Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

[honestbharani]

There is one more thing to consider. Being a non-Karnataka state south Indian, to seal a place in main playing 11 is a very hard task if not impossible as favouritism prevails among Mumbai and Karnataka belt followed by NCR. Generally even mediocre cricketers from north are given chances over a Tamil or Malayalam speaking South Indian. So with these bias against him, he has come thus far, it iscommendable. Some pacer with average impact value like Shardul Thakkur or Mohd Siraj will find a place in overseas tests which has been questioned by commentators like Sunil Gavaskar and Harsha Boghle time and again. If he is sidelined by Indian team owing to jealousy as he overthinks and is reckoned a captaincy material by Kohli and Rohit Sharma and have been opressed internally itself, where is the question of he being heralded as all time great. He saved Sydney test and won us a series in Bangladesh with the bat and has won the winning runs against Pakistan in a WC league match and have excelled as a match winner inspite of jealousy and politics. Some bowlers with consistant line without the craft of wrong ones like carrom ball and top spin are celebrated more than him like Jadeja or Lyon. In less than a year or so from now, mark my words, when he reaches 550 wickets and crosses 3500 runs he becomes all time second greatest after Stuart Broad and in two years if given that many opportunities to play, will go past Kumble and will remain the only one with 4000 runs and 600 wickets combo. At that time should he have picked a few overseas 5 wicket hauls, he'd knock the door of the hall of fame of the ATGs.

Siraj is from Hyderabad.

 

[honestbharani]

Very good post. Lot of truth bombs.

User name checks out too. Ethical mind, Big Brain.

 

[Line and Length]

Do a breakdown of Ashwin's series by series average in Australia

Why? Are you going to cherry pick one series?

 

[Line and Length]

Just out of curiosity, how was South Africa in those times? minnowish or a really good team? Given your age, have you seen Laker play?

South Africa's bowling attack was its strength at the time. Adcock and Heine were the pacemen with Tayfield the spinner. The batting wasn't a strength with Trevor Goddard the biggest 'name'.
I watched Laker 'live' on TV (a 9" black and white job) and saw his 19 wicket game. It left a lasting impression on a young L&L.

 

[TheJediBrah]

a 9" black and white job

Hey i watched that film last night

 

[subshakerz]

I don't mean in like ATVG vs ATG, but why is it better for you to stick Ashwin in ATVG vs ATG? What's the point? It's not like you've been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt so where is this coming coming from?

It's not better. Its just more accurate.

It's as annoying as English pundits saying Anderson was the best in the world right during Steyn's prime.

 

[subshakerz]

At that time should he have picked a few overseas 5 wicket hauls, he'd knock the door of the hall of fame of the ATGs.

At least one fan admits it.

 

[Line and Length]

Laker played a grand total of 4 matches in Australia, at his very peak and has exactly the same record there as Jadeja; and was still outperformed heavily by Benaud taking 31 wickets. He also played the South Africa series on that same trott, took 11 wickets in 5 games; and that series was heavily dominated by the spinners; Hugh Tayfield took 37 wickets (@17) and Johnny Wardle took 26 (@13) and there were a grand total of 2 bowlers who averaged higher in that series. In his first WI tour, the 4 highest wicket takers were all spinners (though he was 2nd) and only one of them averaged higher. And in the 2nd WI tour again, he was largely outperformed by Sonny Ramadhin. During his playing days, most experts and selectors maintained he was pitch dependent after the 1st WI series and that he wouldn't be great away; so didn't tour again before the mid 50s.

Well researched. You mention some very good spinners of that time. However, I was simply comparing Laker and Ashwin and the latter is well behind Laker in terms of figures in Australia and South Africa. In the West Indies, Laker encountered far better batsmen (eg the 3 Ws) than Ashwin bowled to.

 

[subshakerz]

Laker played a grand total of 4 matches in Australia, at his very peak and has exactly the same record there as Jadeja; and was still outperformed heavily by Benaud taking 31 wickets. He also played the South Africa series on that same trott, took 11 wickets in 5 games; and that series was heavily dominated by the spinners; Hugh Tayfield took 37 wickets (@17) and Johnny Wardle took 26 (@13) and there were a grand total of 2 bowlers who averaged higher in that series. In his first WI tour, the 4 highest wicket takers were all spinners (though he was 2nd) and only one of them averaged higher. And in the 2nd WI tour again, he was largely outperformed by Sonny Ramadhin. During his playing days, most experts and selectors maintained he was pitch dependent after the 1st WI series and that he wouldn't be great away; so didn't tour again before the mid 50s.

