The Better Player: Ravi Ashwin vs. Shaun Pollock

[Bolo.]

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.

Im not a big one for downgrading a player on performance against a particular country. In my hypothetical, he would still have taken over 400 wickets in the low 20s, and I would rate him similarly.

But in my hypothetical, I know I would rate him slightly higher, even though on some level I know I dont think I should... he was doing his team a massive service by playing considering how poor everyone else was, and the fact that 40 as a bat and a bunch of extremely economical bowling and the odd wicket would be fantastic for the vast majority of teams in history.

The question is more aimed at people who focus on the fact that he was dogshit vs AUS (a fair criticism, despite my attempt at justifying it).

 

[TheJediBrah]

Obviously Pollock, but I do think he's overrated

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Pollock clearly. He and Kallis were the only 2 world class all rounders in 2 decades after the fab 4 era

Jadeja better than both

Cairns was world class 97-2004
Flintoff was world class for one Ashes series

 

[TheJediBrah]

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

Lmao would have needed Aus to declare 4-5 down every innings to get India even close to being in those games

 

[Spark]

Eh I think it’s not out of the question for that series to have finished 1-1. All it would have taken is, what, one more good partnership at Adelaide? Which you would assume is quite possible with no Lyon - but then, you’d wonder if Clarke would have set such an inviting target for India to chase had he not had such a reliable spinner in the 4th innings. Hazlewood and Johnson were the reason Aus won at Brisbane (bowling wise) so presumably that’s unchanged, and if anything Melbourne and Sydney would be even more nailed-on draws; those were some of the most unfriendly pitches for fast bowlers ever rolled out in this country. Honestly the favoured result would be 1-0 Australia purely because Brisbane was the only pitch in that series that had any assistance whatsoever for fast bowlers.

Christ those mid-2010s pitches were awful. How ~every ground in the country didn’t get an official pitch warning at some point is beyond me.

 

[OverratedSanity]

but then, you’d wonder if Clarke would have set such an inviting target for India to chase had he not had such a reliable spinner in the 4th innings.

Lyon hadnt really bowled any significant spells in the 4th innings at the time before that game. It was a common criticism at the time.

 

[Spark]

Lyon hadnt really bowled any significant spells in the 4th innings at the time before that game. It was a common criticism at the time.

Yeah but he was still a decent spinner. The comparison point isn’t, like, peak Kumble or Warne, it’s to Michael Beer and Xavier Doherty. Not sure Clarke would have been so willing to dangle a carrot in those circumstances - especially since he couldn’t bowl himself.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Eh I think it’s not out of the question for that series to have finished 1-1. All it would have taken is, what, one more good partnership at Adelaide? Which you would assume is quite possible with no Lyon - but then, you’d wonder if Clarke would have set such an inviting target for India to chase had he not had such a reliable spinner in the 4th innings. Hazlewood and Johnson were the reason Aus won at Brisbane (bowling wise) so presumably that’s unchanged, and if anything Melbourne and Sydney would be even more nailed-on draws; those were some of the most unfriendly pitches for fast bowlers ever rolled out in this country. Honestly the favoured result would be 1-0 Australia purely because Brisbane was the only pitch in that series that had any assistance whatsoever for fast bowlers.

Christ those mid-2010s pitches were awful. How ~every ground in the country didn’t get an official pitch warning at some point is beyond me.

well yes, exactly, and the only reason Adelaide was "close", and even a result, was Clarke declaring twice.

 

[CricAddict]

well yes, exactly, and the only reason Adelaide was "close", and even a result, was Clarke declaring twice.

Yes, but stupidity or being over-smart should not be a reason to be defended. We can say that for every scenario. Only reason SA lost the world cup semi was because Donald ran etc. etc.

 

[sunilz]

well yes, exactly, and the only reason Adelaide was "close", and even a result, was Clarke declaring twice.

