Dale Steyn vs Muralitharan

[subshakerz]

What kind of silly a point is "he got hit in many key games"?

Replying to a comment that said he underperformed in draws.

 

[Bolo.]

He did strike fast but the benefits of it are exaggerated because he got hit more often and generally bowled less overs per test.

He got hit in many key games. Some in series losses like against Aus in SA in 2009. Some in draws that had to be saved by the bats. Basically almost once a series abroad against better teams he would have a shocker bad test.

Are the benefits exaggerated? He sits close to the top of the pile for WPM for quicks despite playing in a batting era and alongside a bunch of very fast striking bowlers. And the benefits of not giving much bowling to some Harris/Tahir 40ish average spinner are huge.

Replying to a comment that said he underperformed in draws.

You aren't showing this at all. The only away series losses in his career were his first, last, and one where he was out injured at the start. Other than these, there are only 3 away test losses in his career. His stats are very bad in draws, and he got some stick. But it's much better that he did failed in the draws and punched through in other games to swing series.

 

[subshakerz]

Are the benefits exaggerated? He sits close to the top of the pile for WPM for quicks despite playing in a batting era and alongside a bunch of very fast striking bowlers. And the benefits of not giving much bowling to some Harris/Tahir 40ish average spinner are huge.

Benefits aren't exaggerated which is why most of us put him in the top five pacers ever.

You aren't showing this at all. The only away series losses in his career were his first, last, and one where he was out injured at the start. Other than these, there are only 3 away test losses in his career. His stats are very bad in draws, and he got some stick. But it's much better that he did failed in the draws and punched through in other games to swing series.

Dude you think I am worked up over this over him being neutralised in dull foregone drawn games in the UAE? Nah. It's about actual awful performances he has done in games that have damaged SA.

Here are just a few examples of games I have seen Steyn stumble badly in:

India 2010 2nd test: On the heels of his historic Nagpur performance, almost too easily taken apart by Sehwag and co in the next test as India win and square the series.

England 2008 1st test: 1st innings, loses total control of the Duke ball as KP carts him around. SA forced to follow on after England post a huge total.

Australia in SA 2014 1st test: Starts off well in the first session but then mysteriously after that starts bowling completely listlessly as Smith and co post a formidable total. Gets hammered in next innings by Warner. SA lose.

Pak vs SA 1st test: Steyn gets knocked around very comfortably by Pak openers, almost too easily, as they post a big score. SA lose.

Australia in SA 2009: Probably the worst bowling I have seen by an ATG pacer in their prime in a series. For the first two tests bowls utter tripe, short and wide crap on bowling friendly wickets as newbies like North and Hughes easily score tons. SA lose the series largely thanks to Steyn.

I can give more examples if you like, but Steyns waywardness did hurt SA.

 

[Bolo.]

Benefits aren't exaggerated which is why most of us put him in the top five pacers ever.



Dude you think I am worked up over this over him being neutralised in dull foregone drawn games in the UAE? Nah. It's about actual awful performances he has done in games that have damaged SA.

Here are just a few examples of games I have seen Steyn stumble badly in:

India 2010 2nd test: On the heels of his historic Nagpur performance, almost too easily taken apart by Sehwag and co in the next test as India win and square the series.

England 2008 1st test: 1st innings, loses total control of the Duke ball as KP carts him around. SA forced to follow on after England post a huge total.

Australia in SA 2014 1st test: Starts off well in the first session but then mysteriously after that starts bowling completely listlessly as Smith and co post a formidable total. Gets hammered in next innings by Warner. SA lose.

Pak vs SA 1st test: Steyn gets knocked around very comfortably by Pak openers, almost too easily, as they post a big score. SA lose.

Australia in SA 2009: Probably the worst bowling I have seen by an ATG pacer in their prime in a series. For the first two tests bowls utter tripe, short and wide crap on bowling friendly wickets as newbies like North and Hughes easily score tons. SA lose the series largely thanks to Steyn.

I can give more examples if you like, but Steyns waywardness did hurt SA.

Player did not succeed in every match they ever played. More news at 11. There are absolutely going to be examples of any player having the wrong MO for the circumstances.

Of the matches you have listed, he went sub 3 ER vs Pakistan, and they won with more than a day to spare. What point are you trying to make?

England was a draw, and he contributed heavily to a series victory by taking a ton of fast wickets the next match. Kinda like all the series he played in England and AUS. Are you seriously complaining about an MO that wins you series?

