Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram

[Rob Wesley]

All formats combined, Wasim.

Tests - Steyn.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Dude you are the bloke who tried to convert missed slip catches into runs, need I remind you?

Yeah him responding "brilliant post" with no irony to someone who calculated the value of drops is one of the funniest things I've seen on this site. He should never be allowed to forget it imo.

 

[h_hurricane]

They both were meh. Neither could hit the deck hard hence took the less ***y option of swinging the ball with moderate success.

 

[subshakerz]

Out of his 414 Test wickets, 119 were lbw and 102 were bowled. This means approximately 53.6% of Wasim wickets came without help from fielders

Wasim probably had around 30-50 extra drop catches than any other ATG bowlers would face in their career. I do think its something to keep in mind when you look at his slightly less impressive stats.

 

[smash84]

Yeah him responding "brilliant post" with no irony to someone who calculated the value of drops is one of the funniest things I've seen on this site. He should never be allowed to forget it imo.

Agreed.

Quite ridiculous, even by his standards.

 

[kyear2]

Dude you are the bloke who tried to convert missed slip catches into runs, need I remind you?

Yet suddenly asking for an estimate of impact on bowler average is a bridge too far?

We have the receipts. Anyone can revisit that thread and see the exchanges and your dodging like you do for countless points.

Anyways, we know the shtick with you. You make up your ranking first, then come up with arguments later, and whenever you get cornered you deflect.

Post them.

You posted a thread, one if multiple trying to give extra credit to your guys.

One was should Asian bowlers be given more credit and have their averages adjusted, then had one about Marshall and McGrath having advantages, despite the fact that literally all of the great fast bowlers from Davidson to Lillee had magnificent cordons to support them.

And re that sad ass final statement, you come up with tours and find hoops to jump over to justify yours.

I've acknowledged Wasim had his early trials and late career health challenges. Doesn't mean I have to rate him above Lillee or Donald, who I believe are better.

You only point of your pissy rants is the need for me to agree with you.

And for the love of God please stop tagging me or asking me stupid ass questions. I legitimately trying to avoid I treating with you, and your disingenuous, dishonest and bad faith arguments that surrounds for the most part surrounds one ****ing player.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Post them.

You posted a thread, one if multiple trying to give extra credit to your guys.

One was should Asian bowlers be given more credit and have their averages adjusted, then had one about Marshall and McGrath having advantages, despite the fact that literally all of the great fast bowlers from Davidson to Lillee had magnificent cordons to support them.

And re that sad ass final statement, you come up with tours and find hoops to jump over to justify yours.

I've acknowledged Wasim had his early trials and late career health challenges. Doesn't mean I have to rate him above Lillee or Donald, who I believe are better.

You only point of your pissy rants is the need for me to agree with you.

And for the love of God please stop tagging me or asking me stupid ass questions. I legitimately trying to avoid I treating with you, and your disingenuous, dishonest and bad faith arguments that surrounds for the most part surrounds one ****ing player.

Dude, I just revisited the Thread. Your literal first post was that the comparison was non sense and ball tampering even that difference in Australia and Pakistan's 90s slip catching out..... Particularly egregious was a post that the slippers Wasim and McGrath got had nothing to do with luck. Given you started a thread with the literal premise of Sobers vs Tendulkar but Sobers not bowling, batting at 4 and taking 100+ catches, and later admitting that the thread was mostly to talk of slip catching benefits; your response was indeed a bit strange.

 

[capt_Luffy]

An interesting concept for a thread, "Would you trade the 90s corridor of Australia for Pakistan given you can bring bottle caps on the field".....

 

[kyear2]

Sure I already told you that several times. There are always loose spots in most average sides for blokes who are shaky on their own specialist standards, like Rhodes or Harper, but fielding gives them a way in.

However, I also said as a general rule, top fielding sides don't pick individuals for field positions, but they have those high standards anyways and fielders evolve to occupy those positions.

This is just ultimate condescending bull ****. And Sobers kept his spot initially because of his catching, Simpson made it into the team for slip fielding, Hooper kept his place because of it.

Great team prioritize it, as with Simpson, Lindwall had chances go a begging and they brought in a specialists. Guys like Hammond are known and rated for his catching more than his blowing and not an insignificant reason why many rated him a top 10 player of all time.

Even in the great series that just ended, Australia brought in a great slip and immediately slotted him into the cordon and it paid immediate dividends. Not to add that the games Australia caught well, they won. The games they dropped crucial chances, for example off Jaiswal and K.L. , they either lost or lost the opportunity to press for victory.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah him responding "brilliant post" with no irony to someone who calculated the value of drops is one of the funniest things I've seen on this site. He should never be allowed to forget it imo.

So which was it, did I bright up or try to place a number on it, or did I respond to a post.

The three of you are so full of **** sometimes.

 

[kyear2]

Agreed.

Quite ridiculous, even by his standards.

And what are your standards?

 

[kyear2]

Dude, I just revisited the Thread. Your literal first post was that the comparison was non sense and ball tampering even that difference in Australia and Pakistan's 90s slip catching out..... Particularly egregious was a post that the slippers Wasim and McGrath got had nothing to do with luck. Given you started a thread with the literal premise of Sobers vs Tendulkar but Sobers not bowling, batting at 4 and taking 100+ catches, and later admitting that the thread was mostly to talk of slip catching benefits; your response was indeed a bit strange.

It had nothing to do with luck. How was that egregious?

And there was nothing to admit. The literal purpose of the thread with Sobers and Sachin was was about slip catching and what was the drop off that you all were willing to accept for a viable slip catcher.

The responses were predictably stupid, and this is why the winging on Wasim's slip catching support is so baffling considering most of you given a chance would have done nothing to solve it.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It had nothing to do with luck. How was that egregious?

