Best Indian Spinner

[capt_Luffy]

Ok. I get ranking series victory performances over regular ones.

Let's leave Ponting cas he is a batter. My point is that qualitatively, Ashwins performance isn't far from Warne and Murali who are both considered failures in India.

Now, fair enough though, we aren't comparing Ashwin to Murali/Warne overall, but compared to Kumble in Australia I think Kumble is superior.

Warne is instructive because Warne pretty much played a similar support role in 2004/2005 victory as Ashwin in 2021. Yet his record couldn't recover from damage of previous tours.

So Ashwin in Australia to me is at most an average middling performance

I think you got one thing wrong here, I never said Ashwin was a 'beast in Australia' or he 'won Tests single-handedly ' (heck, my favourite performance of his in Aus came with the bat in a draw); I just meant he is better there than his record suggests, i.e., not below average but average, might be above average as a spinner. Warne and Murali are ATG bowlers, there performance in India, which offers much more spin friendly tracks than Australia, are hence why more targeted. And as for Warne, my main criticism wasn't that he was useless in India, but that he never dominated Indian batsmen in any series, whether home or away. As for Kumble, he isn't really that much better than Ashwin away, he had a few good series (Australia 2004 might be even a great one) in most countries he played in, but overall hardly got his team to victories. Ashwin is better in England, comparable in Australia and only clearly worse in South Africa; not to mention Kumble averages 44 in Sri Lanka while Ashwin does 21; and yes, both played most matches against a strong batting line-up for the most part.

 

[capt_Luffy]

If away records are the deciding factor then my man Chandrasekhar has no equals

Got wickets everywhere (1 flat track draw in Pak spoils his average there)

	Span	Mat	Inns	Ballss	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Avg	Econ	SR	5w
in Australia	1967-1978	7	13	1956	878	29	6/52	12/104	30.27	2.69	67.4	3	1
in England	1967-1979	9	15	2319	1053	31	6/38	8/114	33.96	2.72	74.8	2	0
in India	1964-1979	32	55	9185	3933	142	8/79	11/235	27.69	2.56	64.6	8	1
in New Zealand	1976-1976	3	4	719	294	11	6/94	8/179	26.72	2.45	65.3	1	0
in Pakistan	1978-1978	3	4	576	385	8	4/130	4/179	48.12	4.01	72.0	0	0
in West Indies	1976-1976	4	6	1208	656	21	6/120	8/208	31.23	3.25	57.5	2	0

The thing about Chandrashekhar was either he was unplayable, or of quality not suiting international standards. But yes, Chandrashekhar has won more matches and bowled better spells than both Ashwin and Kumble.

 

[subshakerz]

I think you got one thing wrong here, I never said Ashwin was a 'beast in Australia' or he 'won Tests single-handedly ' (heck, my favourite performance of his in Aus came with the bat in a draw); I just meant he is better there than his record suggests, i.e., not below average but average, might be above average as a spinner. Warne and Murali are ATG bowlers, there performance in India, which offers much more spin friendly tracks than Australia, are hence why more targeted. And as for Warne, my main criticism wasn't that he was useless in India, but that he never dominated Indian batsmen in any series, whether home or away. As for Kumble, he isn't really that much better than Ashwin away, he had a few good series (Australia 2004 might be even a great one) in most countries he played in, but overall hardly got his team to victories. Ashwin is better in England, comparable in Australia and only clearly worse in South Africa; not to mention Kumble averages 44 in Sri Lanka while Ashwin does 21; and yes, both played most matches against a strong batting line-up for the most part.

Noted on your points. I don't see them comparable in Australia. Kumble is better. Kumble followed up 2004 with 20 wickets in 4 tests in 2007/8, including a first day 5-fer against an ATG batting lineup.

In England, they are roughly even for me. Ashwin hardly takes any wickets despite a better average to have impact whereas Kumble has a couple key tests where he helped win it for India in 2002 and 2007 despite his super high average.

SA, Ashwin is just rank bad while Kumble was respectable.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Ashwin in India to me is like Philander in SA. Nerfed up by the conditions moreso than skill. It's bizarre to me how posters here ignore that when looking at his record.

In Philander's defence, he actually averages around 23 in both England and New Zealand; and isn't really too poor in Australia as well. He only really struggled in India and Sri Lanka.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Noted on your points. I don't see them comparable in Australia. Kumble is better. Kumble followed up 2004 with 20 wickets in 4 tests in 2007/8, including a first day 5-fer against an ATG batting lineup.

In England, they are roughly even for me. Ashwin hardly takes any wickets despite a better average to have impact whereas Kumble has a couple tests where he helped win it for India in 2002 and 2007.

In England that has things to do with India having a much better pace line-up now than then. Kumble had to be strike bowler, and despite winning a few matches, failed for the most part. Ashwin's role was of that of a support bowler, to take some wickets here and there and keep things tight, which he excelled at. (Though admittedly, Kumble's role is much tougher for a spinner in unsuitable conditions).

