Can Cummins make it to the top 10 pacers ever?

[capt_Luffy]

You literally have destroyed your arguments for Barry here. Again when convenient, pundits can take a hike.

I don't want to get involved in one of your Imran debates now, but that's like extremely hypocritical......

 

[kyear2]

Bit of a silly thread given the guy has achieved almost everything in the sport. The stats don't tell the whole story in terms of importance of wickets.

Cummins might not be the greatest ever, but he's phenomenal at taking wickets in the big moments. I've been critical of his captaincy through the years but in terms of setting an example and leading from the front, he's amongst the best.

Top 10 is a big call though.

And the thread isn't about him as a cricketer but rather just his bowling.

I don't see too 10 right now, but he is quality and a great bowler and definitely above quantity guys like Jimmy.

I think he's a definite test great and there's some space in the top 10 pacers, we'll see.

Don't think he can pass

Marshall / McGrath / Hadlee / Steyn / Ambrose / Imran / Lillee / Donald

Then there's Lindwall, Holding, Garner, Wasim, Davidson, Trueman and of course Bumrah.

Doesn't mean he isn't among the greats though.

 

[subshakerz]

You do see the difference between receiving 100 or 90 votes and the consensus that implies rather than 10 right?

I'm assuming there's a difference implied.

Or maybe he is just poking fun at you having a hallowed view of Wisden until it comes to a ranking you don't like.

 

[kyear2]

@capt_Luffy @HouHsiaoHsien

I just want you to note for the record that despite multiple efforts to get @kyear2 to respond to this clarification of Imran's Australia record in response to his talking point, he has refused to do so and ignored it. This just shows that on this topic he is simply a bad faith actor who doesn't really care about modifying his views but just repeating himself as if he never heard a rebuttal.

Bad faith actor.

I think that at this point you have truly taken this too far and personally.

My response to Australia.

I started it in the other post, no other cricketer do we have to cut and revise records to fit into what's acceptable. We already ignore his first 4 tests in England and acknowledge he was great there.

No one is saying he's horrible in Australia, but again, as ai said in the Steyn thread, we aren't comparing him to Anderson and Broad, it's to the other guys in the ATG arena that he's in.

By 90 to 91 Marshall was no longer opening the bowling and was basically done.

I don't know who he played against those years or how he did, nor do I try to subtract it from his numbers.

Marshall played in India in '78 after 1 first class match because of WSC, I have never subtracted those numbers from his record in India to show he was ATG there. I genuinely don't know what they would be.

So your argument is to ignore his last tour there, fine, his average drops to 27.

You want to include his WSC numbers. Do you know why I've always focused on the WSC numbers for the 3 batsmen rather than the bowlers from the series? The Australia leg of WSC was extremely bowler friendly. Procter and Le Roux both had better averages and strike rates in that series and the WI bowlers on that leg also did very well. It was an extremely friendly bowler series. The WI leg was a slightly different story, but that's a story for another day.

So besides the above, that still doesn't explain why his numbers in the tests were 28. Yes he did well in that series, but why was it 28 outside of that?

But back to the WSC numbers. Since we're including them for Imran, are we also including them for one B.A. Richards?

So if we're including those, then he's up to 9 tests. Include the tests he played that were actually designated tests when he played and we're up to 14.

Not far from the 19 that O'Reilly played vs Australia or the 19 that Headley played before the war?

Is that what we're doing? Or is it just one way?

But back to the object of your affection.

Do you think that I believe that Imran was a bad or poor bowler? The dude that I have 6th all time as a fast bowler, and ahead of Donald, Lillee and Holding. Do you believe that I think he's horrible somehow?

I think he's an ATG bowler and top 10 in that category. I think he wasn't as great away as he was at home, there's no denying that, but still an ATG. You also assume that I don't already factor in all of these factors.

He's 6th because that's where I rank him. He's not better than Steyn not Ambrose in my opinion and just below them with the aforementioned Lillee, Donald, Wasim and possibly Lindwall and Holding. This by the way is where the forum also rates him, as you're so keen to use that as the standard.

Can I take leave of this thread now?

 

[kyear2]

Yeah that was a good series. I want him to have a good series in India and then no issues for me in SC.

Even if he doesn't, why does that impact his overall record?

It's one country.

 

[kyear2]

Sure but it matters to Mr Blind Average guy who I was responding to who doesn't know that.


You brought up low WPM for Imran in Aus.


