Wastemen etc

[karan_fromthestands]

Why on earth would you think 1970s Caribbean pitches were unfriendly for fast bowling?

It's not about that, it's obvious that a player achieving success in varied conditions is something that people consider when rating him.

Look at Chaminda Vaas' bowling numbers for example, averaged 77 in England with a strike rate of 159. Looking at how well he performed on unhelpful Asian tracks, you would've simply assumed that he would wrecked havoc on English pitches with his swing bowling if he hadn't actually played there.

Despite of being a fan of Lillee, I think he has underachieved compared to some of the blokes that are in the same bracket as him. Marshall, Ambrose, McGrath, Steyn, Akram, etc. were effective in all conditions and are simply way ahead of him.

 

[Shady Slim]

It's not about that, a player achieving success in varied conditions is something that people consider when rating him.

Look at Chaminda Vaas' bowling numbers for example, averaged 77 in England with a strike rate of 159. Looking at how well he performed on unhelpful Asian tracks, you would've simply assumed that he would wrecked havoc on English pitches with his swing bowling if he hadn't actually played there.

the warne in india principle

i'd say that warne is clearly too cool for indian pitches built for supernerds like ravi ashwin but jadeja's a pretty cool customer and he goes alright too

 

[Burgey]

Despite of being a fan of Lillee, I think he has underachieved compared to some of the blokes that are in the same bracket as him. Marshall, Ambrose, McGrath, Steyn, Akram, etc. were effective in all conditions and are simply way ahead of him.

Yeah I don’t really know anyone who disputes those blokes did more than him though? This is a periodic thing that gets raised to get a rise out of Australian supporters, who for the most part don’t seem to give much of a **** about it, because they basically don’t dispute it.

No one doubts Lillee did poorly in the four tests he played on the SC. I think it’s a bit tough to count the WI record against him given he was bowling with stress fractures there, but if people want to do so I genuinely dgaf, and I don’t know many Aus supporters on here would choose that hill to die on.

 

[Ymaxxx]

It's not about that, it's obvious that a player achieving success in varied conditions is something that people consider when rating him.

Look at Chaminda Vaas' bowling numbers for example, averaged 77 in England with a strike rate of 159. Looking at how well he performed on unhelpful Asian tracks, you would've simply assumed that he would wrecked havoc on English pitches with his swing bowling if he hadn't actually played there.

Despite of being a fan of Lillee, I think he has underachieved compared to some of the blokes that are in the same bracket as him. Marshall, Ambrose, McGrath, Steyn, Akram, etc. were effective in all conditions and are simply way ahead of him.

Is there a reason why some pacers/spinners perform better on pitches that dont suit the bowling type but do better on pitches that dont?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Is there a reason why some pacers/spinners perform better on pitches that dont suit the bowling type but do better on pitches that dont?

Because your assumptions about which type of pitches suit which bowlers can be wrong. Vaas was suited to Sri Lankan pitches. It's not as simple as "Swing bowler - should be good in England". Vaas tailored his game to Asian wickets. His off-cutters were pretty dope.

 

[Burgey]

Is there a reason why some pacers/spinners perform better on pitches that dont suit the bowling type but do better on pitches that dont?

It can be any number of things can’t it? Adaptability, how fast you learn, who you’re bowling to/ batting against, the comparative strength of your own team can also be a factor. Sample size comes into it on some occasions too. I don’t think there’s any one answer to that question

 

[honestbharani]

I have long felt that CW really under rates players who have tailored their games to be match winners in home conditions. I am not talking about blokes who average 40 at home and 20 away as batsmen. The guys who are almost guaranteed match winners for a team at home in tests are worth their weights in gold. Cricket is ultimately a team sport and people just want folks in the team who will help them win cricket games. The Aussie side of the early noughties got more out of Kasprowicz than they ever did out of Brett Lee for instance, even though you can make the argument that Lee was the better bowler overall. You play roughly 50% of your games at home and if you get players who are almost Bradman level match winners at home who are mediocre away, you would still take them and they are still great IMO, although perhaps not ATG.

 

[harsh.ag]

I have long felt that CW really under rates players who have tailored their games to be match winners in home conditions. I am not talking about blokes who average 40 at home and 20 away as batsmen. The guys who are almost guaranteed match winners for a team at home in tests are worth their weights in gold. Cricket is ultimately a team sport and people just want folks in the team who will help them win cricket games. The Aussie side of the early noughties got more out of Kasprowicz than they ever did out of Brett Lee for instance, even though you can make the argument that Lee was the better bowler overall. You play roughly 50% of your games at home and if you get players who are almost Bradman level match winners at home who are mediocre away, you would still take them and they are still great IMO, although perhaps not ATG.

Just say Samaraweera is underrated

 

[honestbharani]

Just say Samaraweera is underrated

I would say Jayawardena is.

 

[harsh.ag]

Sorted by average at home (min. 1000 runs):

 

[Burgey]

I have long felt that CW really under rates players who have tailored their games to be match winners in home conditions.

I think this happens a lot because most of the discussions are about who is or isn’t an ATG so you end up dissecting careers to separate a group which, as a whole, are all very good players at worst.

Mike Hussey is a classic example of a proper HTB. Not really in the argument for an Aussie AT side as a batsman at all, but if it was a side to be named to play here, he would probably be in the argument.