I like that you mention the wicket rate but don't do that for Ashwin in England

 

[subshakerz]

This is a good post from you. In his initial days, I too used to get aghast of subshakerz making every Ashwin or Jadeja related thread as a thread about himself. But then realized that it is useless to care about whatever he thinks. Hb, Xix, sorcerer etc will all also realize that soon.

Lol what?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Well researched. You mention some very good spinners of that time. However, I was simply comparing Laker and Ashwin and the latter is well behind Laker in terms of figures in Australia and South Africa. In the West Indies, Laker encountered far better batsmen (eg the 3 Ws) than Ashwin bowled to.

No doubt there that Laker did better. I just point out that they didn't necessarily played in similar conditions and Laker hardly played much. While in Laker's case, Benaud, Ramadhin, Tayfield and Wardle; bowlers in general considered worse than Laker; all severely outperformed him; in Ashwin's case, Lyon averages close to 50 in the matches they played together in Australia and Keshav Maharaj does 60. What I meant to say is that, Laker played in pitches with decent spin support, atleast going by stats; and didn't really dominated anywhere, while Ashwin played in pitches with very scare support and oscillated from being average mostly and good (like the matches he played in the last 2 BGTs); in pitches unsuitable. I would still probably take Laker away, but his away record isn't really much significant and another good BGT can turn it over.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I like that you mention the wicket rate but don't do that for Ashwin in England

I mentioned the wicket rate BECAUSE on the very same matches Johnny Wardle took 26 and Hugh Tayfield took 37.... Please read full before complaining.

 

[subshakerz]

I would still probably take Laker away

I agree, Laker is better.

 

[subshakerz]

I mentioned the wicket rate BECAUSE on the very same matches Johnny Wardle took 26 and Hugh Tayfield took 37.... Please read full before complaining.

You're complaining about one tour whereas that is Ashwins entire record in England. Just saying there is a double standard of your scrutiny.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You're complaining about one tour whereas that is Ashwins entire record in England. Just saying there is a double standard of your scrutiny.

No, I am complaining because that one tour was spinner dominated!! Don't be so biased, I could also had posted their averages and shown how Tayfield and Wardle were superior, but that wasn't the point. Also, Ashwin bowled in 11 innings in England and took 18 wickets, Jimmy did 11 in 10 innings; in pitches were other spinners dominated.

 

[subshakerz]

No, I am complaining because that one tour was spinner dominated!! Don't be so biased, I could also had posted their averages and shown how Tayfield and Wardle were superior, but that wasn't the point. Also, Ashwin bowled in 11 innings in England and took 18 wickets, Jimmy did 11 in 10 innings; in pitches were other spinners dominated.

For the record, I do think Laker was somewhat pitch dependent and hence not a confirmed ATG for me, tho I may change my mind on this. We agree he was better overall though.

 

[capt_Luffy]

For the record, I do think Laker was somewhat pitch dependent and hence not a confirmed ATG for me, tho I may change my mind on this. We agree he was better overall though.

When did I agreed he was better overall though? I think it's very close between him and Ashwin; and to pick someone in a team it would be Ashwin for me due to his batting.

 

[subshakerz]

When did I agreed he was better overall though? I think it's very close between him and Ashwin; and to pick someone in a team it would be Ashwin for me due to his batting.

Don't do that. Don't bring his batting in when it's a thread about him as a bowler.

You agreed Laker is a better away bowler. I would be interested in your argument for Ashwin being notably better at home give Laker averages 18 in England.

 

[Socerer 01]

This is a good post from you. In his initial days, I too used to get aghast of subshakerz making every Ashwin or Jadeja related thread as a thread about himself. But then realized that it is useless to care about whatever he thinks. Hb, Xix, sorcerer etc will all also realize that soon.

bro why am i catching strays here

 

[capt_Luffy]

Don't do that. Don't bring his batting in when it's a thread about him as a bowler.

You agreed Laker is a better away bowler. I would be interested in your argument for Ashwin being notably better at home give Laker averages 18 in England.

Ashwin wins on longevity for me. Laker hardly played substantially away; and he missed the equal no. of Tests he played. That's a substantial point.