Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn

[Bolo.]

I mean, ofcourse. I watched the whole of One Piece only once, read the Manga whole thrice (last time during Oda's eye surgery break). Think would give Simpsons a go, might as well start from S1

Simpsons isn't a serialised show. No need to start at the beginning and put yourself off on account of a weak S1.

 

[subshakerz]

Bradman, Hobbs and Tendulkar is probably the most generic top three possible, and the objectively correct one.

I'd have preffered if he glazed Viv a bit though.

They recently asked if there was one batsman to play an over and score 6 against the ultimate bowler, he would pick Viv.

 

[Coronis]

I mean, ofcourse. I watched the whole of One Piece only once, read the Manga whole thrice (last time during Oda's eye surgery break). Think would give Simpsons a go, might as well start from S1

Enjoy! (Also I would be actually curious to hear your perspective on Apu as a younger Indian watching the show for the first time now - feel free to lmk)

Simpsons isn't a serialised show. No need to start at the beginning and put yourself off on account of a weak S1.

The main attraction for me would be the first of many appearances of a wonderful guest actor for that particular continuity.

It also is only 13 episodes to go through but yeah I’d definitely call it the weakest of the first decade.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Enjoy! (Also I would be actually curious to hear your perspective on Apu as a younger Indian watching the show for the first time now - feel free to lmk)




The main attraction for me would be the first of many appearances of a wonderful guest actor for that particular continuity.

It also is only 13 episodes to go through but yeah I’d definitely call it the weakest of the first decade.

I probably am not the best judge though, I don't mind many small things in media unless they are too on the nose. A few stereotypes and a bad accent won't do anything at all, and I am pretty confident there isn't anything severe there.

 

[Bolo.]

Enjoy! (Also I would be actually curious to hear your perspective on Apu as a younger Indian watching the show for the first time now - feel free to lmk)




The main attraction for me would be the first of many appearances of a wonderful guest actor for that particular continuity.

It also is only 13 episodes to go through but yeah I’d definitely call it the weakest of the first decade.

There is some relation between episodes, but it is incredibly weak. I wouldn't worry about it @capt_Luffy. You will end up missing 10 seconds of inside jokes every few episodes

 

[kyear2]

They’re far closer to Marshall than Knott is to Gilchrist

Yet, and again

Knott actually makes teams over Gilly.

You're trying really hard to ignore that.

You're trying to suggest that this is based on who is closer to whom.

If someone's the 3rd name of the sheet, it means you're a lock to make such teams, the 3rd mostly likely player to be on said team.

The others to you may be closer, but Knott actually has a better argument over Gilchrist. And why? Because he's better than Gilchrist at what is their primary job.

And, yet again, and this can't be emphasized enough, Knott has made teams over Gilchrist.

 

[Coronis]

Yet, and again

Knott actually makes teams over Gilly.

You're trying really hard to ignore that.

You're trying to suggest that this is based on who is closer to whom.

If someone's the 3rd name of the sheet, it means you're a lock to make such teams, the 3rd mostly likely player to be on said team.

The others to you may be closer, but Knott actually has a better argument over Gilchrist. And why? Because he's better than Gilchrist at what is their primary job.

And, yet again, and this can't be emphasized enough, Knott has made teams over Gilchrist.

Yet and again, I don’t blindly follow others opinions.

You have my opinion. Gilchrist is a lock for me. There is a huge gap between him and the next player. Marshall is not a lock. I’m perfectly happy having an attack or XI without him. I am completely unhappy having an XI without Gilchrist.

I like that you bring up other people’s XIs in this thread. I like that in another thread you conveniently ignore that similar people and lists rate Imran as a better cricketer than Hadlee. I like the consistency based on whatever supports your opinion.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yet and again, I don’t blindly follow others opinions.

You have my opinion. Gilchrist is a lock for me. There is a huge gap between him and the next player. Marshall is not a lock. I’m perfectly happy having an attack or XI without him. I am completely unhappy having an XI without Gilchrist.

I like that you bring up other people’s XIs in this thread. I like that in another thread you conveniently ignore that similar people and lists rate Imran as a better cricketer than Hadlee. I like the consistency based on whatever supports your opinion.

Yep totally agree. Marshall was better, but he's less above replacement value for his role.

I'd much rather have Marshall for the average side, or indeed the vast majority of real Test teams. That's what actually matters, so I rate him as the much better player.

But I think I'd lose less by dropping Marshall for Hadlee (hell I'd even gain a tiny bit of batting at 9 as a minor counter-bonus) in an imaginary ATG XI type contest than dropping Gilchrist for Knott, and that's coming from someone who thinks Gilchrist's batting wouldn't hold up as well as most others in such a contest anyway.

