Why Do ATG XI's Have More Pacers Than Specialist Spin Bowlers?

[trundler]

Imagine being accused of potential malfeasance for part of one series, compared to multiple decades and being the reason neutral umpires were instituted.

Parochial West Indian umpiring continued until 2000, much later than the rest of the world, when Pakistan were robbed of a series win in WI yet again. Incidents of corrupt umpiring in the West Indies stretch back to the time of the 3 Ws so that's a solid half century of corrupt umpiring.

'Potential' malfeasance my ass.

 

[shortpitched713]

Ugh, all the older player's away records ( especially apparent when you look at bowlers in particular ) are kind of marred by the lack of neutral umpires. More modern players can boast much more even or even sometimes better away than home records, which never really used to be a thing.

Neutral umpires basically saved cricket.

 

[kyear2]

 

[kyear2]

Parochial West Indian umpiring continued until 2000, much later than the rest of the world, when Pakistan were robbed of a series win in WI yet again. Incidents of corrupt umpiring in the West Indies stretch back to the time of the 3 Ws so that's a solid half century of corrupt umpiring.

'Potential' malfeasance my ass.

Guess we can all sit back and make up stuff.

 

[trundler]

Guess we can all sit back and make up stuff.

Fred Trueman calls out West Indian umpiring as biased and fraudulent in The Umpire Strikes back. Here's the 2000 footage:

I seem to have touched a nerve to activate such butthurt here but your shameless hypocrisy and bias really do shine through in these discussions.

 

[kyear2]

Fred Trueman calls out West Indian umpiring as biased and fraudulent in The Umpire Strikes back. Here's the 2000 footage:

I seem to have touched a nerve to activate such butthurt here but your shameless hypocrisy and bias really do shine through in these discussions.

No nerves touched, this amuses me while at work during the day.

No hypocrisy or bias. You're the one who refuses to acknowledge that Pakistan was renowned as having some of the worst umpiring bias in cricket for decades.

I'm good over here.

 

[kyear2]

 

[trundler]

No nerves touched, this amuses me while at work during the day.

No hypocrisy or bias. You're the one who refuses to acknowledge that Pakistan was renowned as having some of the worst umpiring bias in cricket for decades.

I'm good over here.

Oh okay if you say so.

Resorting to 'no u' is the sign of maturity and an unhurt butt after all. The fact is that West Indian umpires were known for being biased too and Pakistan suffered mightily because of it so it's all swings and roundabouts. I don't go around discrediting the home record of every West Indian that played until 2000. As far as I'm aware there has never been a riot in a Pakistani stadium that has resulted in an umpire cowering and changing his decision to suit the home side. I can recall multiple such incidents in the WI.

It's incompetence and potential malfeasance when it happens in the Caribbean, eh.

 

[TheJediBrah]

He did make the team. Everything else in this conversation is secondary to this point. The fact that he did it at a time when he was rubbish and Aus were peaking enhances this point, rather than detracting from it.

Did he improve peak AUS? Very much no. Would he have improved them if his peak (or just the average of his career) had coincided with theirs? Typically not IMO*, but in games where they were going in with 5 bowlers, yes.

*Peak Aus were in an unusual situation where a decent AR was often going to be less valuable to them than a mediocre bowler. I think I'm typically picking Lee for example above him, despite him being a worse player.

Mate if your point was just that he made the team in a few single games in special circumstances, to show that Pollock would have too, you could have just used Scott Muller or Paul Wilson as examples.

Or, as mentioned, Andrew Symonds who actually was good enough and was picked as an all rounder around 2005 to 2007 in a full strength team. Then you wouldn't have been wrong and could have avoided all your immense back tracking to avoid admitting it

 

[Prince EWS]

Mate if your point was just that he made the team in a few single games in special circumstances, to show that Pollock would have too, you could have just used Scott Muller or Paul Wilson as examples.

Yeah, when Burgey says Pollock wouldn't have made the team he doesn't literally mean he'd have played 0 games.

He's still wildly wrong, but he clearly means he wouldn't be a mainstay/hold his spot.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

On the topic of West Indian umpires,


The average average of the 'top' batsmen in our region is mid-20s. Our umpires are trigger happy.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Well, the team that went toe to toe with 80s WI had one of the greatest all rounders.

That's true, yet some on here don't even consider him an allrounder as he averaged under 30.

I guess Pakistan with Imran did okay against the Windies too.

 

[Burgey]

Imran didn't even need a good slip cordon to put up similar bowling numbers as McGrath . And we've established how important slip catching is.

Imagine what he'd do in an ATG team with good catchers.

Probably attack the stumps less and not get as many lbws and bowleds.

