Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

[honestbharani]

The danger of rating Ashwin as ATG is that it opens the door to consider Lyon ATG, who performs across all conditions and has the hardest home conditions of all to bowl in, and that is a door that should not be opened.

Nah Ash is easily better.

 

[subshakerz]

Nah Ash is easily better.

Due to batting.

 

[Xix2565]

Right, so you are just assuming they are universally spin friendly, that's what I thought. Maybe give some evidence if that is the basis of your argument.

The issue with your 'just asking questions' approach is that you would prefer not to answer your own question or clarify your own stance of who should qualify as an ATG. Instead, the goal is to just muddy the waters so you can sneak in Ashwin under this title.

I mean compared by decades they are spin friendly: https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

Noticeably better than 2000s/10s/20s for most of the relevant eras involving those past spinners. And given the records of spinners from those countries across all eras, makes sense that spinners from the past got better conditions for their skillsets compared to now where pacers are a bigger focus for teams.

So you don't want to answer my questions, got it. Then it's easy to dismiss your points as basically being non-factors in discussing Ashwin as an ATG.

 

[Xix2565]

Absolutely. Thankfully we don't have a nationalist brigade in Australia seeking to put Lyon on an ATG pedestal like we see with Ashwin, probably because they already have Warne and don't feel so insecure about it.


I hate this type of head-to-head argument. A player faces an entirely different lineup, can have a poor series or a good series, and this is irrelevant to how the opposition spinner is doing. We look at Lyon based on his home career in it's entirely and Ashwin based on how he performed when he toured without having to match them arbitrarily based on a series or two.

If SA toured Australia twice and Pollock performed better than McGrath both series, that should only be analysed as Pollock vs Australia and McGrath vs SA, not Pollock vs McGrath. They are facing a completely different set of challenges.

Once again, so willing to put up all sorts of excuses other than conditions. Despite it being the biggest factor in terms of player records vs oppositions/form. You do realise people don't bowl on the pitch for shits and giggles right?

Why can't bowlers be compared when conditions and time periods were the same? This has been done all the time lol, why are you upset in this matter?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Actually, I think we have made common understanding. What we call ATVG they consider low level ATG.

Stuart Binny was an ATG. Just a really low, low, low, low level ATG

 

[Xix2565]

Stuart Binny was an ATG. Just a really low, low, low, low level ATG

Stuart Binny is a All Time Lord (ATL). Different category, seems to be for Indians at the moment since we've yet to get nominations from other countries.

 

[subshakerz]

I mean compared by decades they are spin friendly: https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

Noticeably better than 2000s/10s/20s for most of the relevant eras involving those past spinners. And given the records of spinners from those countries across all eras, makes sense that spinners from the past got better conditions for their skillsets compared to now where pacers are a bigger focus for teams.

So you don't want to answer my questions, got it. Then it's easy to dismiss your points as basically being non-factors in discussing Ashwin as an ATG.

I don't like this raw average approach since there are so many mitigating factors like batting standards and quality of spinners available to just say it was just pitches. For example, why the sudden spike in averages in the 40s? Did only pitches flatten? Were pitches flatten in he 2010s than in the 2000s or were just better spinners available in the latter?

Doesn't seem strong enough evidence IMO.

 

[subshakerz]

Why can't bowlers be compared when conditions and time periods were the same? This has been done all the time lol, why are you upset in this matter?

Because they are facing different lineups for one. Also because if you are trying to determine who is better in Australia, a single series or test match performances for Lyon means far less than an entire home career where he may have performed well in those same conditions against better lineups multiple times. This should be obvious.

 

[Xix2565]

I don't like this raw average approach since there are so many mitigating factors like batting standards and quality of spinners available to just say it was just pitches. For example, why the sudden spike in averages in the 40s? Did only pitches flatten?

Doesn't seem strong enough evidence IMO.

Works for a lot of other people, considering you use this against Ashwin. The spike in 1940s occurred across pace and spin, it's one of the higher decades to bowl pace as well. So probably down to pitches right, since this involved every player good and bad. Just like how 2018 for example was a year where all pacers of varying quality suddenly became demons. That's not just down to batters collectively deciding they were all McGrath level batters for a year/decade or all bowlers deciding they were now going to be all time greats for this period. Skill levels shouldn't be valued more than conditions since conditions are far more influential on the record.

