The Better Player: Ravi Ashwin vs. Shaun Pollock

[Slifer]

Why do Aussie selectors select a 32 averaging Lyon when they can easily have a below 30 averaging pacer?
Example - Lyon had a fixed spot in the team even when Pattinson was available.

That is because they knew a spinner has a totally different job in the team, don't just look up at those averages man!

Why doesn't the team pick 3 spinners and have one pace bowler??

 

[Slifer]

I think part of it is pretty much a lack of understanding of how and why a spinner is valuable for the statsguru generation.

I mean, Lyon is a bloody good bowler. For a guy to have been as successful as he has been shows how well he understands the finer aspects of spin bowling, the angles, the changes of pace and trajectory and the revs etc. I just think there is a whole new generation of cricket who dont play the game as much as they watch it, at least here in India, due to the paucity of actual playing spaces etc in cities, who just do not get the practical difficulties involved in the game and why you need the different roles and styles, especially in bowling.

Nobody is undervaluing spinners. Where in the hell did you lot get this from? I just said pace bowlers are generally more effective. Good grief.

 

[honestbharani]

It took Ashwin two tours of getting absolutely carted by Clarke and Smith to really appreciate how you have to bowl here, for example.

I actually think the signs of improvement were evident in 2014/15. Its just that you need a good pace attack for what he was doing to be effective too. But I guess the point still stands. Spinners of any variety get carted in Australia, esp. when you dont have proper fast bowling attack around them.

On another note, its also why I feel Ash does not get his due. He has been the best spinner in the world overall IMO since 2010 (I count Herath and Swann as 00s bowlers), and has been the best spinner in SENA since 2015. And yet, he is grossly underrated. Same with Lyon, who has been as important to guys like Hazlewood and Cummins being relatively injury free as anyone. And its not like he is wasting space either. 400 odd wickets in 100 odd games is terrific stuff on its own.

 

[Daemon]

Absolutely. Just a lack of appreciation for how a Test attack functions as a unit, as well as an understanding of how spinners work in an Australian-conditions attack. You can't not play a spinner here unless you have five frontline quality seam bowlers (and then you risk short-handing your batting and/or having a lack of variety) because of how tough it is with the old ball and how much work it is to get wickets, but the simple fact is that what happened to Leach has happened to many, many visiting offspinners over the years; "target the offspinner so the quicks get cooked and we can score for fun after tea" is like the most basic Australian-conditions tactic imaginable, it's a mark of Lyon's quality that it's never really been possible against him. It took Ashwin two tours of getting absolutely carted by Clarke and Smith to really appreciate how you have to bowl here, for example.

This is all true but tbf it’s a lot easier for Lyon to keep a lid on things when the quicks are picking up stacks of wickets, which they regularly do. Most visiting batsmen aren’t going to launch the 4th bowler who first comes on in the 23rd over when they’re already 4 down.

 

[honestbharani]

This is all true but tbf it’s a lot easier for Lyon to keep a lid on things when the quicks are picking up stacks of wickets, which they regularly do. Most visiting batsmen aren’t going to launch the 4th bowler who first comes on in the 23rd over when they’re already 4 down.

If the argument is that a more attacking spinner than Lyon would have had better figures than him in Australia, I can probably see that. But if you recall the 2014 series, I would almost argue had it been another spinner instead of Lyon, India would have tied or even won that series, coz the seamers did not run through India as many times as they used to Australia even in that series. He has been a good bowler, somewhat overrated at times in general but definitely underrated in CW IMO. And its not like they did not try others even till 2015.

 

[Daemon]

If the argument is that a more attacking spinner than Lyon would have had better figures than him in Australia, I can probably see that. But if you recall the 2014 series, I would almost argue had it been another spinner instead of Lyon, India would have tied or even won that series, coz the seamers did not run through India as many times as they used to Australia even in that series. He has been a good bowler, somewhat overrated at times in general but definitely underrated in CW IMO. And its not like they did not try others even till 2015.

Yeah not disagreeing with that, but at the same time averaging 31 in Australia as an Australian spinner with the current attack is brilliant but not as mindblowing as it first appears when comparing against visiting spinners.

 

[Bolo.]

Pollock > Warne, Murali too if we go by stats but you just can't compare a pacer to a spinner.
Ashwin has a way better position amongst spinners than Pollock has amongst pacers.

Probably a fair statement if you remove the word 'way'. But not a fair comparison. Typical side plays more than 2 quicks for every spinner. It would be easier to make a case for Ashwin being out the top 10 spinners than Pollock being out the top 20 quicks, and if they are sitting at 10 and 20 respectively, Pollock is relatively ahead.

