vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Feel free to hold your breath, we'll have the West Indies debate up by the end of the night.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Hear, Hear, Hear : Lend me your Ear
- Thread starter SJS
- Start date
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Jack's Late Night Theses; Numero Quattro
Well, it's been a long time between drinks, but the feeling of guilt has been spreading like a wildflower through my lazy bones. So I thought that I'd better get around to proving that the West Indies of the 1980s are far inferior to the Caribbean team of now. For starters, I'll do it through player versus player analysis, and if the masses are still not convinced (however unlikely that is) of my contention, then maybe we'll talk about team records.
Because of the massive length of writing that I'll have to do for this post, I might hold back on the hyperbole a tad, to shorten it and get my point across better. Sorry if it lacks a little oomph without it, but I just want to get this out of the way.
In keeping them brief, if you want me to expand on them afterwards, just let me know.
THE OPENERS
Chris Gayle vs Desmond Haynes
Now, everyone talks about how good the WI opening partnership of the supposed golden years was, Greenidge and Haynes revered the world over. What they don't realise is how lucky they are to be able to witness someone like Chris Gayle, who when you look at the figures properly, is clearly a far superior player to either of them.
When comparing to Haynes, though, the first thing that you see is the massive discrepancy between Haynes' record at home and away. His average of 33 away is an enormous chink in his armour, and something further exploited by the fact that Gayle averages more away from the West Indies. This displays his adaptability is much better than Haynes'.
The much loved 317, respected by all for being constructed in such arduous conditions (even Mark Boucher could take wickets on that pitch!) also demonstrates his ability to make "big hundreds" while Haynes never got higher than 184.
Finally, Haynes had a weakness against spin, much more so than Gayle, which one can argue is displayed by the fact that Gayle averages more in matches played on the sub-continent. Of course, this is all without taking into account Gayle's bowling, who some say is better than that of Lance Gibbs...
Devon Smith vs Gordon Greenidge
What's interesting to find out about players is how they perform in the hard times, when the team isn't performing that well. Much to my suprise, Devon Smith outstripped Greenidge in this category, due to the fact that he averages 16.6 more runs when the team is forced to follow-on. Further enforcing the fact that Greenidge is just a front-runner is the fact that when the Windies enforced the follow-on upon someone else, he would average 122, indicating that his record is inflated against sub-standard opposition.
Also, when looking at big Gordon's figures, one notes that his average takes a big dive when you see how he performed as captain of the side. Therefore it can be concluded that he crushed under pressure. We cannot compare Smith in this field, but truthfully, if he was made captain, it would be quite an achievement to average less than what he does now.
Finally, keeping in mind that Devon's Test match career is in its infancy, I decided to compare the development of the two players, and straight away found that at the same stage, Smith is ahead of Greenidge. During matches played at the age of 23, Smith outclassed Greenidge completely. Therefore it is completely and utterly fair to conclude that Smith will end up being the better player.
Well, it's been a long time between drinks, but the feeling of guilt has been spreading like a wildflower through my lazy bones. So I thought that I'd better get around to proving that the West Indies of the 1980s are far inferior to the Caribbean team of now. For starters, I'll do it through player versus player analysis, and if the masses are still not convinced (however unlikely that is) of my contention, then maybe we'll talk about team records.
Because of the massive length of writing that I'll have to do for this post, I might hold back on the hyperbole a tad, to shorten it and get my point across better. Sorry if it lacks a little oomph without it, but I just want to get this out of the way.
In keeping them brief, if you want me to expand on them afterwards, just let me know.
THE OPENERS
Chris Gayle vs Desmond Haynes
Now, everyone talks about how good the WI opening partnership of the supposed golden years was, Greenidge and Haynes revered the world over. What they don't realise is how lucky they are to be able to witness someone like Chris Gayle, who when you look at the figures properly, is clearly a far superior player to either of them.
When comparing to Haynes, though, the first thing that you see is the massive discrepancy between Haynes' record at home and away. His average of 33 away is an enormous chink in his armour, and something further exploited by the fact that Gayle averages more away from the West Indies. This displays his adaptability is much better than Haynes'.
The much loved 317, respected by all for being constructed in such arduous conditions (even Mark Boucher could take wickets on that pitch!) also demonstrates his ability to make "big hundreds" while Haynes never got higher than 184.
