Imran Khan vs Shane Warne (as bowlers)

[subshakerz]

Hutton and Sutcliffe played under very different lbw laws and with no DRS

They’d have to completely change their approach to survive today as pad as the first line of defence wouldn’t work

Yes and we can assume as elite players then would have changed their approach to adapt.

Doesn't change physical realities that a day 1 pitch, with some exceptions, won't turn, reducing Warne and Murali from worldclass to merely good.

Spinners come more into the equation the longer the test proceeds, by which time most of the match situation has been set up.

A pacer can win you the game on day 1, session 1 to day 5, last session. Not so a spinner.

 

[Bolo.]

I know someone else who was around in the 90s that criticised Donald's lack of tempo nuance but he did finish with an economy rate below 3.

He was very good and bowled predominantly back of a length in a more sedate batting era. Not going for that many runs

 

[social]

The LBW law was changed in 1935. Hutton played his entire career under modern (pre DRS) rules.

Final law change was in 1980 and in combination with DRS, it completely changed the way spin could be played

Many players from yesteryear would be sitting ducks unless they changed their approach and that’s easier said than done

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Final law change was in 1980 and in combination with DRS, it completely changed the way spin could be played

Many players from yesteryear would be sitting ducks unless they changed their approach and that’s easier said than done

What changes?

 

[social]

What changes?

Traditional approach was for batters to be given the benefit of the doubt

In practical terms, this meant that you were far less likely to be given out lbw when playing forward or giving the appearance of playing a shot when struck outside the line of off

I grew up with the saying “if in doubt, push out” and using the pad as a line of defence was common

One of the most famous examples of this came in a 1957 test series where England used pad play to completely nullify the bowling of Sunny Ramadhin

The introduction of technology upended that thinking as it was statistically proven that many more deliveries from spinners should have resulted in lbws than were being given

As a consequence, the number of lbws for spinners increased massively in the first 12 months after the introduction of technology and batters were eventually forced to change their defensive techniques as benefit of the doubt no longer applies

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2012/feb/01/england-spinners-technology-cricket

 

[kyear2]

Imran and Miller weren't bowling all rounders. Having better teammates is an awful criteria for rating someone higher. Also, you're making a lot of contextual allowances to Sobers which you wouldn't for other cricketers (resorting to X player did badly because average > than or < arbitrary criteria overall). I am not against that obviously but worth pointing out the dual standard. And yes, Richards and Warne making the Wisden top 5 over Imran was ridiculous. Nobody takes pundit consensus seriously except when it suits them. Otherwise Lillee and Wasim are the greatest quicks ever.

All top 10s posted so far better than Kyear2's tbh.

The past two weeks you've made it a point to come after everything I post, Subz and I have agreements but we keep it respectful and about substance while you apparently try not to. And it's always the same topic because I'm not allowed to have a different opinion about Imran than you. The only difference in my list than everyone here is no Imran or Miller, everyone's else the same.
But you make it a point to again try to shame the guy who doesn't think Imran is top 3, when outside of this site that isn't close to a consensus.
Yours doesn't include Marshall, who at least a plurality of members on this site have as the greatest ever and at worst top 2, and everyone else have included in their lists. I don't care nor would I go after you for it, because it's your ****ing list and I don't ****ing care, but for some reason I should conform to how you think, because God forbid I don't bow at the foot of your favorite player.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

The past two weeks you've made it a point to come after everything I post, Subz and I have agreements but we keep it respectful and about substance while you apparently try not to. And it's always the same topic because I'm not allowed to have a different opinion about Imran than you. The only difference in my list than everyone here is no Imran or Miller, everyone's else the same.
But you make it a point to again try to shame the guy who doesn't think Imran is top 3, when outside of this site that isn't close to a consensus.
Yours doesn't include Marshall, who at least a plurality of members on this site have as the greatest ever and at worst top 2, and everyone else have included in their lists. I don't care nor would I go after you for it, because it's your ****ing list and I don't ****ing care, but for some reason I should conform to how you think, because God forbid I don't bow at the foot of your favorite player.

