Is Ravindra Jadeja an ATG test bowler?

[Owzat]

You really believe Ashwin belongs with those guys? I find it hard that anyone cant see the daylight between them and the rest of the spinners.

I concur, whilst conditions can be very different cross eras eg Grimmett averaged 24.59 at home, 23.86 away, Jadeja relies heavily on spin friendly home wickets to maintain a 24 average (20.79 at home, not dragged up higher overall due to not being ATG at all and picked less overseas sparing him)

Ashwin does have a better balanced home-away split (60-40), but still home bias of 21.01 vs 29.90


sadly many phrases are worthless these days, bandied about too much, "worldie" in football, "ATG" the current fave in cricket it seems, and as I say of "world class" you'd struggle to get a consensus on not just definition but anything like enough agreement even as to how to measure it.... (and I don't mean stats necessarily, just how you decide who is and who ain't)


many would class Hadlee as an ATG all-rounder, whilst some case could be made for him his batting was very much his second string, still good, but TWO hundreds in 86 Tests is rather lacking even if you only compare with his own era (Botham, Kapil Dev, Imran Khan) and to be fair Wasim Akram is oft described thus but only registered THREE hundreds himself and indeed only seven fifties

just bowlers who are very good lower order batsmen, point being the term "all-rounder" is applied to almost anyone who can bat and bowl. in the loosest terminology yes they bat and bowl thus might be termed "all-rounders" but in truth were great bowlers, handy batsmen so surely term them as great bowlers rather than hinge their "greatness" as an all-rounder on their far stronger string.... I'd throw Marshall in as well, and whilst Kallis was a very good bowler he was a great batsman but many label all-rounder - nearly 300 wickets granted, but only five 5wis and ZERO 10wms.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm sure I said the other day, don't think it was in this thread, any "all time great" spinner would be in the side permanent fixture, no question of them not playing even if touring the roads.....

Thanks. Some sanity.

I have been making the same point. Can you think of any ATG player who regularly becomes disposable once he leaves home?

Such a fundamental, basic point that we have to debate it seems.

 

[Coronis]

I concur, whilst conditions can be very different cross eras eg Grimmett averaged 24.59 at home, 23.86 away, Jadeja relies heavily on spin friendly home wickets to maintain a 24 average (20.79 at home, not dragged up higher overall due to not being ATG at all and picked less overseas sparing him)

Ashwin does have a better balanced home-away split (60-40), but still home bias of 21.01 vs 29.90


sadly many phrases are worthless these days, bandied about too much, "worldie" in football, "ATG" the current fave in cricket it seems, and as I say of "world class" you'd struggle to get a consensus on not just definition but anything like enough agreement even as to how to measure it.... (and I don't mean stats necessarily, just how you decide who is and who ain't)


many would class Hadlee as an ATG all-rounder, whilst some case could be made for him his batting was very much his second string, still good, but TWO hundreds in 86 Tests is rather lacking even if you only compare with his own era (Botham, Kapil Dev, Imran Khan) and to be fair Wasim Akram is oft described thus but only registered THREE hundreds himself and indeed only seven fifties

just bowlers who are very good lower order batsmen, point being the term "all-rounder" is applied to almost anyone who can bat and bowl. in the loosest terminology yes they bat and bowl thus might be termed "all-rounders" but in truth were great bowlers, handy batsmen so surely term them as great bowlers rather than hinge their "greatness" as an all-rounder on their far stronger string.... I'd throw Marshall in as well, and whilst Kallis was a very good bowler he was a great batsman but many label all-rounder - nearly 300 wickets granted, but only five 5wis and ZERO 10wms.

lol so what’s your definition of an allrounder

 

[CricAddict]

After Marshall's debut, how did west indies manage to play all of Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Garner and Gibbs in all tests? Or did they not? Can anyone of those times clarify?

 

[CricAddict]

Benaud was only good for some of Davo's peak and he was ploughing a pretty lone furrow when Benaud was off so don't think he belongs there.

Sorry. I meant Thomson and not Davidson.

 

[kyear2]

After Marshall's debut, how did west indies manage to play all of Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Garner and Gibbs in all tests? Or did they not? Can anyone of those times clarify?

