Dennis Lillee vs Allan Donald

[subshakerz]

I've been avoiding talking about his quality with you. I'm talking about the problems with how you are rating them.

Analysing players against a single country is just a bad way to go. Too much variance. Putting a country on a pedestal is also nonsensical. You have to beat everyone, and are generally better off performing better against the number 2/3 team than number 1. Performances against everyone quality is important.

Very few bowlers have played against only one number 1 team. WI were 1 at the start of Donalds career for example. Does this mean we should ignore his early AUS record and look at WI instead?

Disagree. Donald was facing a great side. Of course his performance against them will be extra highlighted.

 

[Bolo.]

Disagree. Donald was facing a great side. Of course his performance against them will be extra highlighted.

And if he had retired a couple of months before he did, having only played 2 series against number 1 AUS for a great record? You think this should radically change how an entire career is viewed?

 

[Slifer]

I've explained. It didn't apply in previous debates of Imran vs Ambrose since they both did well vs their top sides. I always gave Ambrose credit for being the best ever in Australia. But the question of who is more well rounded applied more then.

I demerit Lillee for not having a SC record of somewhat success like Donald.

But I have to demerit Donald more for not having success against the best side. Plus his peer rating is lower than any other top tier pacer.

Also, do note, if Donald had a bunch of standout match/series away performances outside of the best side he faced, like Warne for example, I could have been willing to forgive his Aussie weakness. He doesn't. Just some flashy figures without big impact. He wasn't really a matchwinner away from home.

But yes overall it is close, Lillee gets the edge. Hopefully my view makes sense.

Donald had outstanding series away to both india and Australia away in the mid 90s. The issue is, he only played 2 tests on both occasions.

And your wording is sooo convenient because you know Warne was horrible vs the best batting of his time but to cover it up, you wanna say you rate him because he had standout match series away....lol. In layman's terms being average vs the best only counts against Donald but not Warne.

 

[Slifer]

Again, we were putting Ambrose against someone who also succeeded against the best batting lineup of his time. Not Donald. Why is this so hard to understand?

But succeeding against the best, wasn't the point of that debate and you know it. It compared them away. You made a point about Ambrose having weak returns in limited opportunities. In this debate, the same could be said of Lillee but on an even greater scale. You can say it wasn't Lillee's fault, but it wasn't Ambrose's either...

 

[subshakerz]

Donald had outstanding series away to both india and Australia away in the mid 90s. The issue is, he only played 2 tests on both occasions.

Outstanding by what standards? What was special/memorable about those performances compared to legendary away series by virtually every other top tier pacer?

And your wording is sooo convenient because you know Warne was horrible vs the best batting of his time but to cover it up, you wanna say you rate him because he had standout match series away....lol. In layman's terms being average vs the best only counts against Donald but not Warne.

Yup Warne was horrible vs India no doubt. But he had a massively impactful away record aside from that, unlike Donald, full of matchwinnig and series-winning performances, not just flashy figures.

But succeeding against the best, wasn't the point of that debate and you know it. It compared them away. You made a point about Ambrose having weak returns in limited opportunities. In this debate, the same could be said of Lillee but on an even greater scale. You can say it wasn't Lillee's fault, but it wasn't Ambrose's either...

Pretty sure we were heavily debating the merits of Imran vs WI and Ambrose vs Australia away in that debate as their best respective sides. But yes, that debate was on away record, and I made it a point to say we can either look at it from well-rounded or concentrated excellence of a few countries.

This debate is overall merits. So yeah best side is quite important.

 

[Slifer]

Outstanding by what standards? What was special/memorable about those performances compared to legendary away series by virtually every other top tier pacer?


Yup Warne was horrible vs India no doubt. But he had a massively impactful away record aside from that, unlike Donald, full of matchwinnig and series-winning performances, not just flashy figures.


Pretty sure we were heavily debating the merits of Imran vs WI and Ambrose vs Australia away in that debate as their best respective sides. But yes, that debate was on away record, and I made it a point to say we can either look at it from well-rounded or concentrated excellence of a few countries.