 

[honestbharani]

I think this happens a lot because most of the discussions are about who is or isn’t an ATG so you end up dissecting careers to separate a group which, as a whole, are all very good players at worst.

Mike Hussey is a classic example of a proper HTB. Not really in the argument for an Aussie AT side as a batsman at all, but if it was a side to be named to play here, he would probably be in the argument.

I have also come to the conclusion at a very high level that cricket stats really do not capture the importance of a player to a team anyways to the fairest extent. It is very possible for someone to have played a far more important role for their team than someone with better stats did for theirs. And the big difference in how surfaces are managed between, lets say the noughties when everything seemed loaded towards batters in most places, as against the 2010s when home advantage seemed to come back with a vengeance etc. I mean, I do agree the requirement of success across conditions being an important factor for someone to be an ATG but its such a team sport that we cant always objectify the importance certain players had in their teams which can go way beyond the basic batting/bowling numbers.

And since every thread is about Jadeja anyways, one example of this line of thinking for me is that for a while now I have felt we would rather play the second spinner away from home, even in SENA than the 6th batsman. Our 6th batsman not being very good was a main factor in this but there are these intangibles of how Jaddu playing helps Ashwin bowl a more attacking line and it helps keep both of them (and our 3 main quicks) fresh given we often seem to tail off as games and innings go longer in SENA conditions. Its hard to quantify this but it was met with a lot of opposition and even ridicule here from some, but we have seen this year it actually does work and is perhaps our best balance as a side.

 

[slippy888]

 

[stephen]

I have also come to the conclusion at a very high level that cricket stats really do not capture the importance of a player to a team anyways to the fairest extent. It is very possible for someone to have played a far more important role for their team than someone with better stats did for theirs. And the big difference in how surfaces are managed between, lets say the noughties when everything seemed loaded towards batters in most places, as against the 2010s when home advantage seemed to come back with a vengeance etc. I mean, I do agree the requirement of success across conditions being an important factor for someone to be an ATG but its such a team sport that we cant always objectify the importance certain players had in their teams which can go way beyond the basic batting/bowling numbers.

And since every thread is about Jadeja anyways, one example of this line of thinking for me is that for a while now I have felt we would rather play the second spinner away from home, even in SENA than the 6th batsman. Our 6th batsman not being very good was a main factor in this but there are these intangibles of how Jaddu playing helps Ashwin bowl a more attacking line and it helps keep both of them (and our 3 main quicks) fresh given we often seem to tail off as games and innings go longer in SENA conditions. Its hard to quantify this but it was met with a lot of opposition and even ridicule here from some, but we have seen this year it actually does work and is perhaps our best balance as a side.

It used to be standard to go 5/1/5 for a long time, but as the sport professionalised balance drifted to 5/1/1/4 with the all rounder predominantly being a batsman. It was very few sides that would go 6/1/4 like the great Aussie side did but to do that you need a spinner you trusted to pick up wickets and keep things tight.

Generally speaking, if you have Ashwin and Jadeja, they are good enough with the bat to basically bat 7 and 8 and let the keeper bat 6. With Pant as keeper you basically don't have a batting weakness in the mid- late order and can squeeze in three quicks as well. It's a nice balance to have, but it wouldn't work with Murali and Kumble (for example) since that would weaken batting too much.

 

[honestbharani]

It used to be standard to go 5/1/5 for a long time, but as the sport professionalised balance drifted to 5/1/1/4 with the all rounder predominantly being a batsman. It was very few sides that would go 6/1/4 like the great Aussie side did but to do that you need a spinner you trusted to pick up wickets and keep things tight.

Generally speaking, if you have Ashwin and Jadeja, they are good enough with the bat to basically bat 7 and 8 and let the keeper bat 6. With Pant as keeper you basically don't have a batting weakness in the mid- late order and can squeeze in three quicks as well. It's a nice balance to have, but it wouldn't work with Murali and Kumble (for example) since that would weaken batting too much.

True, as long as you got a decent enough #7 and #8 and your keeper is good enough to bat at #6, I will always go for the 5 man bowling attack though.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Because your assumptions about which type of pitches suit which bowlers can be wrong. Vaas was suited to Sri Lankan pitches. It's not as simple as "Swing bowler - should be good in England". Vaas tailored his game to Asian wickets. His off-cutters were pretty dope.

Spot on! That's why we can't assume anything in cricket, there are just way too many variables.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Yeah I don’t really know anyone who disputes those blokes did more than him though? This is a periodic thing that gets raised to get a rise out of Australian supporters, who for the most part don’t seem to give much of a **** about it, because they basically don’t dispute it.

No one doubts Lillee did poorly in the four tests he played on the SC. I think it’s a bit tough to count the WI record against him given he was bowling with stress fractures there, but if people want to do so I genuinely dgaf, and I don’t know many Aus supporters on here would choose that hill to die on.

Really?

Are to talking about just CWers? Or people in general? If you are talking about the latter, then you'd be surprised.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Really?

Are to talking about just CWers? Or people in general? If you are talking about the latter, then you'd be surprised.

People in general couldn't give 2 ****s whether or not Lillee played in Asia

 

[Burgey]

Really?

Are to talking about just CWers? Or people in general? If you are talking about the latter, then you'd be surprised.

No I’m talking about here. Thought that was obvious

 

[Burgey]

People in general couldn't give 2 ****s whether or not Lillee played in Asia

This is also the case tbh.