Do SC Pacers Deserve More Credit For Home Performances?

[kyear2]

SA batsmen do bonus points though. @kyear2 rates kallis highly and selects Graeme Smith over Gavaskar and Hutton (I think) sometimes because of his difficult home pitches. I dont think anyone says they should just "learn to adapt" and dont take into account that its tough going.

To be fair I have Kallis 13th, which is about par, and not really based on the home performances.

Smith though, yeah that factored in. But Smith performed better in better conditions away from home, which is what is expected if your home conditions are so much more difficult.
But Smith isn't a straight up upgrade over Sunny and Len, just beings different things.

 

[Socerer 01]

I always meant pacers. Why would I of all people defend spinners in SC?

you will once Abrar Ahmed has a similar record to Ashwin

 

[Bolo.]

Well if it's true then give the bowlers extra credit. That's all were asking but you're stuck in the old ways, just mentioning it as a cliche but denying it in reality.


Youre exaggerating the other cases sorry. I don't think WI was tough for pacers overall in the 90s. At the very least it had several pace friendly grounds.


Again, stop doing this. We do exhaustive away analysis already. We don't need to be petty in suggesting that the figures SC pacers have would actually be a bit better overall once we adjust for pitch quality.

Why do I get the feeling you are only unwilling to apply this reasoning on account of it leading to a conclusion you don't like?

 

[Slifer]

Why do I get the feeling you are only unwilling to apply this reasoning on account of it leading to a conclusion you don't like?

Agreed.

 

[Slifer]

Well if it's true then give the bowlers extra credit. That's all were asking but you're stuck in the old ways, just mentioning it as a cliche but denying it in reality.


Youre exaggerating the other cases sorry. I don't think WI was tough for pacers overall in the 90s. At the very least it had several pace friendly grounds.


Again, stop doing this. We do exhaustive away analysis already. We don't need to be petty in suggesting that the figures SC pacers have would actually be a bit better overall once we adjust for pitch quality.

Interesting. Because afaic, since pitches in Asia are so much more difficult for pacers, as I suggested before a fair way to compare bowlers would be to compare them away:

Hadlee vs Imran. Ignore Hadlee's record in NZ and Imran in Pakistan (since Hadlee had it a lot easier and Imran much harder). Compare them away in: WI, Aus, Eng and India.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah so why is it controversial to say a pacer who has to bowl half his career on low bounce pitches is at a strategic disadvantage?

I haven't made it past page two as yet, but some of your arguments aren't making sense.

1. Imran is rated what, 7th / 8th all time. Besides your Ambrose campaign (which is Imran inspired), who is Imran objectively better than that's rated above him? Unlike Ambrose he wasn't even close to making the top 6 vote.

2. You continue to ignore this, Imran wasn't great in the SC, he was great in Pakistan, he was well below par in India.

3. If he's so great in unhelpful conditions are home, why doesn't the numbers improve in overseas conditions. In all of the more helpful conditions outside of Pakistan, none of them he performed better in.

4. You mention low bounce conditions and abrasive pitches, but those are the things that helps a reverse swing bowler who relies on LBWs. It didn't hurt him.

How many times in recent tours in Australia do leg before appeals get turned down due to the balls going over the stumps, but you're supposed to adapt when you go to different places. That's what the great ones do.

 

[kyear2]

As opposed to all those NZ seamers who never picked the seam and their neutral umpires.

The difference being that Hadlee was equally good away from home, proving it just wasn't the conditions or other favorable "conditions" Imran didn't.

Again, if we're going to give extra credit to Asian bowlers who do well at home, we're also going to downgrade them when they do worse in more favorable conditions? Yes or no? Imran who is the reason for this thread (let's be honest) was amazing in Pakistan but was distinctly worse in England and Australia to the tune of an extra 5 and 10 runs in his average and + 15-20 or so more balls in his strike rate.

Give them extra credit for doing well in Asia but they're getting points deducted when they underperform in more favorable conditions.

Explain why he was so much worse away from home, especially in Australia and India, you said he was great in SC conditions and flat pitches.

The point is if you're so great at home, back it up.

 

[Slifer]

He wants them rated above Ambrose, and he won’t rest until it happens.

This so obvious and yes I'll play his stupid little game. Why not, I'm bored. I already suggested a fair resolution:

Ambrose vs Wasim, disregard their home conditions since one had it much easier and compare them away to Australia, India, RSA, NZ, SL and England. Might leave out India too since Wasim bowled in India and Curtly didn't and that's unfair:

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[subshakerz]

Why do I get the feeling you are only unwilling to apply this reasoning on account of it leading to a conclusion you don't like?

Because you have already made a different conclusion yet have a disconnect about the implications of SC pacers having it harder.

 

[subshakerz]

This so obvious and yes I'll play his stupid little game. Why not, I'm bored. I already suggested a fair resolution:

Ambrose vs Wasim, disregard their home conditions since one had it much easier and compare them away to Australia, India, RSA, NZ, SL and England. Might leave out India too since Wasim bowled in India and Curtly didn't and that's unfair:

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

No, I state clearly, I regard Ambrose as better than Wasim. I am arguing based on principle.

Hadlee vs Imran. Ignore Hadlee's record in NZ and Imran in Pakistan (since Hadlee had it a lot easier and Imran much harder). Compare them away in: WI, Aus, Eng and India.

