Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Lets say hypothetically they’re closely matched. And peer rating ranks them closely together (if peer rating is your thing, idr for you)
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Shane Warne vs Dale Steyn
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Then I would go for Warne.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Instead of the more miserly player taking wickets at a better rate? Interesting view compared to your pace thinking
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think I know McGrath was more penetrative than Ambrose and more miserly than Steyn without even needing to refer to stats.
But between Murali and Warne there isn't, once we take in home/away context, a big difference in terms of miserliness or penetration. In anything, Warne looks better.
OFC Murali had less competition. That doesn't mean anyone else is capable of 3 and a half wickets an innings, regardless of competition. And anyone who attempted it would have their averages obliterated.
You have Imran > Ambrose on the basis of taking more wickets. Which is fine. But you should apply the same principle to other bowlers. From reasonably modern bowlers, there are a couple of tiers for all the ATGs. And a couple of vacant tiers. And then the Murali tier.
Ambrose: 2.26WPI @54.5
McGrath: 2.32WPI @51.9
Steyn: 2.57WPI @ 42.3
The 'goldilocks zone' that you are trying to ascribe to Mcgrath looks a whole lot like the Ambrose zone.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Warne might be if you put him in Muralis situation.
No because Imran has more demonstrated success across varied conditions. I'm not referring to some Goldilock overall stat zone
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
Lol lol at "goldilocks" zone. Fwiw Subz knows that person is Marshall but he keeps coming up with excuses to discredit the man:
Marshall: 2.49WPI @46.7
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He is still my no.1 bowler. Why would I discredit him?
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
That's news to me. But ok. I'm still not leaving you alone. Lol lol
Warne improving his WPI by 40% is a very big 'might'. Barry might have ended up averaging 70 with a proper test career. But that's not how you judge him.
Ambrose has way better averages across countries than Imran. He could have done with more games in a bunch of places. But even with a low number of games, he would crush Imran if he had an Imran level of penetration in those games. But you rate Imran ahead on penetration, and brush it off for the vasty superior level of penetration Murali had.
Unless average changes, you don't get to pick between taking wickets faster and leaking runs. You criticize Steyn and Ambrose from opposite ends. You have been putting Mcgrath in a Goldilocks zone in your last few posts. Do the stats I posted support this?
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I've said that repeatedly. I also rate Lara the same number as Kyear. This idea that I am trying to critique them for some hidden agenda is wrong.
Despite folks saying I bash Steyn too much, I have Steyn ahead of Imran. In fact I have Imran rated below the CW consensus as a cricketer behind Tendulkar. Ambrose yes I do think should be maybe 1-2 slots down but I have given my reasoning for that. Kallis I have always found overrated but frankly based on the latest CW poll had him as AR no.4 where I place him.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I take the blame for introducing this into lexicon.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah given that Warne was aces in SL and wouldn't have McGrath and Gillespie to compete with, I back Warne to do it.
Ambrose has no real great samples outside of WI, Eng and Aus in terms of wickettaking. There is a questionmark how he would do in SC for me.
Regardless, you are making a cardinal error, you are confusing overall stats with stats inside countries. Murali may be higher SR overall but that entirely due to spin friendliness at home, he is far lower than Warne away from home. I am just for arguments sake making them the same but realistically Warne was more penetrative.
I mean if you insist, yes McGrath has a health SR, average, WPM and ER. Steyn is poor on ER, Ambrose slightly middling on SR and WPM which are more serious issues.
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
The Lara critique i don't think you have an agenda there except maybe to prop up Sachin more. Which is odd and completely unnecessary since most rank him 2nd already. You were strangely quiet though, when that SL troll rated something like 20 players above Lara vs spin. Even if you think he had issues vs Kumble or whomever that's an irrational take imo.
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
Imran is a better cricketer than Sachin. What??!!
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah I think Subs has Sachin and Hobbs above Imran and Hadlee respectively.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Imran is better on points but Sachin is greater to me.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
My top 10 greatest are Bradman, Sobers, Tendulkar, Viv, Imran, Hobbs, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Murali.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Damn, interesting