What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?

[TheJediBrah]

If you take out Murali's wickets against bang and zim, and also take out his matches in India, he is averaging 23.46. And if you take out his matches in Australia as well, he averages 22.37. Pretty clear that Murali benefitted from playing the truly weak teams only to the same extent that he suffered from playing the topmost teams against spin in their territory.

Really m8? This is beyond a stretch, and a very questionable conclusion. Their respective careers, both in quantity of games and statistical performance, against England, or India, or each other, or whoever else you want to throw in there are not different enough to warrant serious consideration.

The only reason Murali v minnows is relevant is because it's an enormous difference.
- He took nearly a quarter of his wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. That's a huge percentage
- He averaged 8-9 runs less per wicket against them too. A huge difference.
And Warne virtually never played them.

Murali playing a little more against India is not even close to making up for that. And it's blatant cherry-picking. You just went and picked whichever country Warne was worst against to try a counter argument. Bangladesh and Zimbabwe aren't cherry-picked opponents. They matter because they were generally pretty ****

 

[stephen]

If you take out Murali's wickets against bang and zim, and also take out his matches in India, he is averaging 23.46. And if you take out his matches in Australia as well, he averages 22.37. Pretty clear that Murali benefitted from playing the truly weak teams only to the same extent that he suffered from playing the topmost teams against spin in their territory.

This is what I was saying before about removing parts of their records. Why don't you remove their home records as well, since it's clear Murali was more favoured by his home pitches than Warne. And maybe remove their records against New Zealand and the West Indies post 2000 because they were crap teams too.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's blatant stat cherry-picking to suit an agenda. Completely devolves any meaningful discussion.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Re Miller's low WPM it is worth considering the competition for wickets. Look at the bowling averages of the 1948 5 man attack:

Lindwall - 23.03
Miller - 22.97
Johnston - 23.91
Toshack - 21.04
Johnson - 29.19

That is an insanely good attack for 5 bowlers especially as Johnston could bowl spin as well as pace.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Haha very spurious speculation. Could just as easily say he would average 2 wpm because he wouldn't be needed as much.

Problem is you're judging Miller purely on wpm, which is at best a secondary stat of questionable valuable when rating the quality of bowling. He averaged 21 with the ball over a decent career, with a great strike rate and a perfectly respectable wpm. Along with how he is rated by his contemporaries his status as an ATG bowler is not in doubt. I don't get why you're trying so hard to deny that purely because he wasn't regularly needed to bowl 50 overs a game.

Why he wasn't needed to bowl like a Regular Specialist bowler? His team had not many ATGs like 80s Windies.
If wpm is not important, Brett Lee is in the same league of Kallis as bowler.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Re Miller's low WPM it is worth considering the competition for wickets. Look at the bowling averages of the 1948 5 man attack:

Lindwall - 23.03
Miller - 22.97
Johnston - 23.91
Toshack - 21.04
Johnson - 29.19

That is an insanely good attack for 5 bowlers especially as Johnston could bowl spin as well as pace.

Miller played 11 years.
His FC wpm is less than 2

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why he wasn't needed to bowl like a Regular Specialist bowler? His team had not many ATGs like 80s Windies.
If wpm is not important, Brett Lee is in the same league of Kallis as bowler.

lmao look at the post directly above yours

Miller played 11 years.
His FC wpm is less than 2

Who cares about his FC wpm. IIRC he played a lot as a batsman before he really started bowling. More cherry-picking irrelevant stats to suit an agenda. This is unreal
His Test wpm was 3.1

 

[harsh.ag]

I possibly misread it but you did?

I'm pretty sure I get it, you live in an "OS reality" where Murali's was action was proven undeniably legal and any comment to the commentary is objectively bad and wrong and "flimsy". You can't even comprehend that maybe that's not entirely the case. If someone suggested to you that the veracity of the testing was bull**** and Murali's action should still be highly dubious you wouldn't even consider the possibilty. Hence your assumption that anyone who disagrees with your reality must be joking or fueled by racism, somehow?

There are probably Warne fanboys too who completely believe he never took any banned substances, and that his mum really did give him diuretics without him knowing it.

You talk to others like they are idiots but this if you still believe this, then good luck getting most fair minded people to take you seriously.

You have lowered the forum atmosphere a lot around here recently. Making stupid, wrong, biased posts on player comparisons for fun on CW is mostly a good thing. What you do to rupture said posts can sometimes be much worse.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You talk to others like they are idiots but this if you still believe this, then good luck getting most fair minded people to take you seriously.

This is exactly why I don't bring it up here, and I wasn't the one to bring it up in this case. For some reason people can't think objectively about it.

re. talking to people like idiots, definitely a fair point. But that's mostly because I respond to posts where people say idiotic things.

You have lowered the forum atmosphere a lot around here recently. Making stupid, wrong, biased posts on player comparisons for fun on CW is mostly a good thing. What you do to rupture said posts can sometimes be much worse.

If you want to make it official policy to disallow responding to "stupid, wrong, biased" posts then that is very interesting, to say the least

also shows your own bias in blaming me rather than the people (usually the same people too) who make said posts to begin with

 

[srbhkshk]

This is exactly why I don't bring it up here, and I wasn't the one to bring it up in this case. For some reason people can't think objectively about it.

"objectively" lmao.

Objectively, he was cleared.

 

[TheJediBrah]

"objectively" lmao.

Objectively, he was cleared.

so was OJ

but as I said, I have no interest in discuss that here. Tried it, doesn't work.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

OJ was innocent dummy

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

lmao look at the post directly above yours

Who cares about his FC wpm. IIRC he played a lot as a batsman before he really started bowling. More cherry-picking irrelevant stats to suit an agenda. This is unreal
His Test wpm was 3.1

Between 1946 and 1956, only 5 australians took more than 50 wickets

WPM
Lindwall 3.85
Miller 3.1
Johnston 4
Johnson 2.4
Benaud 2.7


Also, 9 of AUS/ENG bowlers averaged less than 25 ( minimum 50 wickets ) in this period. Easier bowling era?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Between 1946 and 1956, only 5 australians took more than 50 wickets

WPM
Lindwall 3.85
Miller 3.1
Johnston 4
Johnson 2.4
Benaud 2.7


Also, 9 of AUS/ENG bowlers averaged less than 25 ( minimum 50 wickets ) in this period. Easier bowling era?

Possibly. Would also explain Miller's relatively low batting average

 

[Fuller Pilch]

The 50s was also a much slower more defensive batting era with more draws, so I guess fewer wickets taken.

 

[Burgey]

Better than ikki?

I do think Warne and Murali were better than Ikki, yes.

but Ikki is a low-life ****, so the bar isn’t that high.

 

[Burgey]

Why he wasn't needed to bowl like a Regular Specialist bowler? His team had not many ATGs like 80s Windies.
If wpm is not important, Brett Lee is in the same league of Kallis as bowler.

Lindwall, Johnston, Johnson and then Davo are pretty decent tbf

 

[Burgey]

I think that's a little ****ed up but hey, if you dont agree thats fine.

Interesting line of reasoning tbh

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

The 50s was also a much slower more defensive batting era with more draws, so I guess fewer wickets taken.

Bedser, Laker, Trueman.. All were taking 4+ wpm

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Lindwall, Johnston, Johnson and then Davo are pretty decent tbf

Johnson 2.4 wpm
Davidson 16 wickets from 12 tests