Dennis Lillee vs Ray Lindwall

[Xix2565]

I mean duh, Batsmen in the 50s played more defensive Cricket than the Batsmen of modern era so naturally one would've a higher economy (Cummins) and one would've a higher strike rate (Cummins). Average is a better metric and Lindwall's superiority away in that regard is clear.

Even so, that just suggests a pace bowling friendly era, where Lindwall is closer to his peers than Cummins is. That's an argument for Cummins over Lindwall.

 

[Bolo.]

Even so, that just suggests a pace bowling friendly era, where Lindwall is closer to his peers than Cummins is. That's an argument for Cummins over Lindwall.

Hasn't played long enough yet for me. Most quicks end up declining a fair bit later in career.

 

[Johan]

Even so, that just suggests a pace bowling friendly era, where Lindwall is closer to his peers than Cummins is. That's an argument for Cummins over Lindwall.

Rest of the Aussie lineup in Lindwall's games average 26 and in Cummins they average 29, I don't know, makes sense considering The Invincibles attack was certainly fair bit greater than the modern Australian attack.

 

[Xix2565]

Rest of the Aussie lineup in Lindwall's games average 26 and in Cummins they average 29, I don't know, makes sense considering The Invincibles attack was certainly fair bit greater than the modern Australian attack.

I said overall, not just Australian pacers. Other pacers from other teams contributed to that, and Lindwall's still closer to them than Cummins is to his peers playing with and against him by averages. It's a point for Cummins not Lindwall from where I stand.

 

[Xix2565]

Hasn't played long enough yet for me. Most quicks end up declining a fair bit later in career.

Lindwall only played 61 Tests though.

 

[Bolo.]

Lindwall only played 61 Tests though.

Different era, different number of tests played. He already a long career for a quick, and likely had some of the start sawn off by WWII. I do give Cummins credit for the amount of bowling he has done per year though. That's tough as a quick.

 

[Johan]

I said overall, not just Australian pacers. Other pacers from other teams contributed to that, and Lindwall's still closer to them than Cummins is to his peers playing with and against him by averages. It's a point for Cummins not Lindwall from where I stand.

from my math, in Lindwall's games the bowlers average 30.3 on subtracting Lindwall, and in Cummins's games the bowlers average 31.5 on subtracting Cummins, I'm fine giving a point to Cummins for this but don't think it overtakes Lindwall having a decently long career for a pacer.

 

[kyear2]

Cummins>Lillee very soon

What????

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Cummins vs Lillee will probably be close (for me at least, maybe not others) at the end of Cummins career

 

[kyear2]

Cummins vs Lillee will probably be close (for me at least, maybe not others) at the end of Cummins career

What's the argument for Cummins being a top 10 bowler?

Listening.

 

[Johan]

for reference, after a little bit of math, as far as peers go.

Fred Trueman
307 @ 21.58
Other bowlers
1,671 @ 30.42
Ratio = 1.41

Ray Lindwall
228 @ 23.03
Other bowlers
1,624 @ 30.39
Ratio = 1.32

Dennis Lillee
355 @ 23.92
Other bowlers
1,812 @ 32.68
Ratio = 1.36

Pat Cummins
294 @ 22.43
Other bowlers
1,849 @ 31.56
Ratio = 1.407

Alan Davidson
186 @ 20.53
Other bowlers
1,164 @ 29.83
Ratio = 1.45

 

[Coronis]

for reference, after a little bit of math, as far as peers go.

Fred Trueman
307 @ 21.58
Other bowlers
1,671 @ 30.42
Ratio = 1.41

Ray Lindwall
228 @ 23.03
Other bowlers
1,624 @ 30.39
Ratio = 1.32

Dennis Lillee
355 @ 23.92
Other bowlers
1,812 @ 32.68
Ratio = 1.36

Pat Cummins
294 @ 22.43
Other bowlers
1,849 @ 31.56
Ratio = 1.407

Alan Davidson
186 @ 20.53
Other bowlers
1,164 @ 29.83
Ratio = 1.45

Is easily the worst away out of all these bowlers.

