Are high averages a deal breaker for ATG bowlers?

[subshakerz]

Many posters here have a condition of ATG pacers needing a sub 25 average to have an acceptable 'great' record in a country or against an opponent.

But what if your SR and wicket yield is impressive but your average is slightly higher?

For example, Lillee averages 27 against WI while taking 55 wickets in 12 tests with a 48 SR. To me, I don't discount that as a worldclass record.

Steyn in Aus took 30 wickets in 6 tests (not counting his last injured one) @27 average with an SR of 49. Does the average need to be below 25 to be great though?

Meanwhile, I have seen Ambrose's record in certain countries be called great while taking hauls like 13 wickets in 4 tests @23 with a high SR in SA. Is this a bit of a strange standard we have adopted?

 

[Shady Slim]

subzy, please don't take this as a personal criticism because i like a lot what you bring to the forum and really enjoy reading the discussion that you promote:

i find the answer to this question, and to a lot of questions that you pose by thread title, is often: it depends. i think any poster who has a hard and fast line on below 25 average to call someone an ATG, and who isn't willing to budge that line no matter what other context dependent factors may influence how that bowler should be rated, is probably a giant moron. obviously there are borderline cases where it gets questionable but the existence of the twilight doesn't invalidate the distinction between the night and the day, such that i think we should all be able to have these sorta discussions without having to rely on arbitrary cutoffs

 

[OverratedSanity]

Anyone that doesn't consider the factors like pitch conditions/ opposition etc for those averages should not be taken seriously.

Agree that on occasion, a low average as a stat itself can be overrated in smaller samples especially if you aren't picking up enough wickets. Otherwise what's even the point of being a strike bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

subzy, please don't take this as a personal criticism because i like a lot what you bring to the forum and really enjoy reading the discussion that you promote:

i find the answer to this question, and to a lot of questions that you pose by thread title, is often: it depends. i think any poster who has a hard and fast line on below 25 average to call someone an ATG, and who isn't willing to budge that line no matter what other context dependent factors may influence how that bowler should be rated, is probably a giant moron. obviously there are borderline cases where it gets questionable but the existence of the twilight doesn't invalidate the distinction between the night and the day, such that i think we should all be able to have these sorta discussions without having to rely on arbitrary cutoffs

Thanks man, I accept this constructive critique. I do make these threads knowing the answer for most will be 'somewhere in between'. I merely want to bring those unspoken assumptions that come up in our comparison conversations to light to discuss and debate.

However, I will point out there are prominent posters who have literally made that sub-25 argument repeatedly. Don't want to name names but we all know who.

 

[bagapath]

not really... for example, while he was certainly very good, Philander with a sub 23 average doesnt become greater than Andy Roberts with a 26+ average.

Jadeja is very good but he doesn't become an ATG or a superior spinner to Warne despite averaging about 2 points better.

Warne is certainly an ATG. Possibly the greatest and there are many spinners who average less than him (Laker/ Ashwin/ Jadeja/ Grimmett) who dont compete for the top spot which rightfully belongs to him with possible challenges from Murali and Tiger.

 

[subshakerz]

not really... for example, while he was certainly very good, Philander with a sub 23 average doesnt become greater than Andy Roberts with a 26+ average.

Jadeja is very good but he doesn't become an ATG or a superior spinner to Warne despite averaging about 2 points better.

Warne is certainly an ATG. Possibly the greatest and there are many spinners who average less than him (Laker/ Ashwin/ Jadeja/ Grimmett) who dont compete for the top spot which rightfully belongs to him with possible challenges from Murali and Tiger.

Right. Those example are round of averages though. I am speaking more in terms of specific averages against countries or in countries.

 

[TheJediBrah]

specific averages against countries or in countries.

That is just Cricket Chat fetishisation

It's meaningless, samplesizelol in the vast majority of cases

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Sometimes ATGs can average 29.13 and that's fine.

 

[ataraxia]

You know CC's gone downhill when TJB's the voice of reason.

 

[Coronis]

What about overall averages? Is above 25 a dealbreaker for pacers?

 

[subshakerz]

What about overall averages? Is above 25 a dealbreaker for pacers?

I think it would be simply to make it easier to separate the real ATGs.

 

[honestbharani]

, is probably a giant moron.

Niiiice diss after the no disrespect line.