Prince EWS
Global Moderator
*shudders*
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Australia in India 2023
- Thread starter TimAngas
- Start date
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I don't think it is, it's just not enforceable.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
Shows how much the pitches dictate everything. If you are always getting tough pitches you are bound to average upto 40 odd, most probably 30-35 during those tough pitch seasons/years.
On the other hand, if you are mostly playing on flat pitches same batsman is likely to average 50+ or 60+ during those flat pitch seasons/years.
So our method of comparing/judging players based on their average is not right.
Ashwin and Jadeja average like 24, get them to play on flatter surfaces most of the time and I am certain they would be averaging closer to 30. Ashwin perhaps 27-28, Jadeja 29-30. Same applies to all the other players.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
The same players we call great can easily fall down a tier or two if pitches were different in their entire career.
'Greats' would have been 'very good' or just 'good'.
Ashwin would have been like Kumble and been considered good to very good (if he played on flat pitches)
Smith would been considered 'very good' instead of 'great' (if he played on green tops/tough pitches all/most the time)
Kohli could be just 'good' or 'average' rather than whatever he is right now, if he had always played on raging turners. On the contrary, if he had mostly batted on roads, he would be averaging like 54 and he would be considered great! 'Wow what a player'
It seems all this labelling is Bull****. I feel pitch is KING. Pitches make or break a player or make someone great or not great!
???
'Greats' would have been 'very good' or just 'good'.
Ashwin would have been like Kumble and been considered good to very good (if he played on flat pitches)
Smith would been considered 'very good' instead of 'great' (if he played on green tops/tough pitches all/most the time)
Kohli could be just 'good' or 'average' rather than whatever he is right now, if he had always played on raging turners. On the contrary, if he had mostly batted on roads, he would be averaging like 54 and he would be considered great! 'Wow what a player'
It seems all this labelling is Bull****. I feel pitch is KING. Pitches make or break a player or make someone great or not great!
???
Sunil1z
International Regular
No
There is something called eye Test too
Anyone who has seen these players in action won’t decide these labelling simply on the average.
For eg. this series has clearly proved that Axar Patel isn’t in same league as Jadeja/Ashwin.
Similary Head is better opener than Warner in these conditions.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
Yes but their career averages would be drastically different. So we would judge them based on that. Ashwin would be closer to 30 and we would not consider him ATG at all.
You are giving an example of someone with a few tests. I am talking about players with numerous tests under their belt. Let's say 50+ tests.
Sunil1z
International Regular
No one considers Ashwin/Jadeja ATG as pure bowler. They are in consideration as an all rounder
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
People consider Ashwin as a 'great' based on his bowling alone. He would walk into India's All Time XI as a bowler alone, right?
Why? because of what he has achieved on the very favourable pitches he's had.
Sunil1z
International Regular
Being selected in your country’s all time XI is not a criterion for being ATG.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
Take away the favourable pitches, and he would be fighting tooth and nail against all the other contenders. His record would not stand out. Bedi, Prasanna, Kumble, Chandra, Bhaji and co... would be in contention alongside him.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
Maybe I shouldn't have used the term ATG, I just meant 'Great'
Sunil1z
International Regular
He took 6 wkts in the 1st innings. Why are you under rating him ?
If we regularly produce flat wkts, then Ashwin’s batting average will also go up .
If the game was being played in England he wouldn't.
Jadeja would be picked as spinning allrounder. Kapil Dev, Srinath, Bumrah and Shami (or Zaheer) picked as seamers.
The_CricketUmpire
U19 Captain
And the same applies to the batsman too. A lot of players averaged in the low to mid 40s in the 1990s for example, if they played now they might be averaging close to 50.
Did you just forget that during the time Kohli was averaging 60 odd in India Ashwin and Jadeja were killing it? England lost by an innings twice after making 400+ batting first thanks to their bowling.
Spark
Global Moderator
Nah they'd miss the straight ball and be pinned LBW on these pitches like everybody else, which is why post-2018 has been one of the most bowler friendly eras in Test cricket in history.
Spark
Global Moderator
As for a comparison between Ashwin and the likes of Harbhajan, if we're going to talk about the influence of pitches, then there have been part time bowlers more threatening than Harbhajan Singh in Australia, who took a wicket every twenty overs at best. Ashwin being a solid contributor to not just one but two series wins in Australia makes him leagues ahead in that front.
I tried some stuff in Aus designed for surfers that is SPF 100 and is basically like tree sap crossed with Vaseline on your skin. I couldn't get it off with soap and a cloth at night, had to sleep sticky and sand scrubbed in the sea the next day to get it off.
Sweating in that stuff is probably less of a concern in terms of having it run off into your eyes than the worry than that the sweat may never get out of your indestructible force field, causing you to swell up from water retention. I offer no opinion on whether this is actually possible, or what the shape of Lyon's head has to do with anything.