Finally, Haynes had a weakness against spin, much more so than Gayle, which one can argue is displayed by the fact that Gayle averages more in matches played on the sub-continent. Of course, this is all without taking into account Gayle's bowling, who some say is better than that of Lance Gibbs...
Devon Smith vs Gordon Greenidge
What's interesting to find out about players is how they perform in the hard times, when the team isn't performing that well. Much to my suprise, Devon Smith outstripped Greenidge in this category, due to the fact that he averages 16.6 more runs when the team is forced to follow-on. Further enforcing the fact that Greenidge is just a front-runner is the fact that when the Windies enforced the follow-on upon someone else, he would average 122, indicating that his record is inflated against sub-standard opposition.
Also, when looking at big Gordon's figures, one notes that his average takes a big dive when you see how he performed as captain of the side. Therefore it can be concluded that he crushed under pressure. We cannot compare Smith in this field, but truthfully, if he was made captain, it would be quite an achievement to average less than what he does now.
Finally, keeping in mind that Devon's Test match career is in its infancy, I decided to compare the development of the two players, and straight away found that at the same stage, Smith is ahead of Greenidge. During matches played at the age of 23, Smith outclassed Greenidge completely. Therefore it is completely and utterly fair to conclude that Smith will end up being the better player.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
THE MIDDLE ORDER
Ramnaresh Sarwan vs Viv Richards
Even with Viv's decline in his later years, his record speaks for itself. Luckily enough for me, so does Sarwan's. Does Viv average 48 against Sri Lanka? 112.50 versus an Asian side? 49.21 in Africa? Has he made 4 centuries against South Africa? There are plenty of things that Sarwan has achieved in his career thus far that Viv has never gotten close to.
Interestingly, Sarwan averages more than Richards when the team wins, showing that he is often instrumental in winning matches for his country. What then makes things slightly more interesting is that he also averages more than Richards when the side loses.
What can also be assatained from these figures is that Viv averages an astonishing 60.86 in drawn matches. Now, when I think about it, draws tend to mean that the game has been played on a batsman friendly pitch...geez, it'd take a brave man to call IVA Richards a flat track bully.
So, in summation, Viv was a flat track bully and Sarwan is better. And doesn't chuck.
Maybe if Viv wore a headband, he might've been a bit more intimidating...
Brian Lara vs Larry Gomes
Lara - 148 catches
Gomes - 18 catches.
Enough said.
Shivnarine Chanderpaul vs Gus Logie/Richie Richardson
Hmmm. Shiv averages one century every 6 or so Tests. As for Gus-dog, once every 26 Test matches he reached three figures. Makes it a bit hard to state a proper case. So, because the last two have been walkovers, I'll makie it Richie Richardson instead of the man for some reason Australia named our TV Awards after. Then again, it makes sense - both are mediocrity personified.
Once again, we see that disease of captaincy affecting Richie's numbers, with his average as the skipper heading to mid-30s, while Chanders has managed to buck the trend, averaging 90 since he has taken the reins. This undoubtedly proves that he is a more mature and thinking cricketer than Richie, even if he doesn't wear a cool floppy.
In addition to that, Richie never scored a century in the fourth innings of a Test match – obviously this is when matches are there for the taking. This is something that Shiv has managed to perform during his career. Shivnarine also manages to average 40 away from the Caribbean, something that Richardson can only dream of…now that he’s retired.
Wavell Hinds vs Clive Lloyd
First of all, Lloyd was a wonderful player and captain. This doesn't mean, though, that he has the right to stand next to Wavell. I mean, "Dubya Dubya" Hinds has made 2583 Test runs without once ever moving his feet. Not even the genius of Bradman can compare to that. However, when you also look at the stats, we see that Wavell is much the underrated cricketer.
His record against the Pakistan side, so long a benchmark for batsmen to weigh themselves against, shows his skill, and the fact that it easily exceeds Lloyd's own against the same opposition makes any argument against the position held by yours truly redundant.
But the statistic that, to me, makes it irrefutable that "I wish his initial was a 'B'!" Hinds is better than Lloyd is the comparative performances in matches played in the United Arab Emirates. Wavell averages 31.50 more than Lloyd in this category, which shows how even in unusual circumstances, his adaptability and mental application is second to none.
Ramnaresh Sarwan vs Viv Richards
Even with Viv's decline in his later years, his record speaks for itself. Luckily enough for me, so does Sarwan's. Does Viv average 48 against Sri Lanka? 112.50 versus an Asian side? 49.21 in Africa? Has he made 4 centuries against South Africa? There are plenty of things that Sarwan has achieved in his career thus far that Viv has never gotten close to.
