13 overrated players of the last 20 odd years

[Pratters]

NO its not.

It is.

Check his figures. Whenever he has taken exactly 5 wickets, he has given less than 150 runs. Quite a contrast to what you claim.

And on one or two ocassions in which he has given more than 150 runs, he has taken more wickets.

So it is indeed a blatant lie.

 

[GladiatrsInBlue]

Or more appropriately it was an exagerration, instead of a lie.

My point was that he concedes too much runs which remian a fact.I have come accross some good observation made by Rashid Lateef on Danish Kaneria.

Here it is,


KARACHI: Former Pakistan captain Rashid Latif believes his former teammates might fall into a spin trap by pondering too much on preparing slow pitches and attacking England with the spinners.

"My idea without being critical is that we shouldn’t rely on the spinners too much. There are a number of logical reasons for this. The main one being our bowlers are not ready to give consistent flight and loop to the ball which means even if they get wickets it’ll be at a great cost of runs," he told this correspondent on Thursday.

England arrives on October 26 to play three Tests and five One-day Internationals and the national selectors by including four leg-spinners in the national training camp have given a clear indication about how they are approaching the series.

Not only have they recalled veteran leg-spinner Mushtaq Ahmed but have also included youngsters Mansoor Amjad and Imran Tahir to back up the team’s playing leg-spinner Danish Kaneria.

Captain Inzamam-ul-Haq has also been quoted as saying he would like to take advantage of home conditions and utilise the spinners more against England.

But Rashid said Pakistan’s biggest problem was that their spinners mainly Kaneria didn’t like to flight the ball early on and bowled too flat. "Danish you look at this track record. He only starts flighting the ball and taking wickets after he has bowled 20 to 25 overs and conceded a lot of runs," he noted "Danish has to be told to flight the ball. Secondly I’ve also seen Mushtaq bowl in recent weeks and he has changed his action a bit. He is now bowling from a different angle and the spin he is getting is slow making it easier for the batsmen to handle him," he added.

Rashid who kept to some of Pakistan’s top pacers and spinners in his 37 Tests, 166 One-day Internationals and numerous first-class games, said another problem with the Pakistani spinners was that none of them were used to bowling consistently round the wicket on the rough area of the pitch. "This is because in Pakistan the rough area tends to be soft whereas in England the rough area is hard which is why Shane Warne and Ashley Giles bowled a lot around the legs of the batsmen," he noted.

Rashid pointed out on the slow pitches of the Subcontinent even if they were turning bowlers needed to give lot of loop and air to the ball to get wickets against good batsmen.

He, however, advised the Pakistani team management and selectors to look at the possibility of inviting one or two left-arm spinners to the camp and taking a chance with them. "Nowadays most of the world teams are not used to playing left-armers on a regular basis and if we can field a decent left-armer who even if he bowls flat and fast but around the middle stump of the batsmen it’ll be a big advantage for us," he added.

Rashid warned his teammates to prepare beforehand to handle Giles who he described as a cunning bowler. "Giles bowled very well in the Ashes and although he didn’t get too many wickets, he kept up the pressure on the Australian batsmen from one end and that is what he’ll be doing against Pakistan. Plus he is very good at exploiting the rough patches around the batsmen’s legs," Rashid said.

The former Pakistan skipper suggested instead the home side should maintain a balance between pace and spin as it had some good bowlers in both departments. "You can’t beat England relying on any one or two spinners and you can’t do this with pace either. So we need to strike the right balance and prepare good sporting pitches which offer encouragement to batsmen and bowlers," Rashid insisted

 

[Pratters]

Or more appropriately it was an exagerration, instead of a lie.

You said whenever he takes 5 wickets he concedes more than 150 runs.

He doesnt. He takes wickets cheaply when he gets hauls. So what you said is in contrast to the reality.

 

[GladiatrsInBlue]

You said whenever he takes 5 wickets he concedes more than 150 runs.

He doesnt. He takes wickets cheaply when he gets hauls. So what you said is in contrast to the reality.

The figures i mentioned were indeed incorrect but my point is that Danish concedes lots of runs in getting wickets is not invalid.

I can honestly remember him taking wickts cheaply on very few occasions, on most of the occasions he ends up taking wickts but conceds alot of runs to his team's dismay.

 

[Pratters]

The figures i mentioned were indeed incorrect but my point is that Danish concedes lots of runs in getting wickets is not invalid.

I can honestly remember him taking wickts cheaply on very few occasions, on most of the occasions he ends up taking wickts but conceds alot of runs to his team's dismay.

Do I need to give you his 5 wicket halls to show you he is economical when he takes wickets and does not concede loads of runs which you are constantly claiming. Bah.

 

[Dasa]

Do I need to give you his 5 wicket halls to show you he is economical when he takes wickets and does not concede loads of runs which you are constantly claiming. Bah.

Actually, he has a point y'know...Of Kaneria's 11 5 wicket hauls, he's only taken 2 for less than 100 runs against teams other than Bangladesh.