And there was nothing to admit. The literal purpose of the thread with Sobers and Sachin was was about slip catching and what was the drop off that you all were willing to accept for a viable slip catcher.

The responses were predictably stupid, and this is why the winging on Wasim's slip catching support is so baffling considering most of you given a chance would have done nothing to solve it.

So you still think the corridor Wasim got and the one McGrath got aren't because they were lucky but it was their skill issue??

To put it simply, your problem in this scenario is just that, you will bring in how big a factor slip played in the success of Great bowlers, but have no qualms with shoving when slip let someone down under the rug.

 

[peterhrt]

So which was it, did I bright up or try to place a number on it, or did I respond to a post.

I think the discussion originated from this article by Charles Davis - The Search for ‘Missing’ Stats: Dropped Catches in Test Cricket.

https://sportstats.com.au/articles/droppedcatches2016.pdf

People had been trying to place an actual run value on dropped catches and misfields for a long time. English selectors received criticism for picking poor fielding sides going all the way back to Grace, who reminded them: "A run saved is a run made."

 

[kyear2]

I think the discussion originated from this article by Charles Davis - The Search for ‘Missing’ Stats: Dropped Catches in Test Cricket.

https://sportstats.com.au/articles/droppedcatches2016.pdf

People had been trying to place an actual run value on dropped catches for a long time. English selectors received criticism for picking poor fielding sides going all the way back to Grace, who reminded them: "A run saved is a run made."

Kimber also tried to do a study on it, at the end of the day though I think it can be accepted that dropped catches can be costly not only in numbers but also on the impact on the bowler and team overall.

I also know Jaiswall's drop cost an entire test, Smith's catch cost the opportunity to force the follow on, so yeah, you try to get the best guys there as possible.

 

[kyear2]

So you still think the corridor Wasim got and the one McGrath got aren't because they were lucky but it was their skill issue??

To put it simply, your problem in this scenario is just that, you will bring in how big a factor slip played in the success of Great bowlers, but have no qualms with shoving when slip let someone down under the rug.

You're totally misinterpreting my response.

By saying it wasn't luck is that one team has always prioritized slip catching and ensured that their teams were well equipped. The other two this day never have. That's what I mean by saying it wasn't luck.

And no, I have never shoved it under the rug, it's important as hell. What Subz wanted me to do was to adjust Akram's number and say he was top 10. There's other factors to it, but yes, Wasim was severely impacted by not having a great cordon.

The problem I have with you and others though is that, you would complain about Wasim, but then say that there's no way you're even choosing a (non bowling) Sobers over Sachin, even if there were no other good options for the cordon. Sobers over Sachin, they're practically identical

Yet somehow wouldn't select a bowler if he can't bat.

So yeah, don't then say that I disregard it when it's not useful. You don't rate it at all.

 

[morgieb]

Except @morgieb.

I don't get it.

 

[subshakerz]

This is just ultimate condescending bull ****. And Sobers kept his spot initially because of his catching, Simpson made it into the team for slip fielding, Hooper kept his place because of it.

Great team prioritize it, as with Simpson, Lindwall had chances go a begging and they brought in a specialists. Guys like Hammond are known and rated for his catching more than his blowing and not an insignificant reason why many rated him a top 10 player of all time.

Even in the great series that just ended, Australia brought in a great slip and immediately slotted him into the cordon and it paid immediate dividends. Not to add that the games Australia caught well, they won. The games they dropped crucial chances, for example off Jaiswal and K.L. , they either lost or lost the opportunity to press for victory.

It seems you skipped the second part of my response. Teams with great fielding standards won't pick players for specific fielding positions but they evolve into those positions.

 

[subshakerz]

And there was nothing to admit. The literal purpose of the thread with Sobers and Sachin was was about slip catching and what was the drop off that you all were willing to accept for a viable slip catcher.

The Sobers and Sachin slip thread was probably the most embarassing and confusing example of recent threads you have to promote your slip agenda to upgrade guys like Kallis.

You're totally misinterpreting my response.

By saying it wasn't luck is that one team has always prioritized slip catching and ensured that their teams were well equipped. The other two this day never have. That's what I mean by saying it wasn't luck.

BS you were trying to blame Wasim as an individual for his team not having higher slip standards. It was ridiculous.

And no, I have never shoved it under the rug, it's important as hell. What Subz wanted me to do was to adjust Akram's number and say he was top 10. There's other factors to it, but yes, Wasim was severely impacted by not having a great cordon.

The problem is you never stop going on and on about the importance of slips. You even create threads with the purpose of ranking others ahead on that score.

But when someone corners you and ask you to give an estimate about its actual impact, you wilt and run away because you don't want to be on the record about the implications of your argument. You literally told me when I argued slips are a tertiary skill that you have no way to show how they are as important as runs or wickets except for your anecdotes.

Reminds me how when I asked you about what percentage of games are impacted by captaincy, and you mentioned 10 or more percent, and then immediately walked away from your answer because you realised you are rating captaincy as a skill higher than slips.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Kimber also tried to do a study on it, at the end of the day though I think it can be accepted that dropped catches can be costly not only in numbers but also on the impact on the bowler and team overall.

I also know Jaiswall's drop cost an entire test, Smith's catch cost the opportunity to force the follow on, so yeah, you try to get the best guys there as possible.

You responded and agreed to a post that cited a numerical estimation of drop catches. http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/thr...-as-more-important.92140/page-11#post-5213460

I thought it was a great post from @peterhrt tbh. But the fact that you wholeheartedly agreed with the post despite you in the past having repeatedly used the "but we can't quantify drop catches" reason to downplay how much Wasims stats may have suffered due to having a poor cordon was so ridiculous it made me chuckle.