Interestingly, Sarwan averages more than Richards when the team wins, showing that he is often instrumental in winning matches for his country. What then makes things slightly more interesting is that he also averages more than Richards when the side loses.
What can also be assatained from these figures is that Viv averages an astonishing 60.86 in drawn matches. Now, when I think about it, draws tend to mean that the game has been played on a batsman friendly pitch...geez, it'd take a brave man to call IVA Richards a flat track bully.
So, in summation, Viv was a flat track bully and Sarwan is better. And doesn't chuck.
Maybe if Viv wore a headband, he might've been a bit more intimidating...
Brian Lara vs Larry Gomes
Lara - 148 catches
Gomes - 18 catches.
Enough said.
Shivnarine Chanderpaul vs Gus Logie/Richie Richardson
Hmmm. Shiv averages one century every 6 or so Tests. As for Gus-dog, once every 26 Test matches he reached three figures. Makes it a bit hard to state a proper case. So, because the last two have been walkovers, I'll makie it Richie Richardson instead of the man for some reason Australia named our TV Awards after. Then again, it makes sense - both are mediocrity personified.
Once again, we see that disease of captaincy affecting Richie's numbers, with his average as the skipper heading to mid-30s, while Chanders has managed to buck the trend, averaging 90 since he has taken the reins. This undoubtedly proves that he is a more mature and thinking cricketer than Richie, even if he doesn't wear a cool floppy.
In addition to that, Richie never scored a century in the fourth innings of a Test match – obviously this is when matches are there for the taking. This is something that Shiv has managed to perform during his career. Shivnarine also manages to average 40 away from the Caribbean, something that Richardson can only dream of…now that he’s retired.
Wavell Hinds vs Clive Lloyd
First of all, Lloyd was a wonderful player and captain. This doesn't mean, though, that he has the right to stand next to Wavell. I mean, "Dubya Dubya" Hinds has made 2583 Test runs without once ever moving his feet. Not even the genius of Bradman can compare to that. However, when you also look at the stats, we see that Wavell is much the underrated cricketer.
His record against the Pakistan side, so long a benchmark for batsmen to weigh themselves against, shows his skill, and the fact that it easily exceeds Lloyd's own against the same opposition makes any argument against the position held by yours truly redundant.
But the statistic that, to me, makes it irrefutable that "I wish his initial was a 'B'!" Hinds is better than Lloyd is the comparative performances in matches played in the United Arab Emirates. Wavell averages 31.50 more than Lloyd in this category, which shows how even in unusual circumstances, his adaptability and mental application is second to none.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
THE WICKETKEEPER
Courtney Browne vs Jeff Dujon
Well, I was up against it this time to prove that Browne had it over Dujon, but then one statistic cried out to me. Now, during both these players’ careers, Pakistan have had a very strong bowling line up, with the likes of Imran, Qadir and Akram lining up agianst Dujon, and Akram, Shoaib and Waqar trying to knock off Browne’s block. And it has been against this side that these two wicketkeepers have had their biggest problems batting-wise.
In Pakistan, Dujon averages a whole 5.70. This was obviously during a period of bad form for Dujon. Compare this to Browne, who also struck the ***** while in his worst period of form, and averages a similarly abysmal number as the above-mentioned one. The difference is, though, that his abysmal average is .05 more than Dujon’s, which effectively means that Browne’s low periods are not as poor as Dujon’s, making Browne a more consistent player.
In fact, when you also look at the fact that during Dujon’s low period, he averaged 25 runs per dismissal less than his average against all bowling, compared to Browne’s 10 runs, then we see that Browne is most definently a more reliable contributor to his side with the stick.
And not forgetting that Browne averages a tick over 4 dismissals a match, far exceeding Dujon’s 272 in 80 tests. Mind you, Browne has benefited from keeping to much better bowlers…
Courtney Browne vs Jeff Dujon
Well, I was up against it this time to prove that Browne had it over Dujon, but then one statistic cried out to me. Now, during both these players’ careers, Pakistan have had a very strong bowling line up, with the likes of Imran, Qadir and Akram lining up agianst Dujon, and Akram, Shoaib and Waqar trying to knock off Browne’s block. And it has been against this side that these two wicketkeepers have had their biggest problems batting-wise.
