Shane Warne vs Dale Steyn

[kyear2]

Well you rated Imran better than Warne as a bowler just a while back. But I don't want to debate your rankings even though as you re aware I always found you rating Marshall no.3 odd given how you view pundit rankings.

Tell me why and where Imran deserves to be rated ahead of someone like Hammond.

I was looking for a specific cricket topic on YouTube and came across a list of the top 12 fast bowlers of all time.

From that list 4 bowlers had appreciably higher averages away from home that at home. All the rest were equal of better away. Those guys are the ones who travelled well throughout their careers, and we're true ATGs around the world.

The exceptions?

Steyn : we know why, he played in the flattest of eras since the end of the 40's. Some objectively should have been better, but again, understandable.

The other 2 were from Pakistan.

Wasim : The closest and his difference was by only 2 runs. Where you and I have agreed is that away from home teams rely so much more on catching behind the wicket and he had literally no support.

Imran Khan : during the period you recommend we use for him (so we're already making exceptions, but fine), he averaged 17 in Pakistan and 25 away from home at a s/ r of 56.

Shane Warne away from home for his entre career averaged 25 with a s/r of 56.

The one advantage that fast bowlers have over spinners is that they average less, strike faster, take out the top order, and are more efficient. Other than than the spinner has the advantage of bowling longer spells and assisting the over rated etc.

Imran doesn't even have that one advantage. Away from the comforts and advantages of home, what advantage does Imran have over Warne?

 

[kyear2]

It's misleading though. Tendulkars dip we mainly injuries and then he had another peak in which he was the best in the world before a decline the end. Viv just declined slowly as soon as his peak was done

This is where you get disingenuous

Sachin had injuries, like Viv didn't have eye issues and surgery.

Sachin had his 2nd peak at the end when the pitches around the world turned to lifeless mounds, and for the most part the greats disappeared.

 

[subshakerz]

This is where you get disingenuous

Sachin had injuries, like Viv didn't have eye issues and surgery.

Sachin had his 2nd peak at the end when the pitches around the world turned to lifeless mounds, and for the most part the greats disappeared.

Viv wasnt an injury per se it was a life condition like Wasim getting diabetes. You can't use that as an excuse.

Yes pitches were flatter nobody is denying that but he still was well ahead of anything Viv reached post peak.

Point is don't misrepresent big stages of their career as the same.

 

[subshakerz]

Tell me why and where Imran deserves to be rated ahead of someone like Hammond.

Don't care about Hammond stay on topic.

Imran doesn't even have that one advantage. Away from the comforts and advantages of home, what advantage does Imran have over Warne?

I will quote your words:

'For the guys in the second or in-between tier, it is closer, but then I recalled Warne and Murali's record vs India, Murali vs Australia and what Lara did to both. I'll go with Imran on this one.'

Imran did better against best opposition and doesn't have the inherent disadvantages of spinners as far as conditions that you always used to agree on.

 

[subshakerz]

The one advantage that fast bowlers have over spinners is that they average less, strike faster, take out the top order, and are more efficient.

Yes Imran had all those advantages over Warne.

 

[subshakerz]

Averages are incidental. I'm asking you how important you think wicket taking is. You have brought it up a ton of times for Imran away. But it seems to matter less when it comes to Murali, despite there being a huge gap on how many they took.

You again arent addressing my original point on Murali. If you get corrected at least acknowledge it.

And for wickettaking my critiques are more towards those like Ambrose who fall below a certain threshold in certain countries but beyond that I am not going to use overall career WPM to say some ATG is better, especially as Murali had far less competition for his wickets like Hadlee. But if you want to talk in specific countries sure I will look at WPM and SR.

 

[Bolo.]

You again arent addressing my original point on Murali. If you get corrected at least acknowledge it.

And for wickettaking my critiques are more towards those like Ambrose who fall below a certain threshold in certain countries but beyond that I am not going to use overall career WPM to say some ATG is better, especially as Murali had far less competition for his wickets like Hadlee. But if you want to talk in specific countries sure I will look at WPM and SR.

