Ravichandran Ashwin vs Jim Laker

[capt_Luffy]

I will concede Laker is poor in SA if you concede Ashwin is poor, or at least below average, in England.


Seriously? Averaging 50 with the ball and less than 2WPM? You're defending that?

In WI, Laker faced a strong lineup and ended up with respectable figures.


Sorry, Ashwin's home pitches neutralise this argument.

Nope. I am bashing Laker's SA run below that level even.

In England, Ashwin also faced respectable lineups. He did better in England than Laker in WI, as in the former; in both the series he played, 2 spinners were the highest wicket takers, Sonny Ramadhin in the first (blow him out of water) and Wilf Ferguson in the 2nd.....

And Laker's pitches were far more spinner friendly than Ashwin's.

If you just don't look at stats and logic, you will see that Laker's SA run was horrible for him. Ashwin in England is a change bowler, decent at keeping things tight and chirping wickets here and there. Though I will agree that his record in England is comparable to Laker in WI.

And how come Jadeja's sample size in Australia and SA is too small, but Laker in Australia is perfectly okay. Those two have staggeringly similar numbers in Australia....

 

[Xix2565]

Laker averaged 18.09 in home games where the average runs per wicket was 26.77. Ashwin averages 21.15 in home games where the average runs per wicket was 31.26.

 

[subshakerz]

Laker averaged 18.09 in home games where the average runs per wicket was 26.77. Ashwin averages 21.15 in home games where the average runs per wicket was 31.26.

Again, too broad a measure to make conclusions.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Again, too broad a measure to make conclusions.

Better than raw averages in this instance. Laker played in the easiest bowler's era since WWI.

 

[Xix2565]

Again, too broad a measure to make conclusions.

How is it too broad? Teams on average made about 268 runs per 10 wickets when Laker played in England, 313 when Ashwin played in India. I don't know about you, but if 313 is the average total per 10 wickets, that region on average does not produce a lot of bowling friendly wickets.

 

[subshakerz]

Nope. I am bashing Laker's SA run below that level even.

In England, Ashwin also faced respectable lineups. He did better in England than Laker in WI, as in the former; in both the series he played, 2 spinners were the highest wicket takers, Sonny Ramadhin in the first (blow him out of water) and Wilf Ferguson in the 2nd.....

This is a joke, sorry, I can't take what you say seriously after this. You are fine to relegate Ashwin to a stock bowler when convenient and then compare him favorably to an actual wicket-taker with multiple spells against a strong lineup.

If you just don't look at stats and logic, you will see that Laker's SA run was horrible for him. Ashwin in England is a change bowler, decent at keeping things tight and chirping wickets here and there.

Will you admit Ashwin in Aus and SA is a fail too? If not, then we shouldn't be arguing frankly. You're just arguing for a favorite then.

 

[capt_Luffy]

This is a joke, sorry, I can't take what you say seriously after this. You are fine to relegate Ashwin to a stock bowler when convenient and then compare him favorably to an actual wicket-takker.


Will you admit Ashwin in Aus and SA is a fail too? If not, then we shouldn't be arguing frankly. You're just arguing for a favorite then.

An actual wicket taker in spin friendly conditions who got outplayed by Wilf ****ing Ferguson and was benched in international tours for 7 goddamn years??? Yessss.

Ashwin in SA is horrible too. Australia is very below par, but have enough silver lining and match winning performances to not being classified as a total fail.

 

[subshakerz]

An actual wicket taker in spin friendly conditions who got outplayed by Wilf ****ing Ferguson and was benched in international tours for 7 goddamn years??? Yessss.

Actual wicket-taking against a quality lineup > stock bowling at 2WPM. Pretty fundamental and if I have to explain this, I dont see a point debating.

Ashwin in SA is horrible too. Australia is very below par, but have enough silver lining and match winning performances to not being classified as a total fail.

No. Averaging over 40 as a strikebowler is a fail as much as Ponting averaging 26 in India where his later success is never justification to sway this judgement. I know for a fact you wouldnt give this level of concession to other bowlers. Just be consistent, man. Ashwin did unrecoverable damage to his Aus record in early tours.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Actual wicket-taking against a quality lineup > stock bowling at 2WPM. Pretty fundamental and if I have to explain this, I dont see a point debating.


No. Averaging over 40 as a strikebowler is a fail as much as Ponting averaging 26 in India where his later success is never justification to sway this judgement. I know for a fact you wouldnt give this level of concession to other bowlers. Just be consistent, man. Ashwin did unrecoverable damage to his Aus record in early tours.