So your way to assess bowlers is to ignore half their careers completely. Great.

 

[OverratedSanity]

This so obvious and yes I'll play his stupid little game. Why not, I'm bored. I already suggested a fair resolution:

Ambrose vs Wasim, disregard their home conditions since one had it much easier and compare them away to Australia, India, RSA, NZ, SL and England. Might leave out India too since Wasim bowled in India and Curtly didn't and that's unfair:

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Wait no, why would you disregard it? If you agree ambrose had it easier shouldn't the conclusion be that wasim's home record in Pakistan was arguably more impressive than Ambrose in WI?

Why do stats in other countries matter, they're literally irrelevant to the question being asked "Do SC bowlers deserve more credit for home performances".

 

[Slifer]

No, I state clearly, I regard Ambrose as better than Wasim. I am arguing based on principle

Ok, so I offered a fair solution. Away conditions in England, NZ etc. They're are just as foreign to Ambrose as they are to Wasim and Imran. Therefore compare those bowlers away and ignore their home performances. We can do the same for any two bowlers one being from Asia and the other not.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No, I state clearly, I regard Ambrose as better than Wasim. I am arguing based on principle

These blokes can't handle your simple statement that SC pacers deserve some extra credit for home performances, which even they admit is true.

Every post of theirs goes something like "Yeah bowling in Pakistan is probably harder for a pacer...... BUT WHY DID ASIAN BOWLER A SUCK IN ENGLAND??!!" as though that is in any way relevant. They know you've said something true but can't bring themselves to admit it without also waffling about away records which isn't even what us being spoken about. You've exposed them @subshakerz.

 

[subshakerz]

I haven't made it past page two as yet, but some of your arguments aren't making sense.

1. Imran is rated what, 7th / 8th all time. Besides your Ambrose campaign (which is Imran inspired), who is Imran objectively better than that's rated above him? Unlike Ambrose he wasn't even close to making the top 6 vote.

2. You continue to ignore this, Imran wasn't great in the SC, he was great in Pakistan, he was well below par in India.

3. If he's so great in unhelpful conditions are home, why doesn't the numbers improve in overseas conditions. In all of the more helpful conditions outside of Pakistan, none of them he performed better in.

4. You mention low bounce conditions and abrasive pitches, but those are the things that helps a reverse swing bowler who relies on LBWs. It didn't hurt him.

How many times in recent tours in Australia do leg before appeals get turned down due to the balls going over the stumps, but you're supposed to adapt when you go to different places. That's what the great ones do.

The difference being that Hadlee was equally good away from home, proving it just wasn't the conditions or other favorable "conditions" Imran didn't.



Explain why he was so much worse away from home, especially in Australia and India, you said he was great in SC conditions and flat pitches.

The point is if you're so great at home, back it up.

The same recycled argument. Away this, away that, anything to not give SC pacers extra home credit. We don't see these excuses when it comes to Kallis at home, everyone takes it at face value.

It's quite simple, are you willing to treat a SC pacers' home career as an independent achievement or not? Do you give them credit to adapting to difficult conditions or not?

 

[subshakerz]

Ok, so I offered a fair solution. Away conditions in England, NZ etc. They're are just as foreign to Ambrose as they are to Wasim and Imran. Therefore compare those bowlers away and ignore their home performances. We can do the same for any two bowlers one being from Asia and the other not.

Doing well in NZ and Eng is a completely different challenge. Why do I have to explain this to you or have you missed my point?

 

[subshakerz]

These blokes can't handle your simple statement that SC pacers deserve some extra credit for home performances, which even they admit is true.

Every post of theirs goes something like "Yeah bowling in Pakistan is probably harder for a pacer...... BUT WHY DID ASIAN BOWLER A SUCK IN ENGLAND??!!" as though that is in any way relevant. They know you've said something true but can't bring themselves to admit it without also waffling about away records which isn't even what us being spoken about. You've exposed them @subshakerz.

Yup, at this point by just repeatedly bringing up away performances they are just either confused or deliberately dodging the argument in question.

 

[Slifer]

Wait no, why would you disregard it? If you agree ambrose had it easier shouldn't the conclusion be that wasim's home record in Pakistan was arguably more impressive than Ambrose in WI?

Why do stats in other countries matter, they're literally irrelevant to the question being asked "Do SC bowlers deserve more credit for home performances".

No because that's not Subz's motivation. He wants Imran ranked higher and Imran's record to have 1-2 points lopped off overall. That's also unfair. Give Imran extra credit for doing well at home but not deducting points for doing well in supposedly more favorite conditions, how is that fair?

I'd agree to this: give SC bowlers extra credit for doing well at home but deduct them accordingly, when they perform less so in more favorable conditions. And I'm not talking of a one or two runs drop off, a difference of 5+ runs is a significant drop off.

 

[OverratedSanity]

but deduct them accordingly, when they perform less so in more favorable conditions.

This. Is. Already. Done.

give SC bowlers extra credit for doing well at home

This is not.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yup, at this point by just repeatedly bringing up away performances they are just either confused or deliberately dodging the argument in question.

It's deliberate waffling. So transparent.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

This is one of those rare threads when subs is actually right