• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ashwin vs Kumble

sayon basak

International Regular
So it appears that O'Reilly is no longer being considered?
This is what I thought too. Kimber just mentioned him once in the whole video, and then didn't consider him at all for the stats. In fact, he chose Grimmett over O'Reilly for the stats Analysis.
 

sayon basak

International Regular
I mean O'Reilly is considered in Jarrod's deep dive video, not in the Talksports short discussion. Would be nice to try and understand what's being said where and when sometime soon.
iirc, O'Reilly was only mentioned once in the video, and wasn't included in the analysis.
 

sayon basak

International Regular
That's just a difference in evaluation between some of the forum members here and Jarrod. Doesn't mean he wasn't mentioned. Maybe there's an overrating of O'Reilly going on here...
He wasn't even considered in the statistical analysis.

Look at all these lists:-

In all of this lists, O'Reilly is rated as the 3rd greatest spinner. So, all of them are overrating him; and Jarrod is the only one rating him fairly by fully ignoring him in the analysis?
 

kyear2

International Coach
I mean O'Reilly is considered in Jarrod's deep dive video, not in the Talksports short discussion. Would be nice to try and understand what's being said where and when sometime soon.
I watched both, he basically said he was a below the threshold for wickets taken.

So what's your point?
 

Xix2565

International Regular
He wasn't even considered in the statistical analysis.

Look at all these lists:-

In all of this lists, O'Reilly is rated as the 3rd greatest spinner. So, all of them are overrating him; and Jarrod is the only one rating him fairly by fully ignoring him in the analysis?
I mean it's not like they're conducting any analyses there lol. Why is it worth considering?

I watched both, he basically said he was a below the threshold for wickets taken.

So what's your point?
That you don't really seem to want to acknowledge that you go through things unless specifically pressed. You'd rather we think you're lazy for some reason.
 

kyear2

International Coach
He wasn't even considered in the statistical analysis.

Look at all these lists:-

In all of this lists, O'Reilly is rated as the 3rd greatest spinner. So, all of them are overrating him; and Jarrod is the only one rating him fairly by fully ignoring him in the analysis?
That Indian list was objectively bad, but that aside, yes he was the 3rd best spinner of all time, some might even argue higher.

What would be instructive would be to see who was rated 4th.

And alongside O'Reilly on literally all of those lists was a certain South African opener, and quite highly on them as well.
 

kyear2

International Coach
Meaning it's a valid ground to disqualify O Reilly. I think maybe a bit too strict tho.
It's idiotic. He was the best bowler in the world, and greater than Jimmy Anderson would ever be. Hence why spread sheets would never be a good or sole way to rate cricketers.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
It's idiotic. He was the best bowler in the world, and greater than Jimmy Anderson would ever be. Hence why spread sheets would never be a good or sole way to rate cricketers.
It's not spreadsheet. It's a minimum career sample of cricket to qualify. It's perfectly valid and I am surprised you are disagreeing.

And alongside O'Reilly on literally all of those lists was a certain South African opener, and quite highly on them as well.
Dude stop bringing up unrelated cricketers in different threads. We get it, you love Barry.
 

kyear2

International Coach
It's not spreadsheet. It's a minimum career sample of cricket to qualify. It's perfectly valid and I am surprised you are disagreeing.


Dude stop bringing up unrelated cricketers in different threads. We get it, you love Barry.
If you're the best bowler in the world for 7 years in the flattest of eras, how are you disqualified from anything?

I made an observation and I mentioned it, think that's still allowed.

I made a couple others that I could share if you like.
 

Top