 

[Sanz]

Actually, he has a point y'know...Of Kaneria's 11 5 wicket hauls, he's only taken 2 for less than 100 runs against teams other than Bangladesh.

Yeah but dont tell that to Pratyush, when he talks about 5 wicket hauls, he talks exactly about 5 wickets,regardless of what the discussion is mainly about.

The discussion isn't really about clutching @ straws, its about a point which GIB has shown in his last post.

 

[Pratters]

Actually, he has a point y'know...Of Kaneria's 11 5 wicket hauls, he's only taken 2 for less than 100 runs against teams other than Bangladesh.

If we look at whether Kaneria is expensive or not in his 11 5 wicket hauls:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

The point was being made if he conceded more than 150 runs earlier. Any way 100/5 arent exactly expensive and a captain would take that gladly.

Let us exclude Kaneria's first 3 five wicket hauls - against Bangladesh and pretty economical.


32 3 110 5 3.44 3 W 1st Test v NZ in Pak 2002 at Lahore - A averaging 20.5 per wicket.

28.3 8 46 5 1.61 3 W 1st Test v SA in Pak 2003/04 at Lahore - Pretty good

60 20 118 7 1.97 3 W 2nd Test v SL in Pak 2004/05 at Karachi - Averaging close to 17 per wicket. Very good figures.

39.3 5 125 5 3.16 2 L 2nd Test v Aus in Aus 2004/05 at Melbourne - 25 runs per wicket. May be considered expensive.

49.3 7 188 7 3.80 2 L 3rd Test v Aus in Aus 2004/05 at Sydney - May be considered expensive again if we take more than 25 runs per wicket.

53.4 12 150 6 2.80 2 D 1st Test v Ind in Ind 2004/05 at Chandigarh - 25 runs per wicket.

39 7 127 5 3.26 2 W 3rd Test v Ind in Ind 2004/05 at Bangalore - 25 runs per wicket.

20 8 46 5 2.30 4 W 2nd Test v WI in WI 2005 at Kingston - Good performance any way you look at it.

So out of the 8 5 wicket hauls apart from Bangladesh Kaneria is at good grounds in 4 of the ocassions. On 3 ocassions he is in the 25 runs per wicket margin. Once he exceeds that.

Is that very expensive or is it acceptable by an international captain. I would say its very much acceptable.

 

[Tom Halsey]

If Warne played half his games in India he would not have made it as a Test match bowler. Do you need reminding about his stellar performances in the 'spinners paradise.'

Recently I did a career summary of Murali and Warne, minus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The results were interesting, Warne has a better average than Murali in all but 2 countries (one was India, can't remember the other, might be West Indies).

 

[Sanz]

Actually it is even.Warne is better in SA, NZ & Ind, Murali is better in Pak, WI & Eng. Although it must be noted that Murali last played in India in 1997-98. He is due to play some tests this year and it is possible that he might out-do warne in India.

 

[Sanz]

Is that very expensive or is it acceptable by an international captain. I would say its very much acceptable.

Acceptable doesn't make him great shich some people have been claiming, therefore he is over-rated. No one is saying he is crap or not international std. Far from it, he is a good spinner but certainly no warne/murali/Kumble.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Actually it is even.Warne is better in SA, NZ & Ind, Murali is better in Pak, WI & Eng. Although it must be noted that Murali last played in India in 1997-98. He is due to play some tests this year and it is possible that he might out-do warne in India.

Well I shall have to re-check then - I used StatsGuru and Warne definately came out on top.

 

[Sanz]

Well I shall have to re-check then - I used StatsGuru and Warne definately came out on top.

Well what you looke up is wrong then. because Warne's avg in India is better than Murali.

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...1;.cgifields=cplayerid;.cgifields=comparetype

 

[Pratters]

No one is saying he is crap or not international std. Far from it, he is a good spinner but certainly no warne/murali/Kumble.

I have retorted to the claims of Gald. in blue which claim Kaneria is very expensive when taking wickets.

He plainly said he gives 150 runs for 10 wickts, then changing it to 150 runs when he takes 5 wickets in a match when some said 150 for 10 in a match is quite acceptable.

How the great or not great debate comes into this I do not know.

I too dont think any one can pronounce Kaneria great yet. Great is a term which should be used very preciously when the reality is it is used very cheaply. We both share the view and the view that he is of international standard.

 

[tooextracool]

If their records would've been comparable then yes, Tendulkar would be considered better than Bradman playing 2x the # of matches.
Its not Hick or Smith's fault that ENG didnt play much ODIs but your reputation is based on your achievements - playing 2x more with a slightly lower return per capita makes you a better player.
Simple as that.

a slightly lower return? hick was a much more reliable player away from home than aravinda, and he cant be worse than aravinda simply because he didnt get the chance to play as many games.

