Fred Trueman vs Joel Garner

[sayon basak]

0 evidence

0 nuanced reasoning

7 posts of yap

Take a bow, sir. You have summarized the 13 page thread in 3 lines.

Johan>Tendulkar.

 

[Johan]

Ok so we believe it matured maybe decades later. It's not some unfathomable position.

Ok, so I believe it matured in 2015, thus Sachin's career is invalid.

 

[Line and Length]

Boycott in his mid 40s managed to score so much against the so called great bowlers of 80s. Hobbs was leagues above Boycott. And no none of those guys in 80s were quicker than Larwood.

A wonderful action.

 

[kyear2]

Arbitrary and random cutoff point clearly influenced by nothing objective and just random yap, while referencing sports with constant progression to give examples, if Sobers is better than Hobbs cuz muh era, Root is better than Viv cuz muh era, cry me a river

Where is your cut off point? Serous question.

Everyone has one, and it can always be seen as arbitrary.

 

[sayon basak]

Why would anyone dislike an era?

Don't know man. You should ask those who are doing it.

 

[Johan]

This is going off the rails a little. Why would anyone dislike an era.

because it's not when their favourite cricketers started playing cricket, Indians and Pakistanis have cricket starting in 60s and 50s for a reason

 

[subshakerz]

Ok, so I believe it matured in 2015, thus Sachin's career is invalid.

Yeah but you don't. You are just saying things because you seem irritated.

 

[sayon basak]

Ok, so I believe it matured in 2015, thus Sachin's career is invalid.

I believe it will never mature, making the whole sport invalid.

 

[kyear2]

I told you. Minimum international sample. One series isn't nearly enough.


Bottomline they aren't and even if they did it's a dubiously small sample. You really are stretching man.


Again, single first class games can't replace proven long term performance. You know my redline.

What is your number?

 

[sayon basak]

You are just saying things because you seem irritated.

Don't know, sounds like double standard.

 

[subshakerz]

Don't know, sounds like double standard.

Dude we just disagree on the starting point for when to take cricket results more seriously in the early 20th century. It's not a big deal.

 

[subshakerz]

What is your number?

Good question. Maybe a number of years for international cricket, like 5 to 7 before the 70s revolution, moreso after that. I have to think more about the specific number. I can get back to you.

 

[sayon basak]

Dude we just disagree on the starting point for when to take cricket results more seriously in the early 20th century.

And he said he doesn't take pre 2015 seriously. Where's the contradiction? He is equally consistent as you, I'd say.

It's not a big deal.

Agreed.

 

[subshakerz]

And he said he doesn't take pre 2015 seriously. Where's the contradiction? He is equally consistent as you, I'd say.

Seemed tongue in cheek, he can clarify.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

England stopped producing ATG cricketers after like 1970 so that’s probably when the standard of cricket improved significantly.

 

[sayon basak]

Seemed tongue in cheek, he can clarify.

@Johan were you insincere about that pre 2015 cutoff? No, right?

 

[sayon basak]

England stopped producing ATG cricketers after like 1970 so that’s probably when the modern era starts

This is all the thread needed.


A solid definition tho.

 

[Line and Length]

Comparing eras is a futile exercise. There are so many factors outside the skill ability of various players. Fitness, coaching/training, equipment, sports science, diet, playing conditions (and Laws of cricket), and training facilities have all changed over the decades. Transplant a player from a bygone era, give them the same conditions of today and their skill set would shine through.
I can recall, as a young lad in England, a first class player (I forget his name) delivering the mail on bicycle in winter. I can't imagine a modern player having to do this in the 'off season'.

 

[subshakerz]

Comparing eras is a futile exercise. There are so many factors outside the skill ability of various players. Fitness, coaching/training, equipment, sports science, diet, playing conditions (and Laws of cricket), and training facilities have all changed over the decades. Transplant a player from a bygone era, give them the same conditions of today and their skill set would shine through.
I can recall, as a young lad in England, a first class player (I forget his name) delivering the mail on bicycle in winter. I can't imagine a modern player having to do this in the 'off season'.

Yeah but would there be period prehistoric enough that transplanting from then to now seems bridge too far?

 

[Johan]

England stopped producing ATG cricketers after like 1970 so that’s probably when the standard of cricket improved significantly.

West Indies stopped producing ATG cricketers after like 1995 so that's probably when the standard of cricket improved significantly.