Ya Steyn had a poor game vs India and a poor series vs AUS. It happens over a long career. In game terms, it happened to Steyn more than most ATGs. But you are talking about a game that all of the bowlers failed in. Steyn was more economical than the other bowlers, in a series that Steyn had already blasted a win to swing the series. Sure, he sucked. Badly. But India won that match by an innings with only 6 down. And a series that Steyn took over 5WPM in, as much as the other specialist quicks combined, at a way better average. A collective failure is not 'Steyn cost them a series'.

The one example I can think of when Steyn's MO actually probably cost RSA in relation to another ATG was Karunatane in 2019. Another ATG would potentially have bled him out of that innings, even when past due by date. I'm sure there are more. But I'm also sure that number is also way less than the number that his MO worked out in.

 

[subshakerz]

Player did not succeed in every match they ever played. More news at 11. There are absolutely going to be examples of any player having the wrong MO for the circumstances.

I don't expect Steyn to succeed in every game. Plenty of other ATG pacers have quiet games or unpenetrative spells. But it's another thing to be knocked around as leader of the attack regularly.

Of the matches you have listed, he went sub 3 ER vs Pakistan, and they won with more than a day to spare. What point are you trying to make?

Again, because you didn't see the game, Steyn was knocked around by the openers and middle order and only recovered his momentum by cheap wickets in the end. But it was a poor showing.

England was a draw, and he contributed heavily to a series victory by taking a ton of fast wickets the next match. Kinda like all the series he played in England and AUS. Are you seriously complaining about an MO that wins you series?

Dude you are missing my point entirely.

Yes, he is a great matchwinner. But then his MO also put his team in tough situations. Just because the batters were able to dig SA out of a hole after following on doesn't take away from the fact that Steyn was shellacked cas he couldn't control his swing and his team suffered.

Ya Steyn had a poor game vs India and a poor series vs AUS. It happens over a long career. In game terms, it happened to Steyn more than most ATGs.

Great that is all I want folks to acknowledge. That his matchwinning feats have this flip side moreso than other top tier pacers.

But you are talking about a game that all of the bowlers failed in. Steyn was more economical than the other bowlers, in a series that Steyn had already blasted a win to swing the series. Sure, he sucked. Badly. But India won that match by an innings with only 6 down. And a series that Steyn took over 5WPM in, as much as the other specialist quicks combined, at a way better average. A collective failure is not 'Steyn cost them a series'.

Respectfully you are again missing the point.

Steyn was supposed to be in red hot form coming right after Nagpur and then endures a shocker where he is smacked across the ground. That's not normal for ATG pacers.

And you can't just look at overall stats for the Aus series in 2009. His matchwinning came in the 3rd test by which time the series was lost.

And most definitely Steyn was the main culprit by allowing Australia to ratchet high scores on bowler friendly wickets in the first two tests with his loose stuff. If you see the series again you will see what I am talking about by how badly he bowled.

The one example I can think of when Steyn's MO actually probably cost RSA in relation to another ATG was Karunatane in 2019. Another ATG would potentially have bled him out of that innings, even when past due by date. I'm sure there are more. But I'm also sure that number is also way less than the number that his MO worked out in.

Of course, Steyn is an ATG top tier pacer, his MO mostly worked. The examples I gave are just relative to the weaknesses of other ATGs.

But my point is that the caveat with his legendary matchwinning stuff is that he is the pacer most likely to be carted around, and yes it did affect his team. I can give more examples but I think you get the point.

 

[Bolo.]

I don't expect Steyn to succeed in every game. Plenty of other ATG pacers have quiet games or unpenetrative spells. But it's another thing to be knocked around as leader of the attack regularly.


Again, because you didn't see the game, Steyn was knocked around by the openers and middle order and only recovered his momentum by cheap wickets in the end. But it was a poor showing.


Dude you are missing my point entirely.

Yes, he is a great matchwinner. But then his MO also put his team in tough situations. Just because the batters were able to dig SA out of a hole after following on doesn't take away from the fact that Steyn was shellacked cas he couldn't control his swing and his team suffered.


Great that is all I want folks to acknowledge. That his matchwinning feats have this flip side moreso than other top tier pacers.


Respectfully you are again missing the point.

Steyn was supposed to be in red hot form coming right after Nagpur and then endures a shocker where he is smacked across the ground. That's not normal for ATG pacers.

