Ravichandran Ashwin vs Clarrie Grimmett

[capt_Luffy]

That's lazy. It's clear much of the rep is unearned in some cases.

You will never find me downplay how good O'Reilly or Hobbs were because their statistical records are beyond reproach and prove that their rep was warranted.

Grimmett was a fraud. You know it. Set aside your biases. You aren't this stupid . Well you are but you can choose to not be today.

Not agree with the fraud notion btw. He was the 2nd best bowler in the inter war period.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Did you really sneaked in Cameron (glory to fame as batsman being striking Verity a few fours, ATG keeper though) and Viljoen as strong batsmen?? Nourse was great and did ATG stuff in that series against a rampaging Grum and O'Reilly, Mitchell did okay but below par and Rowan was not on their level. That's much worse than the average lineups Ashwin plays as were the batsmen with him. Ashwin bowling at dust balls at home is a very bad myth, proved by the record of visiting spinners and it's not like Grimmett averages sub 25 at home either. Grimmett did very well against Headley, but much of his trouble arise never having played a leg spinner of similar calibre.

Again, by context Grum did well vs England, but hardly otherworldly. If someone rates Grimmett higher, I am fine by it these two are very close. But saying it's a no match is simply wrong.

70 percent of Ashwin’s wickets have came in home in turners compared to 48 percent for Grimmett.

A lineup comprising 6 decent batsman including 2 in the top 50, Nourse probably top 30 ish isn’t worse than the average batting lineups that Ashwin has bowled to. Mitchell did below par in that series because a guy took 44 wickets. WI had a bad batting lineup but that included arguably a top 10 ever batsman whom Grimmett troubled. No slow leggie other than Warne has been of that quality anyway. Grimmett is a clearly superior bowler imho.

 

[capt_Luffy]

70 percent of Ashwin’s wickets have came in home in turners compared to 48 percent for Grimmett.

A lineup comprising 6 decent batsman including 2 in the top 50, Nourse probably top 30 ish isn’t worse than the average batting lineups that Ashwin has bowled to. Mitchell did below par in that series because a guy took 44 wickets. WI had a bad batting lineup but that included arguably a top 10 ever batsman whom Grimmett troubled. No slow leggie other than Warne has been of that quality anyway. Grimmett is a clearly superior bowler imho.

Let's disagree then. It wasn't like Grum's average was comparable to Ashwin for me to give him a free pass; instead he averages close to 30 at home. SA really had 3 decent batsmen (Viljoen averages low 30s in a batting era) , and that too mainly Nourse and Mitchell and only Mitchell underperformed, Nourse was ATG. O'Reilly also was brilliant.

 

[Xix2565]

in home in turners

Average runs per wicket was around 31. What exactly is the definition of a turner here again?

 

[ma1978]

Ridiculous to just stereotype India as a dust bowl, when pace has done just as well as spin for several years and Indian batsmen do just fine,

 

[shortpitched713]

Yes it is lazy. I just find pre-war cricketers boring and don't know how reliable any of their records are, which is why I rarely comment on them.

They're not. Which is why I rarely enter into any conversations about him.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Ridiculous to just stereotype India as a dust bowl, when pace has done just as well as spin for several years and Indian batsmen do just fine,

Sometimes the spin friendly nature of the pitches is very exaggerated

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Yes it is lazy. I just find pre-war cricketers boring and don't know how reliable any of their records are, which is why I rarely comment on them.

Guys like Bill O’Reilly and Sydney Barnes are opposite of boring

 

[ataraxia]

Grimmett averaged 30+ against the only strong team of his era. He also doesn't pass the eye test at all. From most footage, seems to be a very slow floaty spinner who doesn't put his body into his action much. Overrated. I'll take Ashwin.

New Zealand's 2nd greatest ever player

 

[shortpitched713]

New Zealand's 2nd greatest ever player

Where'd Kane Williamson enter into this conversation?

 

[PlayerComparisons]

New Zealand's 2nd greatest ever player

Rachin > Grimmett

 

[kyear2]

Grimmett averaged 30+ against the only strong team of his era. He also doesn't pass the eye test at all. From most footage, seems to be a very slow floaty spinner who doesn't put his body into his action much. Overrated. I'll take Ashwin.

Don't have a dog in this fight, was legitimately interested.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Do you think averaging 32 against the only strong team in your time is impressive? Grimmett pumped up his numbers by averaging sub 20 against minnows which comprised of half of his games. Grimmett is not O'Reilly.

Many of these jurassic era fossils have fraudulent records by modern nitpicky standards. None of you have the willpower to look this up nor the integrity to admit this. I'll take HTB Ashwin over this minnow bashing hack fraud any day no joke.

Destroying that SA line up away in non- spin friendly conditions can’t be any worse than taking over 70 percent of wickets in turners at your home.