 

[subshakerz]

In Philander's defence, he actually averages around 23 in both England and New Zealand; and isn't really too poor in Australia as well. He only really struggled in India and Sri Lanka.

Similar to Ashwin doing well in a few specific climates while being amped up at home.

Point is are we taking Philander averaging 19 in SA that seriously or treating it as something extraordinary and worthy of ATG status?

 

[subshakerz]

In England that has things to do with India having a much better pace line-up now than then. Kumble had to be strike bowler, and despite winning a few matches, failed for the most part. Ashwin's role was of that of a support bowler, to take some wickets here and there and keep things tight, which he excelled at. (Though admittedly, Kumble's role is much tougher for a spinner in unsuitable conditions).

Yeah but you care most about series winning performances and Kumble had helped in both Indian victories in 2002 and 2007 to draw and win series. Plus England in the 2000s had notoriously dull pitches for most of these contests.

Ashwin with 18 wickets in 7 tests is not impacting anything even as support bowler.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Similar to Ashwin doing well in a few specific climates while being amped up at home.

Point is are we taking Philander averaging 19 in SA that seriously or treating it as something extraordinary and worthy of ATG status?

No one is saying that Ashwin deserves ATG status (atleast not me, Shortpitched might, but he says that for Philander too).

Yeah but you care most about series winning performances and Kumble had helped in both Indian victories in 2002 and 2007 to draw and win series. Plus England in the 2000s had notoriously dull pitches for most of these contests.

Ashwin with 18 wickets in 7 tests is not impacting anything even as support bowler.

Ashwin also helped in India in drawing the series in 2018. Ashwin's role was to keep things tight (he didn't gave much runs), bowl when the strike bowlers are tired and take breakthroughs. For the most part, he just did that. And his WPI in England (1.63) is hardly worse than Keith Miller's in his whole career (1.78).

 

[Jumno]

Kumble also performed well in South Africa 2006,1992 and in WestIndies 1997 and was also instrumental in series victory in Pakistan 2004.

Certainly, I forgot these.

I think Kumble is under rated.

He was instrumental, contributed high impact bowling in the win against Pak under pressure in 96 WC qf.

 

[subshakerz]

Ashwin also helped in India in drawing the series in 2018. Ashwin's role was to keep things tight (he didn't gave much runs), bowl when the strike bowlers are tired and take breakthroughs. For the most part, he just did that. And his WPI in England (1.63) is hardly worse than Keith Miller's in his whole career (1.78).

Huh? India lost 4-1 in 2018. And Ashwin was notoriously responsible for not performing on a turning pitch day 4, fourth test, when the game was set up for him.

India drew the series in 2021 but Ashwin didn't play.

 

[reyrey]

The thing about Chandrashekhar was either he was unplayable, or of quality not suiting international standards. But yes, Chandrashekhar has won more matches and bowled better spells than both Ashwin and Kumble.

Yes. He is the Mitchell Johnson of spin bowling.

I would however always pick him in my all-time India Xl but alongside a spin bowling allrounder like Jadeja.

Jadeja, Kapil, Ashwin, Bumrah and Chandrasekhar at a home

Jadeja, Kapil, Bumrah, Zaheer/Shami and Chandrasekhar away

 

[subshakerz]

Certainly, I forgot these.

I think Kumble is under rated.

He was instrumental, contributed high impact bowling in the win against Pak under pressure in 96 WC qf.

Definitely underrated.

Yes, people are forgetting Kumble the overseas bowler of the 2000s. Response for major overseas triumphs in Eng, WI and Pak. 44 wickets in 7 tests against an ATG Aussie lineup on roads in Australia.

Notably better than Ashwin.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Huh? India lost 4-1 in 2018. And Ashwin was notoriously responsible for not performing on a turning pitch day 4, fourth test, when the game was set up for him.

India drew the series in 2021 but Ashwin didn't play.

Sorry, was plain wrong here. I somehow mixed up the results of 2018 and 2021

Definitely underrated.

Yes, people are forgetting Kumble the overseas bowler of the 2000s. Response for major overseas triumphs in Eng, WI and Pak. 44 wickets in 7 tests against an ATG Aussie lineup on roads in Australia.

Notably better than Ashwin.

Kumble averages 40+ in England, New Zealand, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Sure Kumble won India some vital matches, but his average isn't really good however you put it. Their WPI is also similar in England. I would give you that on recontextualization Kumble is definitely better than Ashwin in Australia; and ofcourse in South Africa. But you should also hold Kumble accountable for failing in spin friendly Sri Lankan tracks.

