Cribbage's Standardised Test Averages (UPDATED November 2018 - posts 753-755)

[Gob]

I like to believe that post was meant to be a joke. It's way too ******** to be true

 

[sledger]

Regrettably, I don't think it is. It's just incredibly an incredibly inadequate view deserving of condemnation the severest of terms.

 

[silentstriker]

Actually I dont think I rate McGrath in the top 10 Australian pacers, I mean that puts him in the 4th XI. So more than likely I want my pace bowlers to have actual pace. ffs Shane Watson bowled faster than McGrath.

As for Steve Waugh, one of the most boring batsmen ever. Would much rather have Mark Waugh, Dean Jones, Kim Hughes and Greg Chappell fill my middle order

Your opinion is wrong and you should feel bad.

 

[sledger]

Your opinion is wrong and you should feel bad.

Yeah, I mean everyone had a right to an opinion, but this sort of opinion is dangerously poor.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

I'm usually a paaaaaaace for days sort of guy, and even I think that post is completely ridiculous.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

silentstriker has been moved to post in Cricket Chat so it must be serious.
I wonder if it might have been a ploy to make McGrath fan boys realise how stupid they look when they attempt to rubbish Dennis Lillee.
It could just be that they’re both great bowlers.

 

[Flem274*]

i dont think anyone here was seriously rubbishing lillee. i think most, like me, did it to antagonise aussie tragic because he was moaning.

i was being serious when i said any medium pacer could average less than 30 in the 70s/80s/90s though. simon doull would get carted around the park today.

 

[the big bambino]

Lower average in era where every noteworthy batsman has 10 runs docked off his average for having it too easy. Did it for longer and did it in more varied conditions. Simply was better. Look, this isn't even an argument. McGrath is probably the 2nd guy picked after Bradman, alongside Gilchrist. This is even before getting into things like % top order wickets. It's just that clear-cut. I love copying Lillee's action and he must've been a great competito AND he's one of the greatest fast bowlers but c'mon, McGrath is a rung above - only because he's absolutely elite tho.

That's the sort of stuff that had every pundit on here picking you as the future of CW. Basically nailed on the 3 best best players of the baggy green right there. Lillee was a great bowler and inspiration. I'm no longer the fan I was but no one can deny his courage, skill and greatness. McGrath was better though. I think people reckon he was boring because they can't appreciate his subtlety. His success can't just be put down to "accuracy and a bit of bounce". He was a smart bowler and you only had glimpses of that when he was miked up for T20 games and used Warner as an example as to how he worked over batsmen.

Another occasion was how he adjusted to English conditions after a rare poor test match. Quick study if not overly fast. Yet another when he adjusted to the KP charge tactic and hurt him with a rare short ball. Kept KP respectful from then on. So he had smarts, enough pace, even as he aged and weapons that you didn't see all that often because he rarely needed them. But he did have them. A bowler of nuances.

As for this list from PEWS, I think it started getting criticised after he made changes adjusting for longevity. At least that is my recollection. From memory people were fairly happy with it, then PEWS accounted for longevity after a few comments, and that factor seems to have created the distortions people are highlighting now.

 

[the big bambino]

i dont think anyone here was seriously rubbishing lillee. i think most, like me, did it to antagonise aussie tragic because he was moaning.

i was being serious when i said any medium pacer could average less than 30 in the 70s/80s/90s though. simon doull would get carted around the park today.

I saw Doull hooping them around in Australia in broad daylight. You don't see that often. He'd go ok today.

 

[Test_Fan_Only]

I saw Doull hooping them around in Australia in broad daylight. You don't see that often. He'd go ok today.

Yeah, he could really swing the ball. I remember him bowling an over to Glenn McGrath. The first 5 balls were massive out swingers which McGrath could not anywhere near, but the last ball he learnt and bowled an in swing which got the outside edge and the wicket.
He was slower than McGrath as well, McGrath was 130 or just under for a lot of his career, Doull was around 125. Still if you can be very accurate and move the ball a lot 125-130 is not too slow.
And I agree with above that McGrath did bowl faster earlier in his career.
Extreme pace is one way to be an excellent fast bowler, but there are other ways. Extreme pace also does not guarantee being a good fast bowler either.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

I can't imagine that Doull was ever regularly over 130 even at his peak.

Geoff Allott a much bigger what might have been, the bowler he was in the 1999 WC could have cut it in tests too had he been able to stay on the park

 

[Flametree]

McGrath has always been a funny one for me - the only time I ever saw him bowl a lot was the 2001 series vs NZ, when the NZ batsman completely neutralised him by refusing to play anything outside off. I checked cricinfo and his series figures were 5-327. I watched pretty much every ball of that, and it's always left me thinking that he could be beaten in unfriendly conditions.

I was out of the country for the 2005 series when he took 18 @ 15 which would no doubt have left a different impression had I watched that one in equal detail!

And given how modern batsmen play the moving ball, I think Doull might have got on ok these days... If Tim Murtagh can do it....

 

[Lillian Thomson]

That's the sort of stuff that had every pundit on here picking you as the future of CW.

You mean the bit where he states his opinion is clear cut and there’s no argument.

 

[stephen]

What an epic troll by Aussie tragic.

I was there for the McGrath 5fer in the 06/07 Ashes. Was his last 5 wicket haul in test cricket. I'd say he's underrated but most here rate him top 5 of all time so I guess he can't be.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

This is a quote from a couple of days ago from an Off Topic thread regarding alcohol intake. Could be coincidence, but could also be a factor.

About to take a trial separation of 60 days to start with...didn't drink at all between 96-04 (wife didn't drink) but since then 27 days been longest off it.

 

[sledger]

 

[Prince EWS]

This is a quote from a couple of days ago from an Off Topic thread regarding alcohol intake. Could be coincidence, but could also be a factor.

He made a couple of other since-deleted posts that made me want to lay off him as well. I don't want to repeat them because he deleted them, but as much I decided a while ago that arguing with him probably wasn't all the productive -- especially when he's accusing me of rigging my own rating system to produce weird results that will only make people think less of it -- I don't think being aggressive with him and calling him a drongo is really the best play either.

He's a constructive and interesting member of this forum but his posts in this thread have been anything but for a while, so while I absolutely welcome criticism and ideas, I would suggest focusing on some of the ones that come from people other than him. Burgey and MartinB have made great critical posts in the last couple of days. MartinB's criticism was so productive that I'm working on a way to adjust for it in the next tweak.

 

[Dan]

Just add in a Lillee factor wherever a sufficient number of Eyes > Spreadsheets imo. Sell out values for dem votes, Cribb

 

[the big bambino]

You mean the bit where he states his opinion is clear cut and there’s no argument.

nothing wrong with a bit of confidence.

 

[Red]

worth keeping in mind these rankings came along during a time where cw atg threads were basically worshipping conventional wisdom, crap opinions of blokes we would or do despise as commentators and extreme subjectivity and pining for bygone eras by posters themselves. this list was a welcome shake up of stale discussions.

Yeh, most of the fast bowlers who played with or against him must be wrong. Only 5/8 fast bowlers name him.

Eight former fast bowlers pick their all-time and current favourite quicks | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo.com