Top 30 batsmen of the modern era (1990s -Current)

[harsh.ag]

You're doing it again, but why would I have a problem with how you rate anyone.

To be clear again because obviously I'm not, I don't care about how anyone rates anyone. I was responding purely to the absurd statement that performing against India was "most important".

Most important from a skills pov, not from an important match pov. If you argue against this, then performance in rivalries become more important than conditions, pitch, skills of opposition etc.

 

[ankitj]

When you are rating spin bowlers, especially of 90s and 00s, record against India is certainly more important than against any other team.

Crucial part. What you value more as a sports fan is your preference. But to use what you value more to rate a player is absurd.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Most important from a skills pov, not from an important match pov. If you argue against this, then performance in rivalries become more important than conditions, pitch, skills of opposition etc.

Not really, they're effectively the same thing. If winning games against WI, SA and England is held at higher value than against India then the skills that succeed against that opposition is more important.

Crucial part. What you value more as a sports fan is your preference. But to use what you value more to rate a player is absurd.

lol wtf. That is literally what rating a player is

 

[_00_deathscar]

Are there any ATG/ATVG bowlers who HAVEN'T owned it vs/in England or at least done reasonably well?

 

[ankitj]

Are there any ATG/ATVG bowlers who HAVEN'T owned it vs/in England or at least done reasonably well?

Haha, yes. Tendulkar, Lara, Murali, Warne, Ambrose, McGrath, Akram all hammered England in 1990 to 2010 period. Actually Ponting has a fairly meh record against them but until now I didn't hold that against Ponting.

 

[Shady Slim]

there's been some absolutely dire posting from everyone in this thread over the past twelve hours guys c'mon you're soiling venky's really good thread!!

the reason i say this posting is absolutely dire is because you aren't comparing apples to apples here nor even apples to oranges, it's like we're havin an argument on apples vs ducted airconditioning. nothing coherent about whats going on

 

[honestbharani]

there's been some absolutely dire posting from everyone in this thread over the past twelve hours guys c'mon you're soiling venky's really good thread!!

the reason i say this posting is absolutely dire is because you aren't comparing apples to apples here nor even apples to oranges, it's like we're havin an argument on apples vs ducted airconditioning. nothing coherent about whats going on

Try using a protractor.

 

[TheJediBrah]

there's been some absolutely dire posting from everyone in this thread over the past twelve hours guys c'mon you're soiling venky's really good thread!!

the reason i say this posting is absolutely dire is because you aren't comparing apples to apples here nor even apples to oranges, it's like we're havin an argument on apples vs ducted airconditioning. nothing coherent about whats going on

I have been trying to point that out . . . and it just makes them worse

 

[ankitj]

What exactly are you trying to point out that we don't get buddy? You are saying performances against India in 90s and 00s don't matter as much as against England when rating spinners? And we are saying that's wrong perspective. Right?

 

[TheJediBrah]

What exactly are you trying to point out that we don't get buddy? You are saying performances against India in 90s and 00s don't matter as much as against England when rating spinners? And we are saying that's wrong perspective. Right?

Nah that was a fair discussion. I believe the incoherency being referred to was the one guy making irrelevant comparisons.

I can further clarify. Repeating what I said earlier, from an Australian point of view it was more important to perform against WI and Eng, and then SA, and maybe even NZ more than against India back in the 90sand early 00s. That was just what was considered higher value.

The logic behind your point that "India better players of spin, should rate performances of spinner against India" is pretty self explanatory and I'm sure no one would dispute that opinion, but it's not that simple. Just because a spinner did better against India didn't mean they were better bowlers. Lyon and O'Keefe are more suited at bowling to India than Warne or MacGill but they are definitely not better bowlers, it's just the type of bowlers they are. And in the 90s in Aus the type of bowler than wins games against WI and England would be held in higher regard.

 

[ankitj]

Post 2010, India is not quite as strong against spin as the previous generation.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Post 2010, India is not quite as strong against spin as the previous generation.

Still doesn't even get close to explaining the difference. I could be wrong but I'd guess that there are a **** load of spinners that would have better stats v India than Warne and MacGill, but worse against most other opposition.

Just have to accept that they were not good at bowling to Indian batters. Unless you want to go down the stephen path and claim Warne was sick every time . . .

 

[ankitj]

Averages haven't changed as much over the decades but SRs have been better for spinners against India in 2010s than in previous 2 decades. Not able to limit to top 7 batsmen only which might have given more insight.

 

[ankitj]

Still doesn't even get close to explaining the difference. I could be wrong but I'd guess that there are a **** load of spinners that would have better stats v India than Warne and MacGill, but worse against most other opposition.

Just have to accept that they were not good at bowling to Indian batters. Unless you want to go down the stephen path and claim Warne was sick every time . . .

It's probably fair to say India has been better against wrist spinners than finger spinners. Although there haven't been that many great wrist spinners and Warne may well have done better against the current generation.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's probably fair to say India has been better against wrist spinners than finger spinners. Although there haven't been that many great wrist spinners and Warne may well have done better against the current generation.

Also possible that Warne coming along 20 years later would have tailored his style to be more successful against India, rather than against the opposition considered more important in the 90s. But that's all pointless speculation, fact remains that performance against India wasn't the most important thing back then

 

[cnerd123]

can some kind soul please list out all the batsmen in order in this list so far?

It's fun to follow the countdown and to read about the methodology but there is too much fluff between those posts.

 

[Daemon]

TJB, I get that you’re saying that rightly or wrongly, people highly value performances against certain countries during certain periods of time, and by extension value players who perform against those countries higher.

But I hope you’re not arguing that we should take this into account when trying to make an objective assessment of how good a player was.

 

[Burgey]

can some kind soul please list out all the batsmen in order in this list so far?

It's fun to follow the countdown and to read about the methodology but there is too much fluff between those posts.

the list is complete.

 

[Burgey]

But I hope you’re not arguing that we should take this into account when trying to make an objective assessment of how good a player was.

He hasn't argued that at all.

 

[Daemon]

He hasn't argued that at all.

Then this all seems to be one big misunderstanding.

Once again, Daemon saves the forum.