Statistical anomaly tbh. Best 4-day spinner in Aus for the best part of a decade, probably the best T20 spinner now. Just hasn't taken wickets in the domestic 50-over comps, probably largely because of how people play him, because his economy is still excellent.
He was for a while, but this hasn't been true for years. Just give up mate.
way to avoid all the relevant points and pick on the one bit you don't like
As I said, it shows how people tend to play him. It's hard for a bowler like him to take wickets in 50-over games with no one really going after him.
You mean like ignoring his 50 over record?
your post makes no sense. The point in question was his 50 over record.
Nah thats a fib. You addressed only to brush it. Thereby ignore it as a consideration. In a thread about 50 over selection no less. You're a "funny" man.
Literally my only point was that his 50 over record is misleading. How is that "brushing it" or "ignoring it as a consideration"?
If he was still a decent bat I'd be backing this but he seems to be a bit of a one-dimensional player these days. Not a particularly special fielder either IIRC
You called the most relevant data set for one day selection a statistical anomaly. Which is a joke of course.
So the only thing you disagree with is the suggestion that his 50-over bowling average isn't necessarily an accurate representation of his skill or value?
Didn't we just go over this? I didn't ignore or avoid anything
Agar has been very good for Aus in ODIs, his stats may be misleading but on the tour to England where 400 was a normal score he was almost always our best and most economical bowler. I'd still rather have Zampa for the WC but Agar is far from the worst choice, even before you take his batting into consideration.