That wasnt just a good batting lineup, that was an ATG Batting lineup. Arguably the best ever fielded by any country. At least as strong of batting lineup than the one that smashed both Murali and Warne

England beat Australia, England won by 675 runs

ENG 122 & 66 vs AUS 521 & 342/8d - England won by 675 runs in Brisbane, England tour of Australia 1928, November 30 - December 05, 1928

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

He also doesn't pass the eye test at all. From most footage, seems to be a very slow floaty spinner who doesn't put his body into his action much. Overrated. I'll take Ashwin.

How good would Steve Smith look in footage?

How good would Bumrah’s laughable bowling action with such small run up look had he played in 1930s?

 

[h_hurricane]

Destroying that SA line up away in non- spin friendly conditions can’t be any worse than taking over 70 percent of wickets in turners at your home.

That wasnt just a good batting lineup, that was an ATG Batting lineup. Arguably the best ever fielded by any country. At least as strong of batting lineup than the one that smashed both Murali and Warne

England beat Australia, England won by 675 runs

ENG 122 & 66 vs AUS 521 & 342/8d - England won by 675 runs in Brisbane, England tour of Australia 1928, November 30 - December 05, 1928

www.espncricinfo.com

What kind of example is this ?
9/298 in a match which Aussies lost by 675 runs lol. He bowled 84 overs to get those many.

Ashwin will be bashed to no end if he turns up with that kind of a show. Probably already did something like that in 2011-12 or 2014-15 series and has been endlessly ridiculed.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Destroying that SA line up away in non- spin friendly conditions can’t be any worse than taking over 70 percent of wickets in turners at your home.

That wasnt just a good batting lineup, that was an ATG Batting lineup. Arguably the best ever fielded by any country. At least as strong of batting lineup than the one that smashed both Murali and Warne

England beat Australia, England won by 675 runs

ENG 122 & 66 vs AUS 521 & 342/8d - England won by 675 runs in Brisbane, England tour of Australia 1928, November 30 - December 05, 1928

www.espncricinfo.com

Which lineup are you talking about? SA's or Australia's? SA's had at most 2-3 very good batsman mixed in with poor players.

Australia's was great of course, and his numbers were pretty mediocre in those. Comparing that with Murali/Warne's failures against India doesn't work because they both were quite successful against other excellent batting lineups of their time. Grimmett faced just a single strong lineup and he didn't do great against them.

 

[Coronis]

Which lineup are you talking about? SA's or Australia's? SA's had at most 2-3 very good batsman mixed in with poor players.

Australia's was great of course, and his numbers were pretty mediocre in those. Comparing that with Murali/Warne's failures against India doesn't work because they both were quite successful against other excellent batting lineups of their time. Grimmett faced just a single strong lineup and he didn't do great against them.

I believe his point was that Grimmett had to face one of the best batting lineups of all time for the majority of his career - that England lineup really was stacked - and considering that and the overall batting friendly pitches during his time, an average of 32 is not as bad as it looks from pure numbers. Which of course, rightly shows just how great O’Reilly’s performance was too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Which of course, rightly shows just how great O’Reilly’s performance was too.

That's kind of what I'm getting at. There was a spinner in that era that managed to succeed against the same great team. Like I said, you're never going to see me disparage O'Reilly's record or his status as a great. It wouldn't be an issue if Grimmett faced other genuinely strong teams and did well. If the competition is this limited (virtually half your games against poor teams) and you're merely ok against the good one , then well....

There's clearly a big question mark here whether his bowling style was effective against truly strong opposition. Don't think Ashwin is automatically better but it is curious to me that an obvious hole like this is so easily swept under the rug for a player we've never watched. It's just not rational.

 

[Coronis]

That's kind of what I'm getting at. There was a spinner in that era that managed to succeed against the same great team. Like I said, you're never going to see me disparage O'Reilly's record or his status as a great. It wouldn't be an issue if Grimmett faced other genuinely strong teams and did well. If the competition is this limited (virtually half your games against poor teams) and you're merely ok against the good one , then well....

There's clearly a big question mark here whether his bowling style was effective against truly strong opposition. Don't think Ashwin is automatically better but it is curious to me that an obvious hole like this is so easily swept under the rug for a player we've never watched. It's just not rational.

I mean, its not being swept under the rug I believe. Thats why there’s conversations about Grimmett, Ashwin, Laker, Verity etc. they all have big question marks imo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I mean, its not being swept under the rug I believe. Thats why there’s conversations about Grimmett, Ashwin, Laker, Verity etc. they all have big question marks imo.

Hmm, the whole discussion was triggered by him saying Grimmett was "easily" better.

A guy like O'Reilly is easily better, yes. Claiming it for Grimmett is very dubious and makes it feel like clear flaws are being swept aside.