I have addressed your point on Murali. I judge on results, not perception of style. He got results.

How do you think Murali ends up with a ton more away WPM than everyone else? He wasn't something like a favourite opponents/conditions spammer who just wrecked a country or two. He took more wickets across countries than anyone else. If you prefer to look at countries instead of career, it changes nothing.

Hadlee is the best of the rest in WPI, in a comparable attack. He is a GOAT candidate, and one of the most tireless quicks ever. And Murali still obliterates him on wickets. You are trying to present this as a negative. It is actually a great way of demonstrating how good Murali is.

You can't downplay the extent to which Murali took wickets in any meaningful way. Whatever cutting or adjusting of stats you do, he is still ridiculous. As a person who values wickets per highly, I'm not sure why you won't give him his due for it. It's not like he is one of the players you have a grudge against.

 

[Johan]

Viv wasnt an injury per se it was a life condition like Wasim getting diabetes. You can't use that as an excuse.

Surgery in 84-85 eased it up a bit very obviously, he was the best Batsmen around and became the highest ranked batsmen again somewhere in 86.

 

[shortpitched713]

I agree bowlers are slightly more important and and impactful. But 15 is just hyperbole and a bit ridiculous.

There's a reason SA isn't a great team right now. You still need batting, quality batting.

And what you and everyone else here forgets when discussing the success of great bowlers, they all had great catching support from their keepers and more crucially, their cordons.

Lindwall, Davidson, Lillee, Hadlee, Quartet, Marshall, Ambrose, Donald, McGrath, Steyn, all had elite support, and Hadlee apart, from elite batsmen.

Batting is arguably slightly more important collectively than bowling, so I'm not arguing that.

I'm talking about 1v1 match-up between a batsman and a bowler in their potential impact assuming fitness over a given period. It's not a contest. Bowling resources are far more concentrated in a team compared to batting.

 

[Coronis]

Murali’s WPM in countries for some reference

ENG - 8.00 6 matches
BAN - 7.25 4 matches
SL - 6.75 73 matches
WI - 6.17 6 matches
SA - 5.83 6 matches
PAK - 5.56 9 matches
NZ - 5.00 6 matches
ZIM - 3.71 7 matches
IND - 3.64 11 matches
AUS - 2.40 5 matches

 

[Johan]

Shane Warne is the greatest spinner in the history of this great game.

Continue.

 

[DrWolverine]

Warne vs Murali is very close

 

[DrWolverine]

Murali’s WPM in countries for some reference

ENG - 8.00 6 matches
BAN - 7.25 4 matches
SL - 6.75 73 matches
WI - 6.17 6 matches
SA - 5.83 6 matches
PAK - 5.56 9 matches
NZ - 5.00 6 matches
ZIM - 3.71 7 matches
IND - 3.64 11 matches
AUS - 2.40 5 matches

That’s surprisingly low

 

[Coronis]

Shane Warne is the greatest spinner in the history of this great game.

Continue.

Arguably. I’d say anything in cricket is arguable. Except Bradman. Though some will try and argue that too..

 

[DrWolverine]

Bradman is the greatest batsman and it’s not debatable

 

[Johan]

Arguably. I’d say anything in cricket is arguable. Except Bradman. Though some will try and argue that too..

Yeah, just stating my opinion, he's one of the few convicts I like.

 

[Coronis]

That’s surprisingly low

Yeah I thought so too.

Another cool Murali stat.

He took 5+ 5’fers against every single one of the 9 countries he played against.

Bradman is the greatest batsman and it’s not debatable

Trust me there are some on here who would make a case he is not

 

[Coronis]

Yeah, just stating my opinion, he's one of the few convicts I like.

You posh elitist bastard

 

[DrWolverine]

Murali in Zimbabwe
1 5-Fer in 7 Tests is unusually low for his standards
1995 : 2 Tests. 3 wickets.
1999 : 3 Tests. 9 wickets.
2004 : 2 Tests. 14 wickets.

 

[Johan]

1. Bradman
2. Hobbs
3. Everyone else