He is exceptional in that he had periods where he is a pure bat and bowling AR on top of playing longer than any fast bowler ever. So we account for that.


Nowhere do I rate Imran on par with Sobers. Sobers is my no.2 and Imran is my no.5 greatest cricketer. The rest of what you wrote is therefore irrelevant.


No I argue it's just made up criteria because you know on merit Imran should be higher but you can't rate a cheat that high.

Now please respond to my points on Imran in Aus.

So you believe that the entire structure of how I rate players, and hence every player not in my top 8 is based purely on my "dislike" for Imran Khan.

OMG.

Are you serious right now?

 

[kyear2]

Pat Cummins definitely makes into the top 10 pacers ever. 100%!

He bowls relentless lengths.
He has a beautiful action. He looks like a Greek god too!
When he runs up, in bounds and springs, hair lopping, he looks like some cinematic ideal of limpid Australian athletic vitality.

Ok, so this may be even worse that the last post I responded to .

 

[kyear2]

You literally have destroyed your arguments for Barry here. Again when convenient, pundits can take a hike.

Can you comprehend?

I said it's different between how people rate players as batsmen or bowlers compared to how they rate them as cricketers.

As a batsman Barry ratings are incredibly high.

Bradman called him the best opener he saw.

Gower called him the best post war opener.

Lillee rates him with Garry and Viv and he bowled to them as well as to Chappell and Sunny.

Gower, Cricinfo, the Roar all have Barry in their second all time teams while Nicholas has him in his first.

What are you taking about.

 

[kyear2]

I don't want to get involved in one of your Imran debates now, but that's like extremely hypocritical......

Then you too need to read what was said.

 

[subshakerz]

So you believe that the entire structure of how I rate players, and hence every player not in my top 8 is based purely on my "dislike" for Imran Khan.

OMG.

Are you serious right now?

No just your ranking of Imran.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Then you too need to read what was said.

The hypocritical part is the same arguments you use for Barry can be used for Marshall against Lillee, to a much greater effect.

 

[kyear2]

Or maybe he is just poking fun at you having a hallowed view of Wisden until it comes to a ranking you don't like.

Or common sense on how there's gap of 10 vites between Bradman and Sobers, then 60 to the next player.

 

[subshakerz]

Even if he doesn't, why does that impact his overall record?

It's one country.

India is the toughest opposition country for Cummins so having a respectable record at least there is important.

 

[kyear2]

No just your ranking of Imran.

Objectively how is his different to literally every other player below (and note it's below) him.

 

[subshakerz]

Can you comprehend?

I said it's different between how people rate players as batsmen or bowlers compared to how they rate them as cricketers.

As a batsman Barry ratings are incredibly high.

Bradman called him the best opener he saw.

Gower called him the best post war opener.

Lillee rates him with Garry and Viv and he bowled to them as well as to Chappell and Sunny.

Gower, Cricinfo, the Roar all have Barry in their second all time teams while Nicholas has him in his first.

What are you taking about.

Sorry but this is nonsense. Marshall who you rate as no 3 ever is simply not valued as a cricketer by the same pundits you use to build your case for Barry as top 20 ATG.

This is pure hypocrisy.

 

[subshakerz]

Objectively how is his different to literally every other player below (and note it's below) him.

You prejudge not giving him a high ranking based on the reasons you disclosed before and the fit him into your list.

 

[kyear2]

The hypocritical part is the same arguments you use for Barry can be used for Marshall against Lillee, to a much greater effect.

Marshall came right after Lillee and literally the only country that rates Lillee higher is in Australia.

The difference that you're choosing to ignore is that Marshall even in Australia and by that metric is top 2.

Barry is still up there, but is ignored all together. That's the difference.

 

[subshakerz]

But back to the WSC numbers. Since we're including them for Imran, are we also including them for one B.A. Richards?

Yes by all means include Barry's WSC numbers. His career sample size is still too low for me tho.

So you agree then with Imran's WSC numbers he has a worldclass record in Australia, yes or no? 66 wickets in 13 test @24.

 

[kyear2]

India is the toughest opposition country for Cummins so having a respectable record at least there is important.

Ok, so his record there isn't respectable?

4 matches over 2 series, just under 3 wickets per match, a s/r of 60 and an average of 32.

How is that worse than 10 matches, hence bigger sample size, but also just under 3 wickets per match, a strike rate also over 60 and an average of 28?

Double standards?

 

[subshakerz]

Marshall came right after Lillee and literally the only country that rates Lillee higher is in Australia.

And England.