Curtly Ambrose vs Sunil Gavaskar

[DrWolverine]

A shorter career focused on his peak and with a higher than usual number of home tests.

That’s why I do not rate him ahead of those four.

 

[subshakerz]

How is Ambrose’s record better at home than Donald’s record at home?

Ambrose
52 matches. 203 wickets.
Avg of 21.20. SR of 55.79.
11 5-Fer

Donald
38 matches. 177 wickets.
Avg of 21.64. SR of 45.
12 5-Fer

It isnt though Donald had it easier.

 

[Rob Wesley]

These comparisons are baseless. Both are undisputed ATG test cricketers and among the best of their generation. Since their primary skills are different, it doesn’t make sense to compare.

 

[DrWolverine]

It isnt though Donald had it easier.

It’s like their overall record.

Donald was more attacking and that’s why he took more wickets per match so better strike rate. But sometimes could leak runs as well.

Ambrose was more difficult to play and leaked less runs and had lesser average. But often wasn’t that attacking and hence worse strike rate

 

[Bolo.]

It’s like their overall record.

Donald was more attacking and that’s why he took more wickets per match so better strike rate. But sometimes could leak runs as well.

Ambrose was more difficult to play and leaked less runs and had lesser average. But often wasn’t that attacking and hence worse strike rate

It's not just a style preference thing when it comes to home record.

Donald has better numbers. Ambrose had tougher conditions. It's hard to quantify numerically exactly how much conditions are worth.

 

[subshakerz]

It's not just a style preference thing when it comes to home record.

Donald has better numbers. Ambrose had tougher conditions. It's hard to quantify numerically exactly how much conditions are worth.

I am aware WI had the occasional slow wicket but I wouldn't classify the home conditions entirely over the course of his career as tough. And an ATG pacer is expected to adapt and excel at home. Donald just has a notably better home record even with conditions in his favor.

 

[subshakerz]

It’s like their overall record.

Donald was more attacking and that’s why he took more wickets per match so better strike rate. But sometimes could leak runs as well.

Ambrose was more difficult to play and leaked less runs and had lesser average. But often wasn’t that attacking and hence worse strike rate

Their real difference is Australia. If Donald did well against Aus I think he would be comfortably ahead of Ambrose.

 

[OverratedSanity]

True but McGraths failings have been more at home vs SA

You keep saying this as though that makes it ok

 

[subshakerz]

You keep saying this as though that makes it ok

Nope it ain't ok. I think on flatter wickets in Aus with less lateral movement the SAffers played him the best.

Just clarifying since folks assume he didn't do well in SA whereas he was very good there.

 

[Bolo.]

I am aware WI had the occasional slow wicket but I wouldn't classify the home conditions entirely over the course of his career as tough. And an ATG pacer is expected to adapt and excel at home. Donald just has a notably better home record even with conditions in his favor.

I don't think WI were particularly bad for quicks- some cracking pitches plus some with a bit of juice. More that RSA was particularly good.

 

[Bolo.]

You keep saying this as though that makes it ok

AUS were pitch doctoring to make the tracks less pace friendly vs RSA TBF, which makes it a more understandable. Or at least they said they were trying to do it. IDK how successfully.

 

[OverratedSanity]

AUS were pitch doctoring to make the tracks less pace friendly vs RSA TBF, which makes it a more understandable. Or at least they said they were trying to do it. IDK how successfully.

Tbf, I absolutely think SA were doing the same in their home series vs Aus in that era. Some of the slowest pitches I've ever seen in SA would be when they played 90s Australia with Mcgrath coincidentally. They'd give India/SL some absolute minefields at times which rarely showed up in games vs Aus.

 

[subshakerz]

Tbf, I absolutely think SA were doing the same in their home series vs Aus in that era. Some of the slowest pitches I've ever seen in SA would be when they played 90s Australia with Mcgrath coincidentally. They'd give India/SL some absolute minefields at times which rarely showed up in games vs Aus.

Was that in 2001? 96 was fairly pace friendly except for Johannesburg. 93/94 maybe not so.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Was that in 2001? 96 was fairly pace friendly except for Johannesburg. 93/94 maybe not so.

Yeah probably 2001/02 , think I may have misremembered. There was a game in 96/97 where Blewett got a big ton which became a complete highway after a session or so too which is probably colouring my opinion a bit.

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose post-94 struggled to take 4WPM in NZ, England and SA on more helpful wickets where other bowlers took wickets. He only did so in Aus because of the bounce.

Hence why I am having Ambrose now behind ATG spinners like Warne and Murali. His wickettaking capacity is a bit iffy unless we are talking peak.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah probably 2001/02 , think I may have misremembered. There was a game in 96/97 where Blewett got a big ton which became a complete highway after a session or so too which is probably colouring my opinion a bit.

Yes Waugh and Blewett batted an entire day in Johannesburg.

 

[Bolo.]

Tbf, I absolutely think SA were doing the same in their home series vs Aus in that era. Some of the slowest pitches I've ever seen in SA would be when they played 90s Australia with Mcgrath coincidentally. They'd give India/SL some absolute minefields at times which rarely showed up in games vs Aus.

Not sure they would have been giving AUS slow pitches on purpose in that era with the Warne threat. I can remember some talk about wanting quicker pitches vs AUS for (I think) 2001. I can't remember if the talk was from management or media. Details are fuzzy- it's a long time ago.

They definitely tried for as much juice as possible vs the Asian teams. Pitches were rough, but not as rough as they appeared though. Asian bats from the era were really weak against bounce on the whole.

 

[Coronis]

I think Bradman should be marked down. He skipped the only two tours during his career played outside Aus/Eng. Weak ass bitch

 

[subshakerz]

I think Bradman should be marked down. He skipped the only two tours during his career played outside Aus/Eng. Weak ass bitch

You're better than this.

 

[Coronis]

You're better than this.

Am I though?