Cricket's Great Myths

[subshakerz]

None of them had the ability of Sidhu, Sachin, Azhar or Sehwag. Warne and Murali easily dominated them. Now go back to 70s. Pakistani batsmen ended careers of Indian spin quartret, and that is proper bullying of spin. Underwood ended his career before this great phase of Pakistani cricket, but even he struggled on dry Pakistani pitches in early 70s.

Anwar, Malik and Younis were as good as any of those except maybe Sehwag. But Pakistan were still good overall against spin, maybe not great.

 

[OverratedSanity]

None of them had the ability of Sidhu, Sachin, Azhar or Sehwag. Warne and Murali easily dominated them. Now go back to 70s. Pakistani batsmen ended careers of Indian spin quartret, and that is proper bullying of spin. Underwood ended his career before this great phase of Pakistani cricket, but even he struggled on dry Pakistani pitches in early 70s.

I have no hesitation saying Younis was a better player of spin than Sidhu and Azhar

 

[Starfighter]

Guys, I wouldn't put much stock in statements by a guy who talks about things that literally never happened.

 

[trundler]

That's basically another version of Cullinan not being good against spin because he was bad against Warne. Warne having success against Pakistan doesn't mean Pakistan had no good players of spin. Maybe that fella was somewhat special. Pakistan's success in UAE was built on the back of being very good against spin + Yasir Shah.

 

[Ali TT]

Peter Moores, the best coach of his generation.

 

[subshakerz]

That's basically another version of Cullinan not being good against spin because he was bad against Warne. Warne having success against Pakistan doesn't mean Pakistan had no good players of spin. Maybe that fella was somewhat special. Pakistan's success in UAE was built on the back of being very good against spin + Yasir Shah.

Malik and Anwar scored plenty against Warne. It's not like he owned all of Pakistan.

 

[honestbharani]

Anwar remained not out in the Kumble 10 game. Younis, Misbah are both two of the best players of spin of all time even if they were not tested in India. Inzy and Yousuf made me feel hopeless when they were batting against Kumble and Harby, who are hell of a spin duo themselves. What the **** is this lazy spreadsheet analysis that concludes Pak cant play spin?

It is hard to compare inidivdual batsmen as players of spin given so much of how anyone bats is a result of game situation and team strength etc. But in terms of levels, all the batsmen I just named belong to the very top tier of playing spin AFAIC.

 

[Starfighter]

Anwar remained not out in the Kumble 10 game.

I didn't know Waqar Younis had changed his name to Saeed Anwar.

 

[subshakerz]

Anwar remained not out in the Kumble 10 game. Younis, Misbah are both two of the best players of spin of all time even if they were not tested in India. Inzy and Yousuf made me feel hopeless when they were batting against Kumble and Harby, who are hell of a spin duo themselves. What the **** is this lazy spreadsheet analysis that concludes Pak cant play spin?

It is hard to compare inidivdual batsmen as players of spin given so much of how anyone bats is a result of game situation and team strength etc. But in terms of levels, all the batsmen I just named belong to the very top tier of playing spin AFAIC.

Agreed except for your faulty memory.

Anwar was not out in Calcutta, the next test after Kumble's tenfer.

Younis played two series in India, and Misbah one, they both did very well.

Pakistan were good against spin generally speaking but often didn't click as an entire lineup like India which is why Murali and Warne had more success against them than India.

 

[honestbharani]

I didn't know Waqar Younis had changed his name to Saeed Anwar.

Lol my memory playing tricks last couple of days with the 98/99 season. He was batting a long while though and actually looked comfy against him

 

[subshakerz]

McGrath succeeding in the subcontinent is also another myth.

Excellent in India but mostly blunted in Pakistan and SL.

Also wasn't very impressive against SA.

 

[subshakerz]

Lol my memory playing tricks last couple of days with the 98/99 season. He was batting a long while though and actually looked comfy against him

Anwar was one of the few to score well against Murali, Kumble and Warne. I loved watching him play spin, truly fearless.

 

[Daniel CC]

Mark Waugh was pleasing on the eye

 

[Senile Sentry]

Gilchrist was an ATG and auto pick for World XI. He was fortunate to debut st the beginning of his peak as a batter which continued for a few years post which it dipped. Almost always came in with a free mindset to hit around givne the quality of batters that preceded him in the batting order.

 

[the big bambino]

Gilchrist was a downhill skier. tbf more a cw myth.

 

[Starfighter]

Gilchrist was an ATG and auto pick for World XI. He was fortunate to debut st the beginning of his peak as a batter which continued for a few years post which it dipped. Almost always came in with a free mindset to hit around givne the quality of batters that preceded him in the batting order.

No, this is absolute bull****.

 

[Senile Sentry]

No, this is absolute bull****.