In Pakistan, Dujon averages a whole 5.70. This was obviously during a period of bad form for Dujon. Compare this to Browne, who also struck the ***** while in his worst period of form, and averages a similarly abysmal number as the above-mentioned one. The difference is, though, that his abysmal average is .05 more than Dujon’s, which effectively means that Browne’s low periods are not as poor as Dujon’s, making Browne a more consistent player.
In fact, when you also look at the fact that during Dujon’s low period, he averaged 25 runs per dismissal less than his average against all bowling, compared to Browne’s 10 runs, then we see that Browne is most definently a more reliable contributor to his side with the stick.
And not forgetting that Browne averages a tick over 4 dismissals a match, far exceeding Dujon’s 272 in 80 tests. Mind you, Browne has benefited from keeping to much better bowlers…
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
I can see why you left out the bowlers.
*bumps thread*
*bumps thread*
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
...lol, shuddupSamuel_Vimes said:I can see why you left out the bowlers.
*bumps thread*
I haven't even looked at the bowlers yet. Combination of work, chances are its nigh impossible, and a lack of feedback - I thought no-one was reading this thread.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I only saw this now... Excellent work, Vic... 
BTW, that Browne > Dujob argument PWNS all.
BTW, that Browne > Dujob argument PWNS all.
LongHopCassidy
International Captain
Can anyone prove that Michael Kasprowicz is a better death bowler in ODIs than Wasim Akram?
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
I have to finish off the Windies - 80s versus NOW argument (Malcolm Marshall is soooo crap!) so if anyone else *cough*Hakon*cough* is interested in taking that one, feel free. If I manage to get the Windies one out of the way and no-one else has touched it, then I'll have a crack. Tough to find stats for though, I'd assume...LongHopCassidy said:
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
I tried.LongHopCassidy said:
At one point, I found that Kasprowicz had bowled a maiden at the death in his career, but it turned out Wasim had too, so no luck there. So, I'm giving up.
LongHopCassidy
International Captain
Could this be the unscalable plateau for Swaranjeet's hardy crew?
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
This totally unacceptable. Everyone knows Kasper is a far greater bowler at the death than Wasim Akram. Just because stats specifically of bowling in the death overs are not available doesnt mean the knowledgeable do not know the same. Anyway since exact death over stats arent available here is an undeniable proof of Kasper's superiority based on whats available.LongHopCassidy said:Could this be the unscalable plateau for Swaranjeet's hardy crew?
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Allow me to interject here.SJS said:This totally unacceptable. Everyone knows Kasper is a far greater bowler at the death than Wasim Akram. Just because stats specifically of bowling in the death overs are not available doesnt mean the knowledgeable do not know the same. Anyway since exact death over stats arent available here is an undeniable proof of Kasper's superiority based on whats available.
Has anyone actually defined what constitutes a 'death over' per se? If it isn't a true 'death over', how do we determine whether or not it is a 'mortally wounded' over to take one extreme, or a 'mere flesh wound over' at the other extremity? Similarly, shouldn't we also be concerning ourselves with the quaintly-named but more accurately defined and described 'third light average', which owes its name to the tactics employed by German snipers and the occasional leg-spinner in the trenches during the first world war battles at Paschendale, The Somme and Headingley?
I think these points ought to be cleared up before you make any other unfounded and misleading statements about Mark Ramprakash.
LongHopCassidy
International Captain
I sit uncorrected.SJS said:This totally unacceptable. Everyone knows Kasper is a far greater bowler at the death than Wasim Akram. Just because stats specifically of bowling in the death overs are not available doesnt mean the knowledgeable do not know the same. Anyway since exact death over stats arent available here is an undeniable proof of Kasper's superiority based on whats available.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
As opposed to Warney, who delivered a text message to a "wouldn't touch it if I were dead" maiden.marc71178 said:
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
The Assignment : To prove that Kasprowicz is a better bowler at the death than Wasim Akram
The Constraints : Lack of availability of statistics of the death overs
Modus Operendi : Use the other relevant stats available to show how Kasper HAS to be a better bowler at the death.
What is required to be a good bowler at the death ?
1. To be an economical bowler to start with.
2. To have the ability to bowl well to middle order batsmen (after all it is if they are still there at the end that the job will be tough not if 9, 10 Jack are struggling to get through the 50 overs)
3. To have the ability to bowl tightly in the 21st century's batsman friendly conditions where run rates have touched hitherto unimagined heights.
