Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn

[kyear2]

It's not just SR. The ability and willingness to bowl a lot is nearly as important. More important if you are looking at a career instead of a single game.

Ambrose never shied away from bowling, and I am looking at a career, Subz, for the purpose of his agenda is looking at 6 games over two series where the man was well last his best.

To demonstrate how disingenuous he is, he's here clearly and openly trying to have one bowler's status lowered in the eyes of the community while in another thread stating that another bowler should get credit for ball tampering and that it doesn't / didn't impact one's performance that much.

 

[subshakerz]

Yes it was, and I'll find the original post.

As for the rest of your post, if I can follow along.... Average doesn't matter, and s/r doesn't matter. His average was misleading because he wasn't penetrative enough. Which means his s/r had to be really bad, yet it's still within a point of the person you are claiming should replace him in the top 5. So if he wasn't penetrative, does that mean Immy wasn't either?

Look, this stupid ass argument around 2 tests in NZ, and 4 tests in SA (near the end of his career) when he wasn't the same as he was in his prime is being taken too far. Who the hell outside of Bradman was the same at the end of their career that they were in their prime? Not to add that the tests in NZ were the first tests, and came immediately after his shoulder surgery, the same one that made his miss the tour of India (that bothers you so much) where he wasn't even able to achieve anything close to his full pace or rhythm.

After the shoulder he wasn't the same bowler, he had lost his pace and was constantly battling injuries. He wasn't as penetrative and at times hinted at retirement, but Walsh singlehandedly kept him in the game, dangling his 400 goal in front of him. So what did he do, he became unhitable, yes he dragged back his length and serviced the team the best way he knew how. At that point we basically had a 3 man team and he and Courtney were the bellcows of the attack and everything depended on them, so like Ponting he soldiered on, and we appreciated him for it.

But yes, we can go with your narrative that he couldn't bowl in SA or NZ and that makes him a "limited" bowler to fit your narrative.

Or, looking at fact that he wasn't taking wickets as he once did (with his horrible strike rate and all), and without reducing his work load, that he still maintained that average is ****ing incredible and to quote you, possibly something he might get some credit for.
When other bowlers decline their averages shoots up, why didn't his?

But you can continue your ****ed up campaign.

@OverratedSanity @HouHsiaoHsien are you guys seeing what I am dealing with here?

Sigh. Averages do matter, but the way they are put forward for Ambrose to suggest success is misleading. Especially in the latter career half.

His post-prime was more than half his career, not some short period.

I never said he couldn't bowl in SA or NZ, I suggest his current figures there and in Pakistan can't be take as signs of success based on low wicket tallies. Which you may not admit, is how the majority of posters was reading them previously.

Otherwise, you seem to agree with my analysis on his post-shoulder injury limitations. But again, appear needlessly frustrated.

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose never shied away from bowling, and I am looking at a career, Subz, for the purpose of his agenda is looking at 6 games over two series where the man was well last his best.

To demonstrate how disingenuous he is, he's here clearly and openly trying to have one bowler's status lowered in the eyes of the community while in another thread stating that another bowler should get credit for ball tampering and that it doesn't / didn't impact one's performance that much.

His 'past his best' was more than half his career. At that point, 'past his best' is somewhat as reflective of the actual bowler as prime.

Ball-tampering is a red herring.

 

[Bolo.]

Ambrose never shied away from bowling, and I am looking at a career, Subz, for the purpose of his agenda is looking at 6 games over two series where the man was well last his best.

To demonstrate how disingenuous he is, he's here clearly and openly trying to have one bowler's status lowered in the eyes of the community while in another thread stating that another bowler should get credit for ball tampering and that it doesn't / didn't impact one's performance that much.

Was more of a general comment than a critique of Ambrose tbf, but it does apply to him to an extent. He was the only top bowler who didn't like bowling.

You have to be a bit careful of using outside his prime for Ambrose (bearing in mind that he was better in the late 90s than the 80s). Trim it all away and you hardly have a career.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

@OverratedSanity @HouHsiaoHsien are you guys seeing what I am dealing with here?

Sigh. Averages do matter, but the way they are put forward for Ambrose to suggest success is misleading. Especially in the latter career half.

His post-prime was more than half his career, not some short period.