 

[tooextracool]

You are a kid compared to me- a teenager is and no, despite your protestations, you are not an expert- you are yet to understand the nuance between swing and seam bowling, much less favourable 'pace' conditions.
Barbados has been pace friendly for almost all its time since the early 60s all the way to late 90s.

note the use of the word 'almost'. fact is you cant guarantee that everytime tendulkar set foot on barbados that it was pacer friendly, because it wasnt. hes played 2 tests in barbados, and the conditions were only bowler friendly in 2 of those innings - the 2nd innings in 97 and the first inning in 02(even if the amount of seam movement wasnt that significant), and surprise surprise he failed in both.

Barbados was seaming and boucing excellently in 1996 when Tendulkar played Ambrose and Walsh there - apart from the on-drive, almost all of Tendulkar and Dravid's legside runs came off of chest high pulls and Tendulkar even hooked twice during that innings.
If that wasnt a pacy wicket, i dont know what is.

because 'pace' makes a wicket bowler friendly doesnt it? believe it or not pace without sideways movement is completely useless and as such having a pitch with a little bit of pace and no movement is barely useful, especially if theres no swing. and if you honestly think that barbados of 96/97 was 'pacy' you obviously werent watching closely enough, given that it was extremely sluggish

The perth innings - i have the entire Tendulkar footage on tape if you want it and you'd see just how far the ball was bouncing - almost every other delivery was chest high to him and moving alarmingly off the pitch.

oh wow, so the ball bounced a fair bit, because that on its own makes the conditions bowler friendly. the most common misconception about perth is that its considered a bowlers paradise simply because its quicker and offers more bounce than any other wicket. any one however will tell you that bounce and pace is something that you just need to get used to, before you realise that it isnt that hard to handle.

But then again, for someone who works on just an arrogant notion of 'expertise' instead of an actual one, one who doesnt know the difference between swing and seam and one who thinks 'whenever this batsman scores, it must be favourable conditions', it is hardly surprising.

you know if you believe that anyone on these forums doesnt know the difference between swing and seam then you're quite deluded indeed.

Next time, try using statistical inference instead of your narrowminded idea of what is a good batting condition and what isnt. Tendulkar has done better than any batsman in the last 20 years against pace- statistics show it and experience of viewership confirms that.
When you are capable of using objective statistical analysis inorder to determine who is a good player and who isnt then you can talk. Till then, if i may say so humbly, shut up..

once again you resort to having to bring up irrelevant stats that dont actually prove anything. his record against pace on flat pitches doesnt mean that hes a good player of seam and swing, his record when he plays seam and swing does. and as such hes failed miserably almost everytime hes encountered either of the above.

He is in the top 20 in my opinion and i dont want to belabour the point but lets say he is in the top 20-25. Which is pretty select echelon for ODI cricket. And no, Hick, Smith, etc. are not, despite your pusillanimous vacillations in reference to your motherland.

and such brilliant claims to back your argument too. hick and smith both clearly have better records than desilva, as do many many many others. desilva barely makes the top 40, and you can keep trying to make the ridiculously high number of games hes played to mean something, but the fact is that it doesnt. and the fact that you constantly bring my nationality into this only makes your argument look worse, and makes you look even more racist.

 

[tooextracool]

If Warne played half his games in India he would not have made it as a Test match bowler. Do you need reminding about his stellar performances in the 'spinners paradise.'

thats assuming he played half his games in india vs india

 

[Eclipse]

how are the pitches the same? its completely different batting in ODIs on what are generally flat wickets to harbhajan singh and anil kumble with no forward short leg or silly point standing in front of you. and i've been through the whole SL and pakistan thing, pakistan havent really had a quality spinner for a fair bit of time(Even if danish might develop into something), and in SL he had one good series. thats about it.

where as in India he's had one bad series and that's about it?

And he's not a bad player of spin..it's the fast flatter spinners that get bounce that trouble him and only on low slow sub contenent pitches.. elsewhere he is a very good player of all kinds of spin.

 

[tooextracool]

where as in India he's had one bad series and that's about it?

no hes had 8 bad games in india, spread over nearly 8 years.

And he's not a bad player of spin..it's the fast flatter spinners that get bounce that trouble him and only on low slow sub contenent pitches.. elsewhere he is a very good player of all kinds of spin.

harbhajan isnt exactly a fast flat spinner and hes caused him plenty of problems. ponting clearly shows weaknesses against quality spin and plays with very hard hands.

 

[Eclipse]

no hes had 8 bad games in india, spread over nearly 8 years.

8 games is not alot, he's only played one game since 2001 and that was on a shocking pitch.

harbhajan isnt exactly a fast flat spinner and hes caused him plenty of problems. ponting clearly shows weaknesses against quality spin and plays with very hard hands.

No but he's not a flightly spinner either and he gets alot of bounce.. and actually apart from that one series Ponting has owned harbhajan in all other conditions and matches..

Also explain how he has such a good record against Murili only being dismised now twice but having scored heavily against him and (according to cricketinfo stat not long ago) being able to score off him at a run rate of 70 runs per 100 balls.

Statisticly Harbhajan and Kumble are the only spinners to have Pontings mesure and he has made alot of runs against Kumble as well as lost his wicket a few times.

Surely if he was a poor player of spin he would get out to spin more often...