 

[Johan]

Sucks away tho, unlike many of these bowlers.

are we talking about Cummins or Trueman for reference real quick

 

[Johan]

or Lillee, for reference.

 

[Coronis]

are we talking about Cummins or Trueman for reference real quick

Trueman.

Averages 26.08 away. Buoyed up by his record against one of the few true minnows pre Bangladesh. Played over 70% of his matches at home.

 

[Johan]

Trueman.

Averages 26.08 away. Buoyed up by his record against one of the few true minnows pre Bangladesh. Played over 70% of his matches at home.

He's a better bowler than anyone there at home bar maybe Cummins and is better than Lillee in NZ (who were weak into the 70s) and Windies where Trueman won a series, Lillee also played 63% of his games in Australia, pretty comfortably in that tier.

Better than Lillee.

 

[Coronis]

He's a better bowler than anyone there at home and is better than Lillee in NZ (who were weak into the 70s) and Windies, pretty comfortably in that tier.

Better than Lillee.

Far weaker in Trueman’s time and you know it.

Gaps probably smaller than you think.

Trueman at home 229 @ 20.04
Other English bowlers 572 @ 23.12
Touring bowlers 602 @ 33.46

Lillee at home 231 @ 23.74
Other Aussie bowlers 527 @ 30.01
Touring bowlers 644 @ 35.48

Anyway I rank them side by side.

I’ll take Lillee over Trueman because his record in England is far better than anything Trueman accomplished overseas.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I'd personally end any man who has Cummins over Lindwall or Lillee.

Lol lol

 

[Johan]

Far weaker in Trueman’s time and you know it.

Gaps probably smaller than you think.

Trueman at home 229 @ 20.04
Other English bowlers 572 @ 23.12
Touring bowlers 602 @ 33.46

Lillee at home 231 @ 23.74
Other Aussie bowlers 527 @ 30.01
Touring bowlers 644 @ 35.48

Anyway I rank them side by side.

I’ll take Lillee over Trueman because his record in England is far better than anything Trueman accomplished overseas.

I won't say there is a huge difference there, but probably a good difference.

Regarding conditions, If you want to argue that conditions enabled Trueman to be as good at home as he was, and his conditions were better than Lillee's for bowling then sure, you can probably closen up the gap, the gap between their England/Australia ashes records will be lessened too because I'm willing to bet that Lillee got far better conditions to bowl in during English Ashes tours then what Trueman got in Australia in 61/62, Infact I once did the math and found out that Trueman was as big of an outlier among English bowlers during the Australian Ashes as Steyn was among the Saffer bowlers during his Australian tours, so it all leads to nothing at the very end.

I rate Trueman's destructive capability and home record very highly, bummer he didn't tour down under in 55/56 or I else he might've been in discussion for top 5, but if you place Lillee and Trueman side by side as you said you do, then you shouldn't have a problem with me having Freddie higher.

 

[Coronis]

I won't say there is a huge difference there, but probably a good difference.

Regarding conditions, If you want to argue that conditions enabled Trueman to be as good at home as he was, and his conditions were better than Lillee's for bowling then sure, you can probably closen up the gap, the gap between their England/Australia ashes records will be lessened too because I'm willing to bet that Lillee got far better conditions to bowl in during English Ashes tours then what Trueman got in Australia in 61/62, Infact I once did the math and found out that Trueman was as big of an outlier among English bowlers during the Australian Ashes as Steyn was among the Saffer bowlers during his Australian tours, so it all leads to nothing at the very end.

I rate Trueman's destructive capability and home record very highly, bummer he didn't tour down under in 55/56 or I else he might've been in discussion for top 5, but if you place Lillee and Trueman side by side as you said you do, then you shouldn't have a problem with me having Freddie higher.

I don’t. He is however a large home track bully that significant effects his record. Imagine what we might think of say, Cummins if he had played as many of his tests at home as Trueman did!