Actually, being outplayed by arguably bowlers of similar style, worse calibre<stock bowling @28 and 1.7 WPI. Pretty fundamental and if I have to explain this I don't see a point debating.

No, contributing in two series wins is more important than whatever **** he bowled early on. Only reading blindly into stats will lead you otherwise. I know for a fact you would be all over a bowler (spinner) helping win 2 series in Australia, no matter the average, as you have said multiple times winning matches and taking important wickets is more important to you for a spinner. Used that in favour of Herath, Lyon, Saqlain, Mushtaq Ahmed, Yasir Shah and Harbhajan multiple times. By your logic Kumble should be classified a fail in Australia in the class of someone like Dravid in SA.

 

[subshakerz]

Actually, being outplayed by arguably bowlers of similar calibre<stock bowling @28 and 1.7 WPI. Pretty fundamental and if I have to explain this I don't see a point debating.

We see spinners differently then. Stockbowling holds little stock with me. I rate spinners who take wickets.

No, contributing in two series wins is more important than whatever **** he bowled early on. Only reading blindly into stats will lead you otherwise. I know for a fact you would be all over a bowler (spinner) helping win 2 series in Australia, no matter the average, as you have said multiple times winning matches and taking important wickets is more important to you for a spinner. Used that in favour of Herath, Lyon, Saqlain, Mushtaq Ahmed, Yasir Shah and Harbhajan multiple times. By your logic Kumble should be classified a fail in Australia in the class of someone like Dravid in SA.

Yes, contributing. Not singlehandedly bowling India to a series win. Don't exaggerate what he did. He has no performance there comparable to Kumble in 2004. It's like saying 'yeah I know XYZ bat didnt score anything for two tours, but he did give some key 50s once to help us to this series win. Therefore he is a success in Australia'.

 

[Xix2565]

As usual, Laker being the worse bowler in home conditions is getting overlooked for lol sample size contributions which are a small part of his career. Hard to consider him better than Ashwin when he can't even dominate more on worse pitches than what Ashwin got on average.

 

[capt_Luffy]

We see spinners differently then. Stockbowling holds little stock with me. I rate spinners who take wickets.


Yes, contributing. Not singlehandedly bowling India to a series win. Don't exaggerate what he did. He has no performance there comparable to Kumble in 2004.

You can't say you rate spinners who take wickets and downplay Ashwin in Australia simultaneously as a total failure..... That's wrong. Even you agreed he had vital contribution in Australia, and Kumble is among the best there despite a glaring average. And for reference, Laker's WPI isn't extremely better than Ash as well (2.28, 1.63).

 

[subshakerz]

You can't say you rate spinners who take wickets and downplay Ashwin in Australia simultaneously as a total failure..... That's wrong. Even you agreed he had vital contribution in Australia, and Kumble is among the best there despite a glaring average. And for reference, Laker's WPI isn't extremely better than Ash as well (2.28, 1.63).

Difference is I dont rate his better 2018 and 2021 performances as highly as you do to overhaul his earlier failures. Anymore than Warne or Murali having the occasional moderately good series in India in the mid-2000s makes them successes there.

Overall, Ashwin was poor in Aus, yes with some good performances.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Kumble's late career wicket-hoarding in Aus is the most misleading of bowling stats. Throw enough crap at the wall, some it's bound to stick. Cast a wide enough net, something will eventually wriggle up to the surface.

 

[Xix2565]

Still haven't seen what makes Laker better. Is it bullying minnows away from home in friendlier conditions? Or being dropped often vs tougher matchups?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Difference is I dont rate his better 2018 and 2021 performances as highly as you do to overhaul his earlier failures. Anymore than Warne or Murali having the occasional moderately good series in India in the mid-2000s makes them successes there.

Overall, Ashwin was poor in Aus, yes with some good performances.

Not totally untrue, and wasn't like Laker did much more. He was the definition of mediocre in Australia and the series he played, Benaud took 27 scalps. He was woefully outplayed. You can say he and Jadeja are equal in Australia.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Kumble's late career wicket-hoarding in Aus is the most misleading of bowling stats. Throw enough crap at the wall, some it's bound to stick. Cast a wide enough net, something will eventually wriggle up to the surface.

His 2004 series was genuinely ATG material. He took 24 wickets in 3 games, hardly something that can be achieved bowling crap. The next best average after his (29) was 35.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Not this dumb Ashwin discussion again smh

 

[honestbharani]

Not this dumb Ashwin discussion again smh

Like there is something that is not this when salty is talking about Indian cricketers.

 

[subshakerz]

Still haven't seen what makes Laker better. Is it bullying minnows away from home in friendlier conditions? Or being dropped often vs tougher matchups?

Not being as bad away.