 

[Calm_profit]

CWers tend to overlook Lance Gibbs who is the best spinner after Murali and Warne

 

[subshakerz]

Nobody is undervaluing spinners. Where in the hell did you lot get this from? I just said pace bowlers are generally more effective. Good grief.

Exactly. Spinners play a particular role that tends to be more condition-dependent than pacers. They become primary wicket taking options on spinning wickets, on the 4th or 5th day worn out wickets or against lineups with a weakness. Otherwise they are more support role which is still important.

Pacers are still the ones expected to take more of the wicket taking in most conditions. Doesn't mean spinners are not important but their role and impact is more specified.

 

[subshakerz]

I actually think the signs of improvement were evident in 2014/15. Its just that you need a good pace attack for what he was doing to be effective too. But I guess the point still stands. Spinners of any variety get carted in Australia, esp. when you dont have proper fast bowling attack around them.

On another note, its also why I feel Ash does not get his due. He has been the best spinner in the world overall IMO since 2010 (I count Herath and Swann as 00s bowlers), and has been the best spinner in SENA since 2015. And yet, he is grossly underrated. Same with Lyon, who has been as important to guys like Hazlewood and Cummins being relatively injury free as anyone. And its not like he is wasting space either. 400 odd wickets in 100 odd games is terrific stuff on its own.

Ashwin really only got his due in 2021 when he did well in Australia. Before that he didn't have much match impact.

Since 2015, would argue Lyon has been equal if not better than Ashwin in SENA.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Another 26 page thread potentially.

We're already on the 3rd page, so has potential.

 

[h_hurricane]

We're already on the 3rd page, so has potential.

We should discuss 5 fors more to galvanize this thread and take it to next level.

 

[honestbharani]

Probably a fair statement if you remove the word 'way'. But not a fair comparison. Typical side plays more than 2 quicks for every spinner. It would be easier to make a case for Ashwin being out the top 10 spinners than Pollock being out the top 20 quicks, and if they are sitting at 10 and 20 respectively, Pollock is relatively ahead.

It's never a great way to compare players coz otherwise I think Gilly s ahead of the next wk-bat by more than The Don.


And Pollock s definitely underrated simply because he did not do well against an ATG Aus side, which I feel s a tad unfair at times.

 

[subshakerz]

It's never a great way to compare players coz otherwise I think Gilly s ahead of the next wk-bat by more than The Don.


And Pollock s definitely underrated simply because he did not do well against an ATG Aus side, which I feel s a tad unfair at times.

To be fair he did have a good series against them in his peak in Australia in 97. But 2000 onwards suffered.

 

[Bolo.]

At the risk of going Warne broken toenail on the argument, I think it is worth contextualising that Pollock played nearly half his tests vs Aus in the phase when he was a sub-par medium pacer (and one time offspinner) after blowing his back out in 2005... the phase when he picked up 18 wickets in 5 series, before he rehabbed to a FM.

He really should have been sitting out this period for more physio, but RSA batting stocks were dire, and he was averaging 40 with the bat in this period, when most of the bats were going at low 30s or below, which made sitting out a little difficult. And the bowlers were hot garbage other than Ntini.

Hypothetically, had he not been an AR, and been allowed (forced?) to recover and ended up averaging 28@3.5 a game vs Aus (essentially Mcgraths record vs RSA, a similarly equipped but weaker batting outfit), would it change opinion of him as a bowler?

 

[ma1978]

Pollock was a bowler who took 420 wickets averaging low 20s. There’s no opinion that should be changed of him. He’s one of the most valuable cricketers of all time.

 

[subshakerz]

Pollock was a bowler who took 420 wickets averaging low 20s. There’s no opinion that should be changed of him. He’s one of the most valuable cricketers of all time.

Cant the same be said of Ashwin though?

 

[ma1978]

Cant the same be said of Ashwin though?

Yes

Ashwin is probably today amongst the top 20 valuable cricketers of all time.

 

[Slifer]

Cant the same be said of Ashwin though?

I'll say this, Ashwin (and Jadeja) have taken India from being nearly unbeatable at home to invincible at home. I'd back India with a healthy Ashwin and Jadeja to beat any team in history in India. Seriously !!!

 

[Slifer]

Pollock was a bowler who took 420 wickets averaging low 20s. There’s no opinion that should be changed of him. He’s one of the most valuable cricketers of all time.

Plus outside of Australia, Pollock was great/very good to every team home and away.