 

[subshakerz]

Kumble averages 40+ in England, New Zealand, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Sure Kumble won India some vital matches, but his average isn't really good however you put it. Their WPI is also similar in England. I would give you that on recontextualization Kumble is definitely better than Ashwin in Australia; and ofcourse in South Africa. But you should also hold Kumble accountable for failing in spin friendly Sri Lankan tracks.

Kumble high averages in general are partly due to playing on some of the dullest flat pitches of the 2000s, which even affected his home record. Many, many high scoring draws in that record which bumped those averages up.

And my friend, wasn't your entire earlier point defending Ashwin in Australia was that high average isn't the end all be all compared to sealing important victories?

I will grant you Kumble failed in SL overall, though mainly for that infamous drawn series in 97 where SL scored over 900 in one innings.

However, you have to grant Kumble a slight edge in England due to more impact since Ashwins better average is meaningless at two wickets a test and hardly any overs too per innings without contributing towards an Indian win.

Which means Kumble has a better record in terms of impact in SENA, while Ashwin has a better record in spinning conditions in SC.

And back to my original point, Kumble I believe would have nearly matched Ashwin at home in those same spin conditions post 2010 IMO but is a notably better away bowler in non spinning conditions.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Joke's on you, I consider Philander an ATG bowler.

Does he make your top 10 quicks?

 

[shortpitched713]

Does he make your top 10 quicks?

I've got Philander at 11 currently, so just outside. You have my whole damn list though, so no need to play coy.

Cummins and/or Rabada could be higher than him though, out of active players, once their careers end.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Kumble high averages in general are partly due to playing on some of the dullest flat pitches of the 2000s, which even affected his home record. Many, many high scoring draws in that record which bumped those averages up.

And my friend, wasn't your entire earlier point defending Ashwin in Australia was that high average isn't the end all be all compared to sealing important victories?

I will grant you Kumble failed in SL overall, though mainly for that infamous drawn series in 97 where SL scored over 900 in one innings.

However, you have to grant Kumble a slight edge in England due to more impact since Ashwins better average is meaningless at two wickets a test and hardly any overs too per innings without contributing towards an Indian win.

Which means Kumble has a better record in terms of impact in SENA, while Ashwin has a better record in spinning conditions in SC.

And back to my original point, Kumble I believe would have nearly matched Ashwin at home in those same spin conditions post 2010 IMO but is a notably better away bowler in non spinning conditions.

I would give you that Kumble had higher highs in England; but he also had lower lows. And their WPI is hardly any different in England (Kumble 1.9, Ashwin 1.7). So I think in such a situation, as Kumble's WPI isn't really much better than Ashwin, Ashwin's average is just significantly better by over 13 runs. By that point, it's not really in the realm of a few bad games. Kumble is definitely better in South Africa and better in Australia; but on counting West Indies, I don't think Kumble is enough of an upgrade on Ashwin to call him significantly superior in SENAW, and that Ashwin is that much better in SC.

 

[Socerer 01]

ofc its subs going on a crusade when Ashwin leads the poll by a overwhelming consensus

 

[Socerer 01]

fwiw Ashwin’s record in SA also gets **** on too harshly

i noticed one of the SA fans here sayin that they had India tour in the more lucrative grounds which aren’t as spin friendly and looking at the data it bears fruit. Ashwin has played more times than SA’s main spinner in these series and has a much, much healthier record of 49 avg to 122 for Maharaj. both are **** but it should point to there being deeper issues for spin bowling conditions rather than “lol Ash so bad in SA"

stretch it out for spinners records since 2010 in the 3 grounds Ashwin has played in and the majority of spinners average over 40 with nearly all of them having an economy of over 3. there are a few exceptions like Harmer, Ajmal and Tahir but it’s not pretty reading. Ashwin doesn’t have a great record with wicket taking but his economy of 2.7 is only bested by Benn and Harris which shows that he has done his job of holding up one end when required

if we’re resorting to checklist analysis at least apply some context and relevant comparisons pls

 

[subshakerz]

I would give you that Kumble had higher highs in England; but he also had lower lows. And their WPI is hardly any different in England (Kumble 1.9, Ashwin 1.7). So I think in such a situation, as Kumble's WPI isn't really much better than Ashwin, Ashwin's average is just significantly better by over 13 runs. By that point, it's not really in the realm of a few bad games. Kumble is definitely better in South Africa and better in Australia; but on counting West Indies, I don't think Kumble is enough of an upgrade on Ashwin to call him significantly superior in SENAW, and that Ashwin is that much better in SC.

Those 'lower lows' for Kumble in England were mostly in drawn games. The highs resulted in a drawn and won series. You seem to be going back on your own criteria you set for Ashwin in Australia who also averages 40 plus there but you upgraded his performance.

WI today faced by Ashwin is a nonentity, much worse than even the poor side Kumble faced. It's really SENA and SC that are the testing grounds and Kumble to me is clearly superior in the former.