Which Team won't declare if 360 was needed on Day 5 ? ?
Recently India declared against NZ and ENG when they needed 285 and 280 on Day 5

 

[subshakerz]

Eh I think it’s not out of the question for that series to have finished 1-1. All it would have taken is, what, one more good partnership at Adelaide? Which you would assume is quite possible with no Lyon - but then, you’d wonder if Clarke would have set such an inviting target for India to chase had he not had such a reliable spinner in the 4th innings. Hazlewood and Johnson were the reason Aus won at Brisbane (bowling wise) so presumably that’s unchanged, and if anything Melbourne and Sydney would be even more nailed-on draws; those were some of the most unfriendly pitches for fast bowlers ever rolled out in this country. Honestly the favoured result would be 1-0 Australia purely because Brisbane was the only pitch in that series that had any assistance whatsoever for fast bowlers.

Christ those mid-2010s pitches were awful. How ~every ground in the country didn’t get an official pitch warning at some point is beyond me.

India were always going to struggle to win that game, the fact that they made it close is a credit to Kohli.

 

[honestbharani]

India were always going to struggle to win that game, the facr that they made it close is a credit to Kohli.

True but a lesser spinner than Lyon would have definitely meant better opportunities for both the win and the draw in that game. Of course, this is assuming Clarke would have still declared on that score.

 

[subshakerz]

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

I remember this epic spell from Pollock against Australia on the 3rd day on a batting wicket in Adelaide in 97. He would have won them the game if Mark Waugh wasnt dropped off him in the 4th innings.

AUS vs SA Cricket Scorecard, 3rd Test at Adelaide, January 30 - February 03, 1998

Get cricket scorecard of 3rd Test, AUS vs SA, South Africa tour of Australia 1997/98 at Adelaide Oval dated January 30 - February 03, 1998.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[sunilz]

True but a lesser spinner than Lyon would have definitely meant better opportunities for both the win and the draw in that game. Of course, this is assuming Clarke would have still declared on that score.

Any reason why he wouldn't? Now even 360 is not safe score on Day 5 ?

 

[h_hurricane]

Lmao would have needed Aus to declare 4-5 down every innings to get India even close to being in those games

The dismissals of Kohli and Saha were slogs as well. They obviously thought it wasn't fair for India to win by more than 2 wickets.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yes, but stupidity or being over-smart should not be a reason to be defended. We can say that for every scenario. Only reason SA lost the world cup semi was because Donald ran etc. etc.

I think you're missing the context, not sure of the relevance of this. Just saying Aus missing Lyon isn't going to magically make India able to bowl Australia out on those roads in 2014. If anything it's the opposite. the Adelaide Test is more likely to be a dull draw without Lyon keeping it interesting by taking wickets

 

[sunilz]

I think you're missing the context, not sure of the relevance of this. Just saying Aus missing Lyon isn't going to magically make India able to bowl Australia out on those roads in 2014. If anything it's the opposite. the Adelaide Test is more likely to be a dull draw without Lyon keeping it interesting by taking wickets

If Lyon isn't taking wickets then India is winning that Test unless you are assuming Clarke won't declare which would be so uncharacteristic of him.

Clarke declared in 1st innings against IND on Day 1 in 2nd test of 2013 tour when only 9 Wkts had fallen because he wanted to bowl 1 over to IND at the end of Day 1.

 

[subshakerz]

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 !!!

That is a big claim. I think something you need to factor is that India in this last few years rarely faced high quality bowling lineups at home. I dont think their recent batting lineup compares well to their 2000s one. But yeah, Ashwin and Jedeja are a deadly combo.

I would think the Aussie side of mid-2000s, which was more experienced in India, would beat Kohli's team in India. I also think sides with worldclass spinners and decent players of spin, such as mid-90s Pakistan (which sucked at home but was good away) and Sri Lanka in the mid-2000s would stand a chance to draw a series in India.

 

[TheJediBrah]

If Lyon isn't taking wickets then India is winning that Test unless you are assuming Clarke won't declare which would be so uncharacteristic

I don't get what's so hard to understand? Lyon took half India's wickets in the first innings, in this hypothetical that assumes Aus are worse off without him without him then India almost certainly make 500+. Clarke's not going to declare earlier and even more generiously if this happens. It far more likely will wind up in a boring draw.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Ashwin being dropped for Karn sharma in that game was the first in a long line of Kohli selection disasters. The one pitch in that series which actually spun as the game went on and he got left out. ****ing stupid.