 

[Xix2565]

Because they are facing different lineups for one. Also because if you are trying to determine who is better in Australia, a single series or test match performances for Lyon means far less than an entire home career where he may have performed well in those same conditions against better lineups multiple times. This should be obvious.

So what? The lineups still play in the same conditions right? Is Lyon getting the CA pitch swapping technology for when only he bowls or what?

Sure, but this doesn't involve single Tests or series. It's across their careers, where their developments would also factor in. If it means Lyon doesn't seem as good as you feel then question your feelings first no? Why did you feel that this hypothesis was right? Same goes for Ashwin here also, this isn't an excuse or deflection on his record outside of the modern context of spin friendly conditions.

 

[subshakerz]

Works for a lot of other people, considering you use this against Ashwin. The spike in 1940s occurred across pace and spin, it's one of the higher decades to bowl pace as well. So probably down to pitches right, since this involved every player good and bad. Just like how 2018 for example was a year where all pacers of varying quality suddenly became demons. That's not just down to batters collectively deciding they were all McGrath level batters for a year/decade or all bowlers deciding they were now going to be all time greats for this period. Skill levels shouldn't be valued more than conditions since conditions are far more influential on the record.

I don't recall using this against Ashwin.

And again you are jumping on lower spinner averages over a decade means better spinning pitches. I just don't but that as the single factor, sorry. A very blunt metric.

And I disagree with your last sentence. Skill matters.

 

[subshakerz]

So what? The lineups still play in the same conditions right? Is Lyon getting the CA pitch swapping technology for when only he bowls or what?

Sure but playing a worse lineup or one in form can tilt the equation.

Sure, but this doesn't involve single Tests or series. It's across their careers, where their developments would also factor in. If it means Lyon doesn't seem as good as you feel then question your feelings first no? Why did you feel that this hypothesis was right? Same goes for Ashwin here also, this isn't an excuse or deflection on his record outside of the modern context of spin friendly conditions.

I am talking using head to head performances across the same tests/series they played as the metric for who is better in a specific country. I don't see the point of doing that if you have larger sample sizes of one player performing in those countries available to determine.

There is no way I am going to judge Ashwin in Australia against just Lyon vs India in Australia to determine if Lyon is worse or better when Lyon has an entire home career that I shouldn't ignore to ascertain his skill there.

 

[Xix2565]

I don't recall using this against Ashwin.

And again you are jumping on lower spinner averages over a decade means better spinning pitches. I just don't but that as the single factor, sorry. A very blunt metric.

And I disagree with your last sentence. Skill matters.

You keep saying he bowls in spin friendly conditions without bothering to examine in detail. Is it not the same thing?

Yeah, and I don't buy your argument that talent/skill level or general player form across a significant period of time caused the differences. Especially when the biggest factor is being ignored.

All the skill in the world won't save you from unhelpful conditions. You're still going to look worse regardless.

 

[Xix2565]

Sure but playing a worse lineup or one in form can tilt the equation.


I am talking using head to head performances across the same tests/series they played as the metric for who is better in a specific country. I don't see the point of doing that if you have larger sample sizes of one player performing in those countries available to determine.

There is no way I am going to judge Ashwin in Australia against just Lyon vs India in Australia to determine if Lyon is worse or better when Lyon has an entire home career that I shouldn't ignore.

Does it? Same lineup can look drastically different based on conditions, like the recent Australian side for example. And form and player quality is dictated by conditions more than the other way round.

Yeah, and in those H2H, Lyon at times seems poorer than expected, and Ashwin better. You'll never have larger sample sizes at all given that players will play most of their games at home regardless of eras, so this is the best you can do.

I didn't say you had to use just that, but it matters right? If you can't be better than your peers H2H then surely you're not going to be rated higher than them? Even using home records Ashwin is pretty dominant vs all visiting spinners in India, like Lyon is in Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

You keep saying he bowls in spin friendly conditions without bothering to examine in detail. Is it not the same thing?

No. I am not quoting raw averages to say all pitch conditions across all countries in an entire decade were spin friendly. I don't think there is a reliable statistical way to determine pitch quality for particular bowlers in isolation.

I think we are all watching the series in India the last decade and can attest that they are generally spin friendly as we are witnessing them firsthand. This isn't really a debated point here. If you want to be pedantic and pretend it's debatable I don't see the point arguing with you.

Yeah, and I don't buy your argument that talent/skill level or general player form across a significant period of time caused the differences. Especially when the biggest factor is being ignored.

