Jasprit Bumrah vs Bill O’Reilly

[kyear2]

don't know if this is meant to be a joke or not. the guy who played spin on uncovered wickets in a rainy nation and performed aren't good against spin...?

Mankad's average against England comes from bullying a England C batting lineup in a home series in 1951, he avwrages 34 in England, not to mention 30s was way flatter than 50s which is the toughest era for batting bar windies.

This is what happens when you rate purely by spreadsheet and seem to possess no interest in reading about the history of the game.

 

[kyear2]

Warne and Murali were tested against Quality players of spin but they both struggled against them. That doesn't help their cause very much.

Exactly this. The great players of spin had the upper hand vs them.

 

[DrWolverine]

Yeah O'Reilly might be the second greatest spinner ever

O’Reilly over Murali? Okay

 

[capt_Luffy]

This is what happens when you rate purely by spreadsheet and seem to possess no interest in reading about the history of the game.

You yourself are doing just that though; Mankad really has a pretty great record vs England. In his 1st tour he did pretty great vs Hammond, Hutton, Compton etc. In the home series he demolished a batting not really much shaggy, with the likes of Graveney, Watkins and Robertson. And while his 2nd English tour was a downer, still took a 5-fer in what is imo, one of the 5 Greatest match performance ever in a loss.

 

[capt_Luffy]

O’Reilly over Murali? Okay

All I will say, if O'Reilly is above Murali then he is above Warne as well.

 

[Johan]

O’Reilly over Murali? Okay

didn't say that, I only said it's possible he was 2, same way it's possible Hutton without world war 2 was BAB

 

[Johan]

You yourself are doing just that though; Mankad really has a pretty great record vs England. In his 1st tour he did pretty great vs Hammond, Hutton, Compton etc. In the home series he demolished a batting not really much shaggy, with the likes of Graveney, Watkins and Robertson. And while his 2nd English tour was a downer, still took a 5-fer in what is imo, one of the 5 Greatest match performance ever in a loss.

Mankad was good.

 

[capt_Luffy]

didn't say that, I only said it's possible he was 2, same way it's possible Hutton without world war 2 was BAB

Without WWII, O'Reilly would had been no 1 and overall top 3 bowler. I am more confident in this than Barry Richards ending with a 50+ Test average without apartheid.

 

[Johan]

Without WWII, O'Reilly would had been no 1 and overall top 3 bowler. I am more confident in this than Barry Richards ending with a 50+ Test average without apartheid.

a spinner? top 3? hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahha

 

[capt_Luffy]

Mankad was good.

That's why I commented that. But using him to downplay that English line-up is not right really. None of the top batsmen O'Reilly faced (except maybe Graveney, not sure if they played together) didn't play in Mankad's best series and while the 30s English tour was very good, it's not really damaging enough to question Hammond.

 

[capt_Luffy]

a spinner? top 3? hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahha

That's Tiger for ya. His record was just really that damn impressive, especially in Australian FC.

 

[Johan]

That's Tiger for ya. His record was just really that damn impressive, especially in Australian FC.

maybe, against good batting, he'd reach the level no spinner has ever reached























Joel Garner level

 

[kyear2]

As great as O Reilly was, he was not tested much. At best he played against 1 or 2 great batsmen. That’s about it. And exactly why I would not rate him ahead of modern day great like Bumrah.

He bowled in the original flat out era which was dominated by batsmen. Bumrah has played in not only a relatively live pitch era, but, and I don't know how long you've been watching cricket, but the worst era of batsmen I've seen.

There's this ridiculous narrative that older automatically means worse, context matters. Which NZ batsman from the India series would be looked at as even really good in the future? Even this Australian line up? It's Smith and he's in somewhat of a late career slump. The WI and others are minnow level and Bazball's results can vary wildly.

O'Reilly had an almost unparalleled FC career with a ridiculous average, in again a batting era. He was well tested

 

[sayon basak]

Here are some career defining innings of Bill O'Reilly vs England (Didn't include SA and NZ for obvious reasons):-

In Melbourne; 30 Dec 1932:-
O'Reilly got 10 wickets in this match; 5 in each innings. In the 2nd Innings, he got the wicket of Sutcliffe and Hammond pretty cheaply (33 off 53 and 23 off 43 respectively).

In Nottingham; June 08, 1934:-
O'Reilly got 11 wickets in this match. The 4'fer in the 1st innings included Cheap wicket of Hammond (25 off 79) and a pretty important wicket down the order of Patsy Hendren (79 off 247).7'fer in the second innings included the wicket of Sutcliffe (24 off 102) and Hendren (3 off 45).

In Manchester; 06 July 1934:-
Got a &'fer in the first innings, which included pretty important wickets of Hammond (4 off 2), Sutcliffe (63 off 135) and Hendren (132 off 248).

In Melbourne; Feb 26, 1937:-
Got 8 wickets in this match. Got a fifer in the first innings, which included the wicket of Hammond (14 off 54). Got another 3 wickets in the second innings, where he got Hammond (56 off 106) again.

In Leeds; July 22, 1938:-
Got his final 10 wicket in a match in this match. Got fifer in each innings. In the first innings, he got Hammond (76 off 149) and Compton (14 off 36). In the second innings he got Hammond out for a golden duck and also got the wicket of Compton (15off 20).

Individual batsman vs Bowler stats are incredibly hard to find, but O'Reilly got the wicket of Wally Hammond 10 times in test cricket. Pretty impressive I'd say.

 

[kyear2]

I have O'Reilly in my atg XI.

The main reasons I don't is Warne's batting, and he is also my gully. But just as importantly, if it's O'Reilly the keeper had to be Knott and that removes Gilly's batting then Imran also has to come in for Wasim.

So lot of domino effect for one change.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Tbf, find it pretty pointless to change the keeper over spinner

 

[capt_Luffy]

maybe, against good batting, he'd reach the level no spinner has ever reached























Joel Garner level

So you agree Garner>>>Warne??

 

[Johan]

So you agree Garner>>>Warne??

I've like 8 pacers over any spinner, but yeah if I'm going against a good batting lineup like say, 2000s India, or 70s-80s windies, or 2000s Aus — I'd rather have the Big Bird.

 

[sayon basak]

So you agree Garner>>>Warne??

Everybody does. Always did. Always will.

 

[kyear2]

Mankad was good.

No one said he wasn't