I never said he couldn't bowl in SA or NZ, I suggest his current figures there and in Pakistan can't be take as signs of success based on low wicket tallies. Which you may not admit, is how the majority of posters was reading them previously.

Otherwise, you seem to agree with my analysis on his post-shoulder injury limitations. But again, appear needlessly frustrated.

I find the 5 test limit a good idea. I would say that we can’t conclude anything from his records in SA, NZ record. Ambrose was amazing at home, Aus, Eng. I’d say he’s definitely better than Lillee for me simply he cause dominated the best team of his day like no one ever has. For me Steyn is better than Ambrose cause of a slightly more spread out record(Steyn’s god level at home and Ind, great in Aus, pretty good in Eng). And Imran- Ambrose is very close(cause for the same reasons I exclude NZ and SL for Immy). So Imran better at home, Ambrose better in Aus and Eng, Imran better in WI than Ambrose in Pak. But I’m biased towards Imran cause of his performances on flat tracks at home. So Ambrose is in top 6 for me, but definitely below top 3, and noticeably below Steyn.

 

[subshakerz]

I find the 5 test limit a good idea. I would say that we can’t conclude anything from his records in SA, NZ record. Ambrose was amazing at home, Aus, Eng. I’d say he’s definitely better than Lillee for me simply he cause dominated the best team of his day like no one ever has. For me Steyn is better than Ambrose cause of a slightly more spread out record(Steyn’s god level at home and Ind, great in Aus, pretty good in Eng). And Imran- Ambrose is very close(cause for the same reasons I exclude NZ and SL for Immy). So Imran better at home, Ambrose better in Aus and Eng, Imran better in WI than Ambrose in Pak. But I’m biased towards Imran cause of his performances on flat tracks at home. So Ambrose is in top 6 for me, but definitely below top 3, and noticeably below Steyn.

I agree with Kyear2 on the 5 test limit also, with certain exceptions.

Yup, the flat track performances makes the difference for me to with Ambrose. I have a big questionmark on how he does on unsupprotive pitches.

 

[subshakerz]

Was more of a general comment than a critique of Ambrose tbf, but it does apply to him to an extent. He was the only top bowler who didn't like bowling.

You have to be a bit careful of using outside his prime for Ambrose (bearing in mind that he was better in the late 90s than the 80s). Trim it all away and you hardly have a career.

I think it is a fair comment since post-94 shoulder injury, he bowling load did decrease.

 

[kyear2]

Was more of a general comment than a critique of Ambrose tbf, but it does apply to him to an extent. He was the only top bowler who didn't like bowling.

You have to be a bit careful of using outside his prime for Ambrose (bearing in mind that he was better in the late 90s than the 80s). Trim it all away and you hardly have a career.

400 wickets, 22 five wicket hauls, a moderate s/r of 54 with an average under 21 was a decent career.

 

[kyear2]

I agree with Kyear2 on the 5 test limit also, with certain exceptions.

Yup, the flat track performances makes the difference for me to with Ambrose. I have a big questionmark on how he does on unsupprotive pitches.

Once again, do you think ever pitch in England, Australia and the Caribbean are helpful to fast bowlers. His home pitch alone is one of the flattest on earth, not to mention Bourda and QPO, (both spinning wickets) but you have your stated agenda to have him knocked down a peg or two in the eyes of the community, so carry along smartly.

 

[subshakerz]

400 wickets, 22 five wicket hauls, a moderate s/r of 54 with an average under 21 was a decent career.

He means if you trim away his non-prime.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

The only thing which keeps Ambrose from the top 3 is he didn’t play a lot in the SC. That’s no fault of his own tho. Don’t care that much about his NZ and SA record, he had proved himself in similar conditions. Ambrose is in the top 6.

 

[subshakerz]

Once again, do you think ever pitch in England, Australia and the Caribbean are helpful to fast bowlers. His home pitch alone is one of the flattest on earth, not to mention Bourda and QPO, (both spinning wickets) but you have your stated agenda to have him knocked down a peg or two in the eyes of the community, so carry along smartly.

Generally better than in SC. Plus his home record is not that impressive wicket-taking wise. Tell me another ATG who takes less than 4PM at home.