This debate is overall merits. So yeah best side is quite important.

Donald was impactful in match winning series as well, just that as pointed out, Donald played far fewer tests series of the significant tests ie 4, 5 and 6. Fun fact, Warne and Donald both took around the same wpm. Also, Donald is South African and let's be honest, they tend to be underrated in general.

And in the other debate you dismissed Ambrose's record in Eng/Aus and kept harping on 36 wkts in 12 tests (in the other countries) over and over again. Someone mentioned that he averaged great, you dismissed that as "shiny." Here we have Donald with an extensive record home and away with not just a "shiny" average but outstanding sr. Now, we're shifting goal posts singly to his performances vs Australia (the best team of his time) and the opinions of Australians in general. Lillee averaged 4 runs less vs the best team of his time and never played them away.

 

[peterhrt]

Procter felt that Donald's loyalty to Warwickshire sometimes affected his Test performances.

Lillee was a South African Cricket Annual cricketer of the year in 1976. In two matches at Johannesburg and Durban for International Wanderers against what was effectively the national team, he took 15 wickets @ 12 apiece.

 

[subshakerz]

Donald was impactful in match winning series as well, just that as pointed out, Donald played far fewer tests series of the significant tests ie 4, 5 and 6. Fun fact, Warne and Donald both took around the same wpm. Also, Donald is South African and let's be honest, they tend to be underrated in general.

Which series are you pointing for Donald where he had a decisive role?

That same standard of less test series can be applied to Steyn who is SA. But Steyn has a list of signature matchwinning and series-winning away performances he can point to in virtually every country. Far more impactful.

And in the other debate you dismissed Ambrose's record in Eng/Aus and kept harping on 36 wkts in 12 tests (in the other countries) over and over again. Someone mentioned that he averaged great, you dismissed that as "shiny." Here we have Donald with an extensive record home and away with not just a "shiny" average but outstanding sr. Now, we're shifting goal posts singly to his performances vs Australia (the best team of his time) and the opinions of Australians in general. Lillee averaged 4 runs less vs the best team of his time and never played them away.

To be clear, my point of harping on 36 wickets in 12 tests was because posters were just reading Ambrose's averages there and assuming he was a success. If Ambrose sucked against the best team he played, that point would have been brought first.

As for Donald, I have already conceded he was a moderate success in SC compared to Lillee.

Lillee is definitely less tested than Donald, but Donald did worse against the best team by ATG standards, home and away. So both are weaknesses but I have explained why the latter is worse for me.

Lillee to me overall is a relative success against WI despite the high average given his wicket taking propensity, especially taking WSC into account.

I appreciate this cordial exchange btw.

 

[Slifer]

Which series are you pointing for Donald where he had a decisive role?

That same standard of less test series can be applied to Steyn who is SA. But Steyn has a list of signature matchwinning and series-winning away performances he can point to in virtually every country. Far more impactful.


To be clear, my point of harping on 36 wickets in 12 tests was because posters were just reading Ambrose's averages there and assuming he was a success. If Ambrose sucked against the best team he played, that point would have been brought first.

As for Donald, I have already conceded he was a moderate success in SC compared to Lillee.

Lillee is definitely less tested than Donald, but Donald did worse against the best team by ATG standards, home and away. So both are weaknesses but I have explained why the latter is worse for me.

Lillee to me overall is a relative success against WI despite the high average given his wicket taking propensity, especially taking WSC into account.

I appreciate this cordial exchange btw.

Would you also agree that Donald's record vs Australia is sullied by the 3 tests at the literal end of his career vs the greatest batting line up of all time. A batting lineup a level above anything Lillee played in actual tests (not wsc).

Whatever Donald's shortcomings were vs Australia (mostly at home he was just fine in Australia), it's more than balanced out by the 9 tests in Asia where Donald was generally successful.

