05 3.64 (rank 95)
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 26.33 63.63 5.44 (rank 16)

Sri Lanka must have been extremely thankful that after Murali retired in 2010, Rangana Herath stepped into his shoes so seamlessly. All 11 of his gold performances have come in the post-Muralitharan era, a testament to how he has carried Sri Lanka during this decade. As with many spinners, he has struggled overseas but his performances in his own conditions mean that Sri Lanka have remained a force at home. Sri Lanka will miss him terribly when he retires after one more match. Will the void be filled this time?

 

[Days of Grace]

This doesn't make sense. Yes Aus and Eng were stronger than newer teams, but that was after playing some matches. There s no way to say on absolute terms, the English and Aussie teams played their first matches is stronger than that, say of Pakistan or Afghanisthan. I suggest that every one should start from same number, or to make a system that the existing teams are benefited with additional points when a new team debuts.

No, I'm talking about 1877. You cannot tell me that South Africa in 1889 were as strong as Australia and England were in 1877.

Or that in ODIs, Afghanistan and Hong Kong on debut were as strong as the established test playing nations in the early 1970s.

 

[Burgey]

His roundness. Good on him.

 

[Migara]

No, I'm talking about 1877. You cannot tell me that South Africa in 1889 were as strong as Australia and England were in 1877.

Or that in ODIs, Afghanistan and Hong Kong on debut were as strong as the established test playing nations in the early 1970s.

Can you definitely tell that Australia or England in 1887 was as strong as Pakistan on debut? Asking whether Afghanisthan or Hongkong is as strong as teams of 70s is a stupid question TBH. We are only worried about the quality of the debut teams, not about the quality of the debut team in relation to the other teams playing durin that time.

I think we have no way to absolutely compare the quality of debut teams across the eras. That is why I suggest that everybody should start with the same mark.

 

[ankitj]

So Herath is one of the 2 who has more gold performances than Harbhajan.

 

[Bolo]

Bets on the next one? Murali?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Murali will have like 40 gold performances imo