And you can't just look at overall stats for the Aus series in 2009. His matchwinning came in the 3rd test by which time the series was lost.

And most definitely Steyn was the main culprit by allowing Australia to ratchet high scores on bowler friendly wickets in the first two tests with his loose stuff. If you see the series again you will see what I am talking about by how badly he bowled.


Of course, Steyn is an ATG top tier pacer, his MO mostly worked. The examples I gave are just relative to the weaknesses of other ATGs.

But my point is that the caveat with his legendary matchwinning stuff is that he is the pacer most likely to be carted around, and yes it did affect his team. I can give more examples but I think you get the point.

I don't get why people on CW are so intent on dictating what others have watched or not watched. I watched most of the 1st innings in the UAE game. I don't understand why this is relevant. It's a game that the scorecard doesn't lie in.

No ****, Steyn's full on attack MO was bad for the team when he got things wrong. But how many series do you think this actually impacted negatively? Close to zero. He swung the results in almost every away series he played in for close to a decade, and his home record is stellar. I don't want to distract from the fact that Murali is the GOAT, but Steyn changed more series results than any bowler in history.

People forget that Steyn changed his MO in 2012ish. He didn't do it to be a better bowler. With the exception of the odd game, he was better just straight attacking. He changed it just to prolong his career cos he knew he was running out of shelf life as an express bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't get why people on CW are so intent on dictating what others have watched or not watched. I watched most of the 1st innings in the UAE game. I don't understand why this is relevant. It's a game that the scorecard doesn't lie in.

No ****, Steyn's full on attack MO was bad for the team when he got things wrong. But how many series do you think this actually impacted negatively? Close to zero. He swung the results in almost every away series he played in for close to a decade, and his home record is stellar. I don't want to distract from the fact that Murali is the GOAT, but Steyn changed more series results than any bowler in history.

People forget that Steyn changed his MO in 2012ish. He didn't do it to be a better bowler. With the exception of the odd game, he was better just straight attacking. He changed it just to prolong his career cos he knew he was running out of shelf life as an express bowler.

I think there is a strange thing on CW about admitting cricketer's flaws means you are denigrating them.

I already gave you examples of at least one series (Aus in SA 2009) where his bad bowling lost them it, and several games (India 2010, Aus in SA 2014, Eng 2008) that dictated the results of series where he bowled unusually bad and the team either lost or had to be bailed out. I can provide even more examples if you wish since there are plenty. I am not even counting him getting smacked around in games which where always going to be drawn from the outset.

You are deluding yourself if you think there was close to nil affect of his bad bowling.

But as a baseline of agreement, I think you will concede that Steyn had more outright bad days than other ATG pacers.

 

[Bolo.]

I think there is a strange thing on CW about admitting cricketer's flaws means you are denigrating them.

I already gave you examples of at least one series (Aus in SA 2009) where his bad bowling lost them it, and several games (India 2010, Aus in SA 2014, Eng 2008) that dictated the results of series where he bowled unusually bad and the team either lost or had to be bailed out. I can provide even more examples if you wish since there are plenty. I am not even counting him getting smacked around in games which where always going to be drawn from the outset.

You are deluding yourself if you think there was close to nil affect of his bad bowling.

But as a baseline of agreement, I think you will concede that Steyn had more outright bad days than other ATG pacers.

Do you really think that Steyn taking 16@30 lost the series when Morkel + Ntini took 16@40ish? Steyn had a poor series, but if they had not been hot garbage, RSA still would have won. Do you think RSA would have won that series if he had had a regulation poor ATG series and taken 3 or 4 WPM instead of striking fast?

You are giving examples of series that he swung by firing in other matches.

There's no debate about the fact Steyn was trash in relation to comparable bowlers when he was off. But he swung most away series he played in by firing with his crazy SR at the right times, and his poor ER, irrespective of how much it put RSA on the backfoot, very seldom made a difference to results at the end of the day.

 

[subshakerz]

Do you really think that Steyn taking 16@30 lost the series when Morkel + Ntini took 16@40ish? Steyn had a poor series, but if they had not been hot garbage, RSA still would have won. Do you think RSA would have won that series if he had had a regulation poor ATG series and taken 3 or 4 WPM instead of striking fast?

Yes because Steyn only came good in that series by the third test which he won, by which time the series was lost. Of course you are just reading the overall stats so you wouldn't know.