As for the Steyn comment, we all generally agree that he's slightly better than Donald so that's moot. But looking over Donald's cv seems to me he had "impactful" series vs India at home generally, vs England a few times, definitely at home when South Africa mutilatedthe WI etc.

We just don't talk about them as much because on top of being South African, Donald played during a time when the pond was full of other big fishes: Pollock, McGrath, Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh, Bishop. Steyn played at a time with James Anderson, Mitchell Johnson, Jerome Taylor, and a bunch of other nobodies. Steyn isn't unlike Lillee. When Lillee emerged his main contemporaries were Roberts, Vanburn Holder, Bob Willis (?) Etc. So it's no wonder he stood out and was accordingly praised. Fwiw, he did deserve the praise he was an atg bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

Would you also agree that Donald's record vs Australia is sullied by the 3 tests at the literal end of his career vs the greatest batting line up of all time. A batting lineup a level above anything Lillee played in actual tests (not wsc).

Yes and no. As I made the point, his record before that was three middling series and one good series, home and away. Ambrose and Wasim had multiple good series against Australia compared to that. So by ATG standards, he is still short.

Whatever Donald's shortcomings were vs Australia (mostly at home he was just fine in Australia), it's more than balanced out by the 9 tests in Asia where Donald was generally successful.

Disagree. Because he wasn't setting the SC alight it was largely a supportive bowling role ending up with good figures. But that record is a point in his favor but doesn't overcome his Aussie weakness which as even Kyear2 mentioned is the prime reason his peer rating is so low.

As for the Steyn comment, we all generally agree that he's slightly better than Donald so that's moot. But looking over Donald's cv seems to me he had "impactful" series vs India at home generally, vs England a few times, definitely at home when South Africa mutilatedthe WI etc.

The point is that Steyns small series of test samples didn't stop him from racking up memorable matchwinning and serieswinning performances so that excuse can't fly for Donald.

I don't have issues with Donald at home overall except vs Australia. I am talking great performances away from home which is how all the other ATG bowlers sealed their reputations, possible exception of Trueman though.

Lillee for example made a huge splash in his first test series in England in 72, and was key for them winning in 75.

 

[Coronis]

Again, we were putting Ambrose against someone who also succeeded against the best batting lineup of his time. Not Donald. Why is this so hard to understand?

Because you are shifting the goalposts in terms of what you rate in players, which you generally do in order to support players you like, and downgrade players that you don’t.

 

[Bolo.]

Because you are shifting the goalposts in terms of what you rate in players, which you generally do in order to support players you like, and downgrade players that you don’t.

I somehow doubt that he will remain consistent by arguing Mcgrath wasn't much good for failing against his strongest opponent.

 

[Slifer]

Yes and no. As I made the point, his record before that was three middling series and one good series, home and away. Ambrose and Wasim had multiple good series against Australia compared to that. So by ATG standards, he is still short.


Disagree. Because he wasn't setting the SC alight it was largely a supportive bowling role ending up with good figures. But that record is a point in his favor but doesn't overcome his Aussie weakness which as even Kyear2 mentioned is the prime reason his peer rating is so low.


The point is that Steyns small series of test samples didn't stop him from racking up memorable matchwinning and serieswinning performances so that excuse can't fly for Donald.⁵

I don't have issues with Donald at home overall. I am talking great performances away from home which is how all the other ATG bowlers sealed their reputations, possible exception of Trueman though.

Lillee for example made a huge splash in his first test series in England in 72, and was key for them winning in 75.

And Donald was key for South Africa mauling WI in 1998 and others. I'm frankly too lazy to go through them. I know for a fact that you value sr as shown in previous debates where you harp on that, Donald has that over Lillee and average. Lillee and Donald were both great home and away but Donald played in more varied conditions and his record vs Australia though not great, isn't awful either. Lillee was very good vs WI bit wasn't great ala curtly vs Australia or Steyn vs India.

Anyway, doubt we'll change each other's minds thanks for keeping it respectful.

 

[Jumno]

Donald like Kallis is one of those players stats addicts on CW are going to overrate a tad now more than he was actually rated in his career.