Ok hear me out.

In his entire test career spanning 137 test innings, Gilly had 25 scores of 80 or above (18.2%) (which I believe can be regarded as "significant contribution"). Of these 25 scores, just 5 scores have come in 3rd or 4th innings of a test match (20%). Also, of these 25 scores, 19 (76%) were made in innings where another teammate(s) hit a 100 as well (6 of which in innings where 2 or more teammates scored a 100 in the same innings).

Let's compare these stats with with Pant's, who is just 25 years old. Pant has already 11 scores of 80 plus or above from his 56 innings (19.7%). Of these 11 scores, just 5 were made in innings where another teammate(s) scored a 100 (45%). Further, 4 (37%) of these 11 have come in the 3rd or 4th innings of a match (3 of them in 4th).

This is not to say Gilly had it easy always. He has played some unbelievable knocks - like Hobart 1999 vs Pak, Wankhede 2001 (which I think is his best innings), Kandy 2004 and Fatullah 2006 (both very underrated knocks). But overall, he has had the benefit of having people who are more than capable with the bat ahead and around him, which allowed him to swing his bat with disdain. Someone like Pant, in his limited time, has literally had to carry the batting lineup on his shoulders.

 

[Migara]

Pakistan were good against spin generally speaking but often didn't click as an entire lineup like India which is why Murali and Warne had more success against them than India.

Actually Pakistan (26.3) played Murali way better than India (24.7) on SL soil. The difference was how Murali performed away. He basically bossed Pakistan in Pakistan (even with those filthy flat tracks of 2009 tour), and had it stinking in India

 

[Starfighter]

Ok hear me out.

In his entire test career spanning 137 test innings, Gilly had 25 scores of 80 or above (18.2%) (which I believe can be regarded as "significant contribution"). Of these 25 scores, just 5 scores have come in 3rd or 4th innings of a test match (20%). Also, of these 25 scores, 19 (76%) were made in innings where another teammate(s) hit a 100 as well (6 of which in innings where 2 or more teammates scored a 100 in the same innings).

Let's compare these stats with with Pant's, who is just 25 years old. Pant has already 11 scores of 80 plus or above from his 56 innings (19.7%). Of these 11 scores, just 5 were made in innings where another teammate(s) scored a 100 (45%). Further, 4 (37%) of these 11 have come in the 3rd or 4th innings of a match (3 of them in 4th).

This is not to say Gilly had it easy always. He has played some unbelievable knocks - like Hobart 1999 vs Pak, Wankhede 2001 (which I think is his best innings), Kandy 2004 and Fatullah 2006 (both very underrated knocks). But overall, he has had the benefit of having people who are more than capable with the bat ahead and around him, which allowed him to swing his bat with disdain. Someone like Pant, in his limited time, has literally had to carry the batting lineup on his shoulders.

You are making a massive assumption that Gilchrists' batting would have been worse in a worse batting lineup. This is evidence-free but bias-filled.

 

[Ali TT]

Ok hear me out.

In his entire test career spanning 137 test innings, Gilly had 25 scores of 80 or above (18.2%) (which I believe can be regarded as "significant contribution"). Of these 25 scores, just 5 scores have come in 3rd or 4th innings of a test match (20%). Also, of these 25 scores, 19 (76%) were made in innings where another teammate(s) hit a 100 as well (6 of which in innings where 2 or more teammates scored a 100 in the same innings).

Let's compare these stats with with Pant's, who is just 25 years old. Pant has already 11 scores of 80 plus or above from his 56 innings (19.7%). Of these 11 scores, just 5 were made in innings where another teammate(s) scored a 100 (45%). Further, 4 (37%) of these 11 have come in the 3rd or 4th innings of a match (3 of them in 4th).

This is not to say Gilly had it easy always. He has played some unbelievable knocks - like Hobart 1999 vs Pak, Wankhede 2001 (which I think is his best innings), Kandy 2004 and Fatullah 2006 (both very underrated knocks). But overall, he has had the benefit of having people who are more than capable with the bat ahead and around him, which allowed him to swing his bat with disdain. Someone like Pant, in his limited time, has literally had to carry the batting lineup on his shoulders.

Not sure how many full 2nd team innings that Aussie side needed, so a bit unfair to expect Gilly to have made many contributions in them. On 38 matches during his career where Australia batted fourth, Gilly only featured in 15 of them, including NOs of 10, 10 and 0. As for others scoring centuries, I remember looking back at his record and noting how often he was part of a big partnership for the fifth/sixth/seventh wicket so those other centuries were enabled by him. He regularly turned games in the balance firmly in Australia's direction.

Nothing against Pant, he's too early in his career to make a meaningful judgement. Although, he has batted in a much greater proportion of the third and fourth innings India have batted in.