Never made that argument. It's a combo of factors as I have said, including skill which matters, so isolating just pitches doesn't make sense.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, and in those H2H, Lyon at times seems poorer than expected, and Ashwin better. You'll never have larger sample sizes at all given that players will play most of their games at home regardless of eras, so this is the best you can do.

Except with Lyon we do have a large enough sample so we don't have to rely on H2H in Australia.

I didn't say you had to use just that, but it matters right? If you can't be better than your peers H2H then surely you're not going to be rated higher than them?

In only matters in regards to a spinner in that series and against that opposition.

Someone earlier showed Imran Khan beating Marshall and Hadlee H2H across series. Doesn't make him a better bowler nor more highly rated. A player can be slightly poorer H2H but generally better otherwise across a career.

 

[Xix2565]

No. I am not quoting raw averages to say all pitch conditions across all countries in an entire decade were spin friendly. I don't think there is a reliable statistical way to determine pitch quality for particular bowlers in isolation.

I think we are all watching the series in India the last decade and can attest that they are generally spin friendly as we are witnessing them firsthand. This isn't really a debated point here. If you want to be pedantic and pretend it's debatable I don't see the point arguing with you.


Never made that argument. It's a combo of factors as I have said, including skill which matters, so isolating just pitches doesn't make sense.

Except with Lyon we do have a large enough sample so we don't have to rely on H2H in Australia.


In only matters in regards to a spinner in that series and against that opposition.

Someone earlier showed Imran Khan beating Marshall and Hadlee H2H across series. Doesn't make him a better bowler nor more highly rated. A player can be slightly poorer H2H but generally better otherwise across a career.

I mean then how can you determine player quality with statistics? What makes player skill easier to determine over conditions?

I have seen Indian batters get big runs at home on these spin friendly conditions, comparable to people playing on good batting decks in other countries. It's far more debatable than you feel, and it's bizarre that you refuse to acknowledge this.

Yet you refuse to consider pitches as the biggest factor, so what's the point?

Do the arguments for Lyon not also apply for Ashwin, even possibly to a greater extent?

Doesn't seem to apply in general though, given what you've said about past spinners. And you can easily argue that Ashwin has had a better performance across his career than his peers, so what gives?

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

In a time when conditions were friendlier for spinners. So still not much of an answer, let alone the ones I've asked for.

O’Reilly played in the flattest pitch there has ever been bowling to arguably the greatest batting lineup ever assembled. Outside of tests, Tiger is The GOAT bowler in Sheffield Shield history. The reputation is at least similar and tbh better than Murali/ Warne etc.

From Wisden,

He played 27 Test matches and took 144 wickets - 102 of them Englishmen and the vital wicket of Walter Hammond ten times - averaging 22.59. But his figures have to be judged by the fact that all but one of his Tests came in the 1930s, when other bowlers were dominated by batsmen to an unprecedented extent. No one ever dominated O'Reilly. Even when England made 903 at The Oval in 1938, he bowled 85 overs and finished with figures of three for 178. And before that, he had secured the Ashes by taking five for 66 and five for 56 at Headingley.

 

[subshakerz]

I mean then how can you determine player quality with statistics? What makes player skill easier to determine over conditions?

Not disputing players stats.

I have seen Indian batters get big runs at home on these spin friendly conditions, comparable to people playing on good batting decks in other countries. It's far more debatable than you feel, and it's bizarre that you refuse to acknowledge this.

Yes runs mostly on the flatter decks in between the spin friendly wickets, on which their averages also dropped. I never claimed every pitch was spin friendly, but they were more common in this past decade.

But if your point was the last decade was mostly flat decks, ok. Or maybe youre just arguing for the sake of it.

Yet you refuse to consider pitches as the biggest factor, so what's the point?

You made a general claim about old timer pitches and I disputed the evidence for it.

Do the arguments for Lyon not also apply for Ashwin, even possibly to a greater extent?

What argument am I making for Lyon? Only that he had tougher home wickets and has done generally well. Dispute that if you wish.

Doesn't seem to apply in general though, given what you've said about past spinners. And you can easily argue that Ashwin has had a better performance across his career than his peers, so what gives?

Ashwin isnt even clearly better than Lyon to me based on career performance.

Let's stop arguing. This is going in circles.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Let's stop arguing. This is going in circles.

Nooooooooo