Great bowler but throughout his career he seemed to miss the big moments and big spells when it mattered. No real series winning effort away from home you can point to or signature spells. Just flashy figures.

Best example of Donald's failure to turn it on when it mattered was the big series between SA/Australia at home in 96/97, when Donald was missing in the first 2 tests and then came good in the 3rd with the series lost.

That and the fact that Donald is not even mentioned as an afterthought by batsmen of the era are reasons I don't tend to rate him as highly. Still top 10 though.

WC sf 1999 wickets, Boucher dropped catch 1998 off Atherton, Series in India 2000. Home series against India 92. 92 world cup. Vs the WI Port Elizabeth.

5 fer at Lords 94 to set up win.

Vs WI 98.

Eng series where Atherton saved a test.

 

[subshakerz]

Because you are shifting the goalposts in terms of what you rate in players, which you generally do in order to support players you like, and downgrade players that you don’t.

I'm not. Different players have different weaknesses that will be assessed differently. The issue is this hive mind here on CW that likes to pretend that a checklist reading of averages is the best approach to assess cricketers.

I somehow doubt that he will remain consistent by arguing Mcgrath wasn't much good for failing against his strongest opponent.

Who? SA or India?

 

[subshakerz]

And Donald was key for South Africa mauling WI in 1998 and others. I'm frankly too lazy to go through them. I know for a fact that you value sr as shown in previous debates where you harp on that, Donald has that over Lillee and average. Lillee and Donald were both great home and away but Donald played in more varied conditions and his record vs Australia though not great, isn't awful either. Lillee was very good vs WI bit wasn't great ala curtly vs Australia or Steyn vs India.

Anyway, doubt we'll change each other's minds thanks for keeping it respectful.

Donald was a beast at home, as was Lillee. My critique was that Donald's flashy away averages that everyone here is impressed by don't actually reflect impactful performances.

Bowling SR isn't a big deal for me unless it's unusually high and comes with a low WPM.

I will concede Lillee wasnt as awesome as other ATGs vs the best but overall was pretty good. Donald really needed at least one more impressive series vs Australia IMO.

WC sf 1999 wickets, Boucher dropped catch 1998 off Atherton, Series in India 2000. Home series against India 92. 92 world cup. Vs the WI Port Elizabeth.

5 fer at Lords 94 to set up win.

Vs WI 98.

ODIs are irrelevant. As are home performances in my particular critique. I will give you the 94 England game tho nobody has ever heard or mentioned that performance.

 

[Slifer]

Donald was a beast at home, as was Lillee. My critique was that Donald's flashy away averages that everyone here is impressed by don't actually reflect impactful performances.

Bowling SR isn't a big deal for me unless it's unusually high and comes with a low WPM.

I will concede Lillee wasnt as awesome as other ATGs vs the best but overall was pretty good. Donald really needed at least one more impressive series vs Australia IMO.


ODIs are irrelevant. As are home performances in my particular critique. I will give you the 94 England game tho nobody has ever heard or mentioned that performance.

If you're looking for big hauls away or something, that's not going to happen generally, especially when he rarely played much more than two tests away while competing with Pollock and Fanie. You'll see a 2 or 3 tests series here or there where he'd take 4+ wpm and a low average and sr.

 

[subshakerz]

If you're looking for big hauls away or something, that's not going to happen generally, especially when he rarely played much more than two tests away while competing with Pollock and Fanie. You'll see a 2 or 3 tests series here or there where he'd take 4+ wpm and a low average and sr.

I'm not sure I accept that logic since he was awesome at home on this metric.

 

[Bolo.]

Who? SA or India?

SA. India would be behind PAK as well for that period.

 

[subshakerz]

SA. India would be behind PAK as well for that period.

McGrath didn't fail against SA. He played them in six full series, did well in three and poor in three. Overall, he was okay IMO. But I've never argued his record is without blemishes. However, I do consider India his toughest opponent though.