 

[DrWolverine]

As great as Marshall was, one could replace him with Hadlee and not lose much.

One would lose more in terms of batting and lower order partnerships if Knott replaces Gilly.

 

[subshakerz]

Yet and again, I don’t blindly follow others opinions.

You have my opinion. Gilchrist is a lock for me. There is a huge gap between him and the next player. Marshall is not a lock. I’m perfectly happy having an attack or XI without him. I am completely unhappy having an XI without Gilchrist.

I like that you bring up other people’s XIs in this thread. I like that in another thread you conveniently ignore that similar people and lists rate Imran as a better cricketer than Hadlee. I like the consistency based on whatever supports your opinion.

Please remind Kyear that is wasn't long ago he was the one passionately arguing with us against picking Knott based on specialist skill in an ATG XI by arguing the keeper position was an allrounder one, and also that Gilly was a lock and Knott didn't have the same consensus. Now he has reversed himself.

We just had this conversation re keepers. My only disagreement with you was that the weighting should be different, but it is most definitely an all rounder position.

Was Knott seen as anything close to and AT XI lock prior to Gilly?

 

[subshakerz]

But I think I'd lose less by dropping Marshall for Hadlee (hell I'd even gain a tiny bit of batting at 9 as a minor counter-bonus) in an imaginary ATG XI type contest than dropping Gilchrist for Knott, and that's coming from someone who thinks Gilchrist's batting wouldn't hold up as well as most others in such a contest anyway.

The problem is Kyear is never consistent on his own criteria.

He will passionately argue against dropping Marshall based on specialist skill, but then will argue Knott can be put ahead of Gilly and Kallis ahead of Hammond and Wasim a lesser bowler can be selected for variety, and not see the contradiction.

 

[Xix2565]

So, does this mean Steyn is greater than Ambrose?

 

[DrWolverine]

Dale Steyn is greater than Ambrose.

 

[Johan]

Hmmm, Nice, multi-pages long Alan Knott vs Adam Gilchrist debate on Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn thread.

 

[DrWolverine]

Knott : The better keeper
Gilchrist : The better batsman
Not sure why there is a debate on this

 

[subshakerz]

Dale Steyn is greater than Ambrose.

I used to think Ambrose is better than Steyn based on being more miserly.

But there is a clear gulf between them in terms of who is more penetrative and better tested. On top of that, Steyn had a decade taking 5WPM which is an amazingly long period for a proper fast pace bowler.

Steyn is going to win me more games in more places over a long time. Simple as that.

 

[Coronis]

Knott : The better keeper
Gilchrist : The better batsman
Not sure why there is a debate on this

I don’t think there’s a debate on either of those two facts specifically.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yet, and again

Knott actually makes teams over Gilly.

You're trying really hard to ignore that.

You're trying to suggest that this is based on who is closer to whom.

If someone's the 3rd name of the sheet, it means you're a lock to make such teams, the 3rd mostly likely player to be on said team.

The others to you may be closer, but Knott actually has a better argument over Gilchrist. And why? Because he's better than Gilchrist at what is their primary job.

And, yet again, and this can't be emphasized enough, Knott has made teams over Gilchrist.

Will you actually answer and give us your own opinion.

Do you think Knott is closer to Gilchrist than the other top tier pacers (Hadlee, McGrath etc) are to Marshall?

 

[DrWolverine]

Do you think Knott is closer to Gilchrist than the other top tier pacers (Hadlee, McGrath etc) are to Marshall?

1. If you are merely picking on primary discipline(wk), I would choose Bob Taylor or Jack Russell ahead of Alan Knott.

2. If you want a wicket keeper who can also bat, Adam Gilchrist is the easy answer. A good keeper, explosive batsman and he bats at number 7.

 

[Thala_0710]

Will you actually answer and give us your own opinion.

Do you think Knott is closer to Gilchrist than the other top tier pacers (Hadlee, McGrath etc) are to Marshall?

Well I kind of agree with Kyear on this. Hadlee are Mcgrath are closer to Marshall than Knott is to Gilchrist imo, but one could also argue Knott has more of a case over Gilchrist depending on what each individual prioritizes in his wkb.
For example, consider a player who is a 9/10 on every possible metric as a batsman, another who is 9.3/10 on every possible metric. They are relatively close I would say but in no circumstance would I take the first over the second. Gilly vs Knott is let's say 8/10 vs 6/10 on batting and 8.5/10 vs 9/10 on keeping. Now, I would say the gap between these two guys is larger than the earlier two, but I could see someone taking Knott over Gilly if they prioritize keeping a lot more.
It's simple, if someone is a slightly but strictly version of someone else he is less likely to be replaced, than in another case wherep reference of the important skill comes into question.