Andy Flower vs Alan Knott

[kyear2]

Don’t forget the 20’s.

There were objectively better bowlers in the 30’s than the 20’s which may have contributed but the 20’s were even higher scoring than the 30’s.

Yes, the 20's as well

Most of the period between the wars.

 

[DrWolverine]

Is it possible that the Don’s high scoring may have slightly increased the batting average in 1930s?

 

[sayon basak]

Is it possible that the Don’s high scoring may have slightly increased the batting average in 1930s?

Umm not much. Without Don, the batting average of 1930's would be 31.47.

 

[kyear2]

no. Look at batting averages and outcomes in that era. It was a joke. Barely any tests had results. There was virtually no class bowlers.

But again, Gilchrist batted in literally one of the two flattest eras in the history of the game, while batting at no. 7 in what is the strongest batting lineup in modern history.

Everyone crucifies and downgrades Hayden and Ponting for batting on roads, and they batted at 1 & 3, not 7 when the platform was well set.

One could say Gilchrist had it wayyyy easier than Knott ever did.

You're seeing how your argument is making less and less sense.

You down grade Knott's efforts, the one on Gilly is even more severe and Knotty was easily the better keeper.

 

[DrWolverine]

Umm not much. Without Don, the batting average of 1930's would be 31.47.
View attachment 42797
View attachment 42798

Can you list batting averages of other decades?

And 1930s with & without Don?

 

[ma1978]

Pretty bold of you to assume that.

For example, pitchers in baseball has stopped pitching screwball and knuckleball, although those were very effective.

So, some aspect of a specific sport can face degradation over time.

yes those skills have degraded because the fastballs and breaking balls have become better. As sports modernise and standards rise, niche skills often suffer

 

[kyear2]

Is it possible that the Don’s high scoring may have slightly increased the batting average in 1930s?

West Indies, South Africa, New Zealand.

The 30's were well known and accepted as the absolute worst (or best depending on perspective) of pitches. Which is why, as have been discussed times a plenty here, that Bradman's runs were somewhat discounted during his career and many saw Hobbs and even Trumper as his superior.

Hobbs pre WW1 (it is claimed) had just a big a gap over his peers and on much worse pitches.

The 20's and 30's were flat, that don't change till 1950 or so.

That's why some here don't rate Hammond that highly, and Headley even lower, and mainly because of the solo efforts he displayed for a sub first class batting team, and against vastly superior opponents. There's a reason he was called Atlas.

 

[sayon basak]

yes those skills have degraded because the fastballs and breaking balls have become better. As sports modernise and standards rise, niche skills often suffer

Not really. They are going extinct because it's hard to master those pitches (and injury concern for screwball). Dickey got CY young in 2012 by throwing Knuckleballs. Wouldn't call that pre-modern.

And average fastball speed has increased sure, but is that the same as saying that they have got better?

 

[kyear2]

yes those skills have degraded because the fastballs and breaking balls have become better. As sports modernise and standards rise, niche skills often suffer

The only sports (that I watch) that have become better are the sports and positions that are impacted by athletes becoming bigger and stronger.

But skill wise? There's probably two quarterbacks that comes close to Marino as a passer in this era and one of those is 40 and we'll past his best.

No tennis player has the skill of Fed in his prime. What they are are faster and with better equipment.

These F1 drivers (Lewis / Max apart) can't hold a candle to Sena, Prost, Shumi). Cars are safer and better though.

Bonds is still better than any hitter today.

Just because we like to believe something doesn't make it true. Lindwall is as good as any pacer today, Marshall better.

 

[sayon basak]

Bonds is still better than any hitter today.

What about steroids?

 

[kyear2]

What about steroids?

He was a hall of famer well before the roid age.

 

[sayon basak]

The only sports (that I watch) that have become better are the sports and positions that are impacted by athletes becoming bigger and stronger.

But skill wise? There's probably two quarterbacks that comes close to Marino as a passer in this era and one of those is 40 and we'll past his best.

No tennis player has the skill of Fed in his prime. What they are are faster and with better equipment.