You are giving examples of series that he swung by firing in other matches.

Yes, he fired in the other games which I already give him credit for, but misfiring also cost them which you don't acknowledge.

There's no debate about the fact Steyn was trash in relation to comparable bowlers when he was off.

Yes

But he swung most away series he played in by firing with his crazy SR at the right times, and his poor ER, irrespective of how much it put RSA on the backfoot, very seldom made a difference to results at the end of the day.

That's just not true.

There's at least two Aus series at home where his bad performance contributed to series losses.

The India series turned out to be a draw instead of a win because India made a huge score.

At least two wins in Eng and Aus wouldn't have happened if the bats didn't bail out the team after Steyn got royally bashed.

I can think of two other series in the SC that Steyn getting caned contributed to changes to the series result, a loss and a draw.

And that's acting like it's completely irrelevant if he gets bashed in draws or dead rubber tests too, which it's not for too tier ATG standard.

 

[Bolo.]

Yes because Steyn only came good in that series by the third test which he won, by which time the series was lost. Of course you are just reading the overall stats so you wouldn't know.


Yes, he fired in the other games which I already give him credit for, but misfiring also cost them which you don't acknowledge.


Yes


That's just not true.

There's at least two Aus series at home where his bad performance turned into series losses.

The India series turned out to be a draw instead of a win because India made a huge score.

At least two wins in Eng and Aus wouldn't have happened if the bats didn't bail out the team after Steyn got royally bashed.

I can think of two other series in the SC that Steyn getting caned contributed to changes to the series result, a loss and a draw.

And that's acting like it's completely irrelevant if he gets bashed in draws or dead rubber tests too, which it's not for too tier ATG standard.

Can we please stop with this condescending you didn't watch the game stuff? For half the players we debate over on PCs, none of us have seen. If you know something from watching the games that the scorecards don't reflect, feel free to bring it up. But the way people lord games they have seen over others is silly.

I watched that series FTR. It's the reason I'm calling Steyn's performance poor rather than fine. He had a poor series and RSA would likely have won if he'd had a great one. But do you think it was his MO that cost RSA the series, and if he'd had an Ambrose style poor series and taken half the wickets at a good ER, RSA would have won? Tou are avoifing this question

Again, for most of the away series he played in, his hot/cold style quick striking swung the results. Reread my OP. Why are you going on about games that his underperformance in had no impact on results? Especially in series that his overperformesd in other games tha swung series results.

Again, he swung more series than any other bolwer in history. This doesn't make him the best bowler ever, but it does mean that complaining about his MO is remarkably dense.

 

[subshakerz]

Can we please stop with this condescending you didn't watch the game stuff? For half the players we debate over on PCs, none of us have seen. If you know something from watching the games that the scorecards don't reflect, feel free to bring it up. But the way people lord games they have seen over others is silly.

Apologies if I seemed condescending was not my intent bro. But yes I did bring up from the Aus series in 2009 he was bowling a lot of wide short stuff that was continually be hammered on the off side.

I watched that series FTR. It's the reason I'm calling Steyn's performance poor rather than fine. He had a poor series and RSA would likely have won if he'd had a great one. But do you think it was his MO that cost RSA the series, and if he'd had an Ambrose style poor series and taken half the wickets at a good ER, RSA would have won? Tou are avoifing this question

You realise that I also critique and downgrade Ambrose for his latter career half lack of penetration too? I rate Steyn ahead of Ambrose. But it's not like Ambrose was like that his entire career.

Anyways you are presenting a false dichotomy because plenty of ATGs have had quiet tests, like Ambrose, but it's another thing to have a bad test where you as leader of the attack get smashed which is more damaging.

Again, for most of the away series he played in, his hot/cold style quick striking swung the results. Reread my OP. Why are you going on about games that his underperformance in had no impact on results? Especially in series that his overperformesd in other games tha swung series results.

Because unlike you I am giving him credit for the games he won but demerit him for games he lost when he bowled bad. I am just being consistent.

And I gave you plenty of examples of games which SA lost and series where the results changed. Shall I give more? You are just skipping over most of my examples.

Again, he swung more series than any other bolwer in history. This doesn't make him the best bowler ever, but it does mean that complaining about his MO is remarkably dense.

The problem is you call his MO hot/cold yet don't want to follow your own logical to its conclusion. Basically he was a brilliant matchwinner but inconsistent which we usually demerit for other players.