Because that's beta

#weakness

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Traditional approach was for batters to be given the benefit of the doubt

In practical terms, this meant that you were far less likely to be given out lbw when playing forward or giving the appearance of playing a shot when struck outside the line of off

I grew up with the saying “if in doubt, push out” and using the pad as a line of defence was common

One of the most famous examples of this came in a 1957 test series where England used pad play to completely nullify the bowling of Sunny Ramadhin

The introduction of technology upended that thinking as it was statistically proven that many more deliveries from spinners should have resulted in lbws than were being given

As a consequence, the number of lbws for spinners increased massively in the first 12 months after the introduction of technology and batters were eventually forced to change their defensive techniques as benefit of the doubt no longer applies

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2012/feb/01/england-spinners-technology-cricket

So another reason why Hammond was an overrated hack.

 

[subshakerz]

Because that's beta

#weakness

Nah Kyear ain't Beta, he is respectful while still communicating how lowly he considers our opinions. All good.

 

[kyear2]

Hutton and Sutcliffe played under very different lbw laws and with no DRS

They’d have to completely change their approach to survive today as pad as the first line of defence wouldn’t work

I would say Hobbs and Sutcliffe, and even Hobbs had some time under the new law. I could be wrong but don't think Hutton played under the old law, and definitely played most of his career after it and after the war vs much more varied attacks.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Nah Kyear ain't Beta, he is respectful while still communicating how lowly he considers our opinions. All good.

Yeah but you are extremely unfunny tho.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah but you are extremely unfunny tho.

I don't try to be funny. There are plenty of monkey posters here who do that.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

I don't try to be funny. There are plenty of monkey posters here who do that.

You are saying that you aren't?

 

[kyear2]

So another reason why Hammond was an overrated hack.

I have my issues with Hammond, but that has more to do with his struggles with shirt pitched bowling, and that isn't unique to him. It does highlight though some of the issues with rating pre war batsmen especially.
But I wouldn't go near as far as calling him a overrated hack. He was a giant of the game and hell of an all round player.

 

[subshakerz]

You are saying that you aren't?

Yup, I am pretty vanilla.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't try to be funny. There are plenty of monkey posters here who do that.

No wonder you like Bhajji more than Ashwin.

 

[social]

I would say Hobbs and Sutcliffe, and even Hobbs had some time under the new law. I could be wrong but don't think Hutton played under the old law, and definitely played most of his career after it and after the war vs much more varied attacks.

LBW law was last changed in 1980

It was common for batters to pad spinners away with impunity prior to that time and the game changed exponentially with the introduction of technology in the early 2000s

There’s virtually no chance that many 1950s test batters would have survived more than a few overs from Murali if they played him the way that they played spin back in the day

Just another example of why it’s next to impossible to compare players from such vastly different eras

 

[kyear2]

LBW law was last changed in 1980

It was common for batters to pad spinners away with impunity prior to that time and the game changed exponentially with the introduction of technology in the early 2000s

There’s virtually no chance that many 1950s test batters would have survived more than a few overs from Murali if they played him the way that they played spin back in the day

Just another example of why it’s next to impossible to compare players from such vastly different eras

You can't eliminate every cricketer prior to 1980, I'll be open to skepticism prior to 1930 but not 1980.
And I'm well aware of how the brits played Ramadin and Valentine, besides being unsporting it contributed to the perception that the game was dying.

 

[social]

You can't eliminate every cricketer prior to 1980, I'll be open to skepticism prior to 1930 but not 1980.
And I'm well aware of how the brits played Ramadin and Valentine, besides being unsporting it contributed to the perception that the game was dying.

I don’t eliminate them at all

Just very different playing conditions

Some would adapt while others wouldn’t

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't try to be funny. There are plenty of monkey posters here who do that.

Leave Jimmy out of the Oval.