Roberts soon retired, Holding was a tad injury prone, Gibbs played in the 60's,

 

[kyear2]

I concur, whilst conditions can be very different cross eras eg Grimmett averaged 24.59 at home, 23.86 away, Jadeja relies heavily on spin friendly home wickets to maintain a 24 average (20.79 at home, not dragged up higher overall due to not being ATG at all and picked less overseas sparing him)

Ashwin does have a better balanced home-away split (60-40), but still home bias of 21.01 vs 29.90


sadly many phrases are worthless these days, bandied about too much, "worldie" in football, "ATG" the current fave in cricket it seems, and as I say of "world class" you'd struggle to get a consensus on not just definition but anything like enough agreement even as to how to measure it.... (and I don't mean stats necessarily, just how you decide who is and who ain't)


many would class Hadlee as an ATG all-rounder, whilst some case could be made for him his batting was very much his second string, still good, but TWO hundreds in 86 Tests is rather lacking even if you only compare with his own era (Botham, Kapil Dev, Imran Khan) and to be fair Wasim Akram is oft described thus but only registered THREE hundreds himself and indeed only seven fifties

just bowlers who are very good lower order batsmen, point being the term "all-rounder" is applied to almost anyone who can bat and bowl. in the loosest terminology yes they bat and bowl thus might be termed "all-rounders" but in truth were great bowlers, handy batsmen so surely term them as great bowlers rather than hinge their "greatness" as an all-rounder on their far stronger string.... I'd throw Marshall in as well, and whilst Kallis was a very good bowler he was a great batsman but many label all-rounder - nearly 300 wickets granted, but only five 5wis and ZERO 10wms.

We find agreement with a fair bit here, the term ATG is bandied around was too easily..

But Kallis was an all-rounder, I'll also venture to say so was Hadlee.

 

[kyear2]

I mean, people do that.

Incorrectly though.

 

[CricAddict]

Thanks. Some sanity.

I have been making the same point. Can you think of any ATG player who regularly becomes disposable once he leaves home?

Such a fundamental, basic point that we have to debate it seems.

I just did some research and found that Marshall struggled to hold a regular place in XI in his first few years due to the fearsome foursome Holding Roberts Garner and Croft. Since you believe it is a fundamental basic point that an atg should be in XI no matter what, I believe you will not vote for Marshall as atg in any voting going forward.

 

[Coronis]

The quartet only actually played 6 tests together, 2 in England in 1980 and 4 vs India in 1983. Funnily enough Roberts (the worst bowler of the 4 imo) was the best across those matches.

It bugs me a little too that people say struggled against the quartet etc. when its not actually them lol.

 

[kyear2]

I just did some research and found that Marshall struggled to hold a regular place in XI in his first few years due to the fearsome foursome Holding Roberts Garner and Croft. Since you believe it is a fundamental basic point that an atg should be in XI no matter what, I believe you will not vote for Marshall as atg in any voting going forward.

That is not true.

Marshall came into the team prematurely in '78 after 2 first class matches to cover for the loss of players die to WSC. He wasn't near ready and when he firmly entered in '83 he never left the lineup

 

[CricAddict]

That is not true.

Marshall came into the team prematurely in '78 after 2 first class matches to cover for the loss of players die to WSC. He wasn't near ready and when he firmly entered in '83 he never left the lineup

So what happened to Marshall between 78 and 83?

 

[kyear2]

The quartet only actually played 6 tests together, 2 in England in 1980 and 4 vs India in 1983. Funnily enough Roberts (the worst bowler of the 4 imo) was the best across those matches.

It bugs me a little too that people say struggled against the quartet etc. when its not actually them lol.

Yup, there was WSC, Croft getting banned, Roberts retiring, Holding getting hurt.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

So what happened to Marshall between 78 and 83?

he was dropped because he wasn’t good enough

similar to jadeja

 

[kyear2]

So what happened to Marshall between 78 and 83?

He was raw, he played a few more matches from '80 but his firm position wasn't established till '83

 

[subshakerz]

I just did some research and found that Marshall struggled to hold a regular place in XI in his first few years due to the fearsome foursome Holding Roberts Garner and Croft. Since you believe it is a fundamental basic point that an atg should be in XI no matter what, I believe you will not vote for Marshall as atg in any voting going forward.

Come on, I respect your cricket intelligence.

Someone at the early stage of their career being dropped ain't comparable to someone being dropped in their bowling prime. You know better than giving this argument.

 

[Coronis]

Come on, I respect your cricket intelligence.

Someone at the early stage of their career being dropped ain't comparable to someone being dropped in their bowling prime. You know better than giving this argument.

How do we know someone is in their prime until their career is over?

 

[ma1978]

Hypothetical - in India today you have a team of Marshall, Garner, Holding, Ashwin, Jadeja, Kuldeep

whi gets dropped?

 

[subshakerz]

How do we know someone is in their prime until their career is over?

When they reach a sustained period of worldclass form.

 

[subshakerz]

Hypothetical - in India today you have a team of Marshall, Garner, Holding, Ashwin, Jadeja, Kuldeep

whi gets dropped?

In India, Holding/Garner get rotated for the second pace bowler spot.

Outside, Ashwin/Jadeja/Kuldeep get rotated for the spinner spot.