 

[Victor Ian]

**** I hate when you want to say something and then find the thread has moved on 10+ pages.

Anyway... In an ATG team I like the idea of lower order batting as tie breaker. Yes, I'd probably go Hadlee over McGrath, but it's not so clear cut. McGrath achieved a large part of his numbers in the roads era. The gap between Hadlee and him in bowling is not as small as it looks. But I could easily take Hadlee as well. But Imran doesn't get a look in. His numbers are built on two different players. He was immense as a bowler, or as a lower order bat, but not together. Hadlee did his thing across his career. Plus Hadlee won't have cameras watching him work the ball as an issue to worry about.

If batting factors in to a choice of bowlers, how much does fielding factor in to choosing batsmen? Kallis' slip fielding must be considered when picking batsmen. But how about Ponting? Sure, the end of his career has bumped him below Lara and Tendulkar, but his fielding everywhere is worth so much more than those few runs per innings in batting. In an ATG encounter you don't want to give great batsmen easy singles. You need them staying put so your bowlers can work their plans.

 

[Burgey]

TBF most all timers are at least decent fielders. You get exceptions to the rule, especially in the older eras, but for the most part their hand-eye coordination and athleticism means they're mostly not terrible. Murali the obvious modern day exception.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

**** I hate when you want to say something and then find the thread has moved on 10+ pages.

Anyway... In an ATG team I like the idea of lower order batting as tie breaker. Yes, I'd probably go Hadlee over McGrath, but it's not so clear cut. McGrath achieved a large part of his numbers in the roads era. The gap between Hadlee and him in bowling is not as small as it looks. But I could easily take Hadlee as well. But Imran doesn't get a look in. His numbers are built on two different players. He was immense as a bowler, or as a lower order bat, but not together. Hadlee did his thing across his career. Plus Hadlee won't have cameras watching him work the ball as an issue to worry about.

If batting factors in to a choice of bowlers, how much does fielding factor in to choosing batsmen? Kallis' slip fielding must be considered when picking batsmen. But how about Ponting? Sure, the end of his career has bumped him below Lara and Tendulkar, but his fielding everywhere is worth so much more than those few runs per innings in batting. In an ATG encounter you don't want to give great batsmen easy singles. You need them staying put so your bowlers can work their plans.

That's bullshit tbh. He was a decent lower order bat and ATG bowler from 80-88

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[Bolo.]

Mate if your point was just that he made the team in a few single games in special circumstances, to show that Pollock would have too, you could have just used Scott Muller or Paul Wilson as examples.

Or, as mentioned, Andrew Symonds who actually was good enough and was picked as an all rounder around 2005 to 2007 in a full strength team. Then you wouldn't have been wrong and could have avoided all your immense back tracking to avoid admitting it

You would save a lot of time posting if you spent a little reading what you are replying to.

 

[The Sean]

That's bull**** tbh. He was a decent lower order bat and ATG bowler from 80-88

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Imran in the 1980s really was a ****ing ridiculous cricketer.

 

[Prince EWS]

Australian bowling averages at home against RSA, specialist bowlers, 2000-2016:

Hazlewood 22
Johnson 26
MacGill 29
Starc 29
Warne 30
McGrath 31
Siddle 32
Hilfenhaus 36
Bird 37
Pattinson 38
Gillespie 40
Bracken 42
Lee 43
Lyon 46
Hauritz 51
Bollinger 66
Mennie 85
Hastings 153
Krejza 204

Bowling on those pitches against a good batting lineup well-suited to pace and bounce was seriously hard. Australia had an even better batting lineup at the time than RSA, plus they were at home, so averaging low-mid 30s during that period was not really anything to be particularly ashamed about.

The idea that players like Pollock and Anderson just "couldn't bowl in Australia" due to their meh figures there across this period is nonsense - if they'd got to bowl in Australia against West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc instead of an ATG batting lineup at home every time, what do you reckon their records would look like then?

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Australian bowling averages at home against RSA, specialist bowlers, 2000-2016:

Hazlewood 22
Johnson 26
MacGill 29
Starc 29
Warne 30
McGrath 31
Siddle 32
Hilfenhaus 36
Bird 37
Pattinson 38
Gillespie 40
Bracken 42
Lee 43
Lyon 46
Hauritz 51
Bollinger 66
Mennie 85
Hastings 153
Krejza 204

Bowling on those pitches against a good batting lineup well-suited to pace and bounce was seriously hard. Australia had an even better batting lineup at the time than RSA, plus they were at home, so averaging low-mid 30s during that period was not really anything to be particularly ashamed about.

The idea that players like Pollock and Anderson just "couldn't bowl in Australia" due to their meh figures there across this period is nonsense - if they'd got to bowl in Australia against West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc instead of an ATG batting lineup at home every time, what do you reckon their records would look like then?

That also shows how much Mcgrath benefited from playing in that team. His figures would look like Wasim's.