These F1 drivers (Lewis / Max apart) can't hold a candle to Sena, Prost, Shumi). Cars are safer and better though.

Bonds is still better than any hitter today.

Just because we like to believe something doesn't make it true. Lindwall is as good as any pacer today, Marshall better.

Here's a few words from @capt_Luffy;

Hamilton/Max can't hold a candle to Schumacher/Senna/Prost; or Fed was way better than Joker, the best player around now; while both played together for a majority of their careers and Joker ended up with a better one, is some pure nostalgia wanking, to the fullest. Sports, by and large have developed well past the skill levels of 60s and 70s. You can't pretend Don was premodern and would have struggled in the modern game while simultaneously saying Sobers would need to change nothing to be as effective as he was had he played today (according to you, more actually).

 

[kyear2]

Here's a few words from @capt_Luffy;

Hamilton/Max can't hold a candle to Schumacher/Senna/Prost; or Fed was way better than Joker, the best player around now; while both played together for a majority of their careers and Joker ended up with a better one, is some pure nostalgia wanking, to the fullest. Sports, by and large have developed well past the skill levels of 60s and 70s. You can't pretend Don was premodern and would have struggled in the modern game while simultaneously saying Sobers would need to change nothing to be as effective as he was had he played today (according to you, more actually).

Or read what I said.

I said Max or Lewis apart, none of today's drivers can hold a candle to Prost or Sena.

Fed in his prime was more skilled than Djoker. He had the better serve, forehand, volley etc etc. Djoker the better defender, mover and backhand. Also adopted better equipment faster and just maintained his fitness better over time.

Where did I say Don had to change anything? The conditions (difficulty and variance), level of opponents, laws and increased travel greatly changed. If I felt Don had to change he wouldn't make the team.
Sobers in his late career decline faced prime Lillee, that's as modern as it gets.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Just stop dude.

The two easiest eras to bat were the 30's and the 2000's.

By that argument was Gilchrist also a fraud with a soft average?

Gilchrist definitely was lucky to play in the 2000s. His average would certainly drop playing in the 80s/90s or from 2015-2024.

 

[kyear2]

Gilchrist definitely was lucky to play in the 2000s. His average would certainly drop playing in the 80s/90s or from 2015-2024.

So I want to ask you,6 @ma1978 and @capt_Luffy

If not Gilchrist, who is the candidate for the best wicketkeeper batsman ever, and do any of you believe that there should be a minimum keeping standard required for that spot, arguably world class if not great?

So yeah, Gilly never existed, who's making your AT selection?

 

[ma1978]

So I want to ask you,6 @ma1978 and @capt_Luffy

If not Gilchrist, who is the candidate for the best wicketkeeper batsman ever, and do any of you believe that there should be a minimum keeping standard required for that spot, arguably world class if not great?

So yeah, Gilly never existed, who's making your AT selection?

Rishabh Pant
Andy Flower
Alan Knott (I was just winding people up before)

I think as long as a keeper is of acceptable understand there is no marginal benefit to being a great keeper and batting is the differentiating point

 

[kyear2]

Rishabh Pant
Andy Flower
Alan Knott (I was just winding people up before)

I think as long as a keeper is of acceptable understand there is no marginal benefit to being a great keeper and batting is the differentiating point

So, want to keep this civil.

Do you believe that Pant"s keeping is of sufficient world class standard for such a designation as greatest ever or for an AT XI?

He think he could keep to a Warne or Murali? Stand up to McGrath?

 

[ma1978]

So, want to keep this civil.

Do you believe that Pant"s keeping is of sufficient world class standard for such a designation as greatest ever or for an AT XI?

He think he could keep to a Warne or Murali? Stand up to McGrath?

no different than keeping to Ashwin or Bumrah

beyond a certain level wicket keeping is a commodified skill

 

[kyear2]

no different than keeping to Ashwin or Bumrah

beyond a certain level wicket keeping is a commodified skill

Even if that were true, don't think he's at that level. At least not imho.

 

[ma1978]

Even if that were true, don't think he's at that level. At least not imho.

doesnr seem to affect some atg bowlers like Bumrah and Jadeja