 

[subshakerz]

The only thing which keeps Ambrose from the top 3 is he didn’t play a lot in the SC. That’s no fault of his own tho. Don’t care that much about his NZ and SA record, he had proved himself in similar conditions. Ambrose is in the top 6.

I am not certain how he would do with more SC tests. Less SC tests may have saved his reputation.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I am not certain how he would do with more SC tests. Less SC tests may have saved his reputation.

I’m saying if he would have had a good and bigger record in those countries, he could have been rated above Steyn/Imran. If maybe have been possible, since his home wicket in WI was a very flat one and he did well. But whether he would’ve or not is impossible to conclude

 

[Bolo.]

400 wickets, 22 five wicket hauls, a moderate s/r of 54 with an average under 21 was a decent career.

It's not a comment on his career. It's a comment on defending performances by virtue of being outside of his peak. His peak was 5 years. His career was 12.

 

[kyear2]

I find the 5 test limit a good idea. I would say that we can’t conclude anything from his records in SA, NZ record. Ambrose was amazing at home, Aus, Eng. I’d say he’s definitely better than Lillee for me simply he cause dominated the best team of his day like no one ever has. For me Steyn is better than Ambrose cause of a slightly more spread out record(Steyn’s god level at home and Ind, great in Aus, pretty good in Eng). And Imran- Ambrose is very close(cause for the same reasons I exclude NZ and SL for Immy). So Imran better at home, Ambrose better in Aus and Eng, Imran better in WI than Ambrose in Pak. But I’m biased towards Imran cause of his performances on flat tracks at home. So Ambrose is in top 6 for me, but definitely below top 3, and noticeably below Steyn.

That's the thing, I've never classified Ambrose as top 3, neither Steyn.

And this isn't something I'm making up now, you can look back over the years of my posts. Marshall and McGrath are one and two for me with Hadlee just a touch behind. Then there's a gap, the top three in my mind have separated themselves from the rest of the pack, complete records, less if any holes.
Steyn has too many holes in his record, was taken apart more often than any of the others and often didn't have a plan B. Ambrose, strike rate of 54 isn't elite, got the impression if he pitched it up a touch more a bit more of those misses would have been edges.
Imran, strike rate not elite, his performances away from home are the worse of any of the elites. Average of 25 with a strike rate just below 60.

On, and Steyn wasn't great in Australia, an average of 28 taking the conditions into account is decent to good. And average of 31 in England is average to below average.

Even disregarding home and away he averaged 27 vs Australia, 31 vs England and 27 vs SL.
And yes he was Godly in India, but averaged 30 in SL. That's not significantly ahead of Ambrose in my opinion, but very much in the same neighborhood. Because of s/r I give him the edge.

 

[kyear2]

It's not a comment on his career. It's a comment on defending performances by virtue of being outside of his peak. His peak was 5 years. His career was 12.

I understood what you meant. I don't trim, or try to take away stats. Most players declined as they got older, that's part of the game, hence I look at the entire picture.

But even if we say only a 5 year peak and the rest was all down hill. 400 with an average of 21 was still ****ing brilliant. All I was trying to say.

 

[kyear2]

I’m saying if he would have had a good and bigger record in those countries, he could have been rated above Steyn/Imran. If maybe have been possible, since his home wicket in WI was a very flat one and he did well. But whether he would’ve or not is impossible to conclude

Just for the record, the community, which isn't quite as clueless as subs believe does rate him above Steyn and Imran, but that's besides the point.

We cite India, and I believe Peterhrt referenced this, as a graveyard, but most of the great fast bowlers performed well there. Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, actually it's only Imran who didn't. So don't know why we would believe Ambrose couldn't have done well.

But again conjecture, which is as much conjecture as to suggest that he wouldn't have.

 

[subshakerz]

We cite India, and I believe Peterhrt referenced this, as a graveyard, but most of the great fast bowlers performed well there. Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, actually it's only Imran who didn't. So don't know why we would believe Ambrose couldn't have done well.

But again conjecture, which is as much conjecture as to suggest that he wouldn't have.

Exactly. In absense of India and with not much in Pakistan, questionmarks will remain on Ambrose as far as SC goes.

 

[Slifer]

Generally better than in SC. Plus his home record is not that impressive wicket-taking wise. Tell me another ATG who takes less than 4PM at home.

Wasim Akram. He took 154 wkts at home in 41 tests.