1. Comparison of Akram and Kasper's abilities against the middle order batsmen.
It may surprise the zillions of sub-continental devotees of the Pakistani Southpaw that he seemed to specialise in handling tail enders !!
Blasphemy ?
No sir !! Fact !
127 of Akrams victim's or 25.3 % of all the wickets he took in limited over internationals were of tail enders(numbers 8 to 11). Kasper has only 9 wickets(13.8%) of tail enders !! Surprised ? Well dont be. There's more.
You may say what has this to do with bowling at the death when we are agreed that its bowling to better batsmen (if they are still there at the death) is what matters. Okay, okay. Only 29.1 % of Akram's victims are middle order batsmen (numbers 4 to 7) while our lion from down under counts a phenomenal 44.6% of all his victims as being from the middle order !!
Thats not all. I am well aware of the sceptics who may rush into the well of the house shouting that there will be cases (howsoever few) when numbers 1 to 3 may also be at the end.
SO. If we add all victims from numbers 1 to 7 (though its less than fair to expect top order to be there often enough to matter) we still find
Akram having only 74.7%
wkts from top and middle order while
Kasper has 86.2 %
of his victims from this august group !!!!
Clearly Kasper has the top batsmen in a tizzy compared to Akram who seems to shrink like a violet before the onslaught of the top and middle order. Clearly this must translate itself into a better performance when faced by these same batsmen at the wicket in all situations of the match including the death overs.
2. Ability to bowl maidens at will !!!.
As is usual with the ignorant or the semi-litterate, people jump at Akrams career figures and wave them in the face of Kasper to try and prove that the former was a more economical bowler. This is a fallacy.
Firstly, Kasper and Akram played in different eras with very little overlap so taking into account Akram's figures for the pre-Kasper era of cricket is stupid.
Secondly, Kasper has been one of the greatest victims of unfair selection policies of his countries cricket authorities.
From the time he made his debut in December 1995 till November 2003, he played in a grand total of 16 ODI's in 8 years !! 2 ODI's per year !! What does one expect by way of consistent performance from a young man in this situation ??
In a similar 8 year period between 1994 and 2002, Akram played 169 ODI's. OVER 21 ODI's per year !!
And we want to compare them ??
Anyway, in the 18 months since Kasper has played with some regularity(2004 and 2005) playing 24 matches in a year and a half, he has shown himself to be one of the great bowlers for this form of the game.
How do we say that ?
Well what is one of the most difficult things for a bowler to do in an ODI? Bowl a maiden of course.
In the years 2004 and 2005 , 10.7 % of all overs bowled by Kasper have been maidens !! Can you beat that ??
Akram has a career % of 7.8 !!
Kasper today is 30% MORE LIKELY to bowl a maiden over than Akram was throughout his career !!
3. Finally the much abused economy rates.
Arm chair critics of the 'X_X' variety tend to use averages and economy and strike rates as gospel and use them to prove or disprove this or that. But all they do is to expose their total lack of understanding of the game and its evolution over time.
Everyone knows that the game today has evolved beyond recognition from what it was even ten years ago. And the one area in which it has changed most dramatically is the scoring rates of batsmen. The Sehwag, Gilchrist's Afridi's Gayle's make a mockery of the bowlers economy rate. It is in this tough as nails environment that masters of the art like Kasper have honed their art not in the protected cushy times of Sanjay Manjrekar , Mike Gatting and Atherton.
The real test of a bowler's capacity to contain a batsman has come in the 21st century. It is in this boiling couldren that we decided to compare the great Kasper and the pretender from Pakistan.
In the 21st century, Kasper has an economy rate of 4.095 (and mind you he has bowled in 2004 and 2005 !!
Akram bowled only in 2000-2003(beginning) and averages 4.142.
Playing only 6 matches in 2003, he found the going so tough, (he averaged 4.28 and 4.23 in 2002 and 2004) that he chose to retire rather than soil his career figures further !!!
I have no doubt that the speed with which Akram's figures were being reworked by the batsmen of the new millenium he would have ended in the upper strata with the great AAgarkar for company.
Between 2001 and 2003 his averag had already moved up by a stunning 0.56 runs per over !!!!
I rest my case.
Last edited:
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Anthony?Jamee999 said:Nice one.
McGrath better bat than Bradman please
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
We've already done McGrath better than Gilchrist - isnt' that enough for you?Jamee999 said:Nice one.
McGrath better bat than Bradman please
And SJS, its good to see you back in here again. Well done, chief!