Ian Botham vs Dennis Lillee

[subshakerz]

Not against Bazball though.

Ok but that's just one test. He certainly has done well in two series there.

 

[capt_Luffy]

What does Trueman have to do with this comparison? I already debated him about this and he had to make some concessions such as admitting there is little separating them in the WI and basically that Lillee is better away from home.

He will come.

 

[Johan]

Failing against the WI truly separates him from Lille though.

Yeah, performance against the strongest sides of your time is certainly the gold standard...

 

[Johan]

I already debated him about this and he had to make some concessions such as admitting there is little separating them in the WI and basically that Lillee is better away from home.

Though tbf That was before I had fully read on the 1958-59 Ashes.

 

[subshakerz]

Though tbf That was before I had fully read on the 1958-59 Ashes.

That wasnt the crux of the debate tho.

 

[Johan]

That wasnt the crux of the debate tho.

was important to it.

 

[subshakerz]

was important to it.

It boiled down to you leveraging a more exceptional home record with a slightly worse away record of Trueman over Lillee, whereas I said Lillee was amazing as at home in his own right and achieved levels of worldclass success in England that Trueman never managed in Aus and WI despite four series there.

 

[Johan]

It boiled down to you leveraging a more exceptional home record with a slightly worse away record of Trueman over Lillee, whereas I said Lillee was amazing as at home in his own right and achieved levels of worldclass success in England that Trueman never managed in Aus and WI despite four series there.

Yeah my argument was Trueman being one of the GOAT bowlers at home, slightly better in Windies and having just plain better numbers against the top two teams (WI, Aus) than Lillee did against his top two (Pak, WI) is what pulled it for Trueman even though Lillee was superior in Ashes rival home territory.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah my argument was Trueman being one of the GOAT bowlers at home, slightly better in Windies and having just plain better numbers against the top two teams (WI, Aus) than Lillee did against his top two (Pak, WI) is what pulled it for Trueman even though Lillee was superior in Ashes rival home territory.

Slightly better in WI by ignoring his early series there is it?

You told me you rate McGrath so highly vs Barnes because of his Ashes record in England despite England not being a top team then. Why not with Lillee?

I think I just look at the big picture. I would find it hard to rate a bat so high if he never averaged over 50 away from home against non minnows despite having reasons in context to account for each series. Same with Trueman.

 

[Johan]

Slightly better in WI by ignoring his early series there is it?

You told me you rate McGrath so highly vs Barnes because of his Ashes record in England despite England not being a top team then. Why not with Lillee?

I think I just look at the big picture. I would find it hard to rate a bat so high if he never averaged over 50 away from home despite having reasons in context to account for each series. Same with Trueman.

You can count the 71 test for Lillee and the 54 series for Freddie and it'd be relative, but I just think Freddie in 60 Windies is a little more impressive than the WSC tour.

when comparing Barnes and McGrath the Ashes record is the best link between them, Freddie and Lillee are close enough that we don't have to put all the focus on the Ashes tho that does count for Lillee even if I think they were roughly relative in home Ashes.

overall, I just don't have very strong opinions on Lillee vs Trueman, Trueman clearly the better home bowler and better in the two countries they both toured bar home, Lillee better in England than Trueman in Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

You can count the 71 test for Lillee and the 54 series for Freddie and it'd be relative, but I just think Freddie in 60 Windies is a little more impressive than the WSC tour.

when comparing Barnes and McGrath the Ashes record is the best link between them, Freddie and Lillee are close enough that we don't have to put all the focus on the Ashes tho that does count for Lillee even if I think they were roughly relative in home Ashes.

overall, I just don't have very strong opinions on Lillee vs Trueman, Trueman clearly the better home bowler and better in the two countries they both toured bar home, Lillee better in England than Trueman in Australia.

Lillee was injured and broke down mid 72 test and you argued yourself not to count it. Are you suggesting we remove all early career series from bowlers records entirely? I wouldn't do that unless someone is exceptionally young. So by right Lillee should be better in WI overall.

I think you are too easy on Trueman away frankly which does take the gloss from his home record. Bottomline in both Aus and WI in 16 tests he took 62 wickets @ around 30 with a far higher SR than at home. I don't see the need to give him a pass.

 

[subshakerz]

for Reference, I think Ambrose would've been successful in 90s India too.

Based on what?

 

[Johan]

Lillee was injured and broke down mid 72 test and you argued yourself not to count it. Are you suggesting we remove all early career series from bowlers records entirely? I wouldn't do that unless someone is exceptionally young. So by right Lillee should be better in WI overall.

I think you are too easy on Trueman away frankly which does take the gloss from his home record. Bottomline in both Aus and WI in 16 tests he took 62 wickets @ around 30 with a far higher SR than at home. I don't see the need to give him a pass.

I don't think either the first series for Trueman in Windies nor the 72 test for Lillee should count, first tour was a political mess and he wasn't a part of the team constantly even at this point, bowled to ATG batting with an ankle injury. 1960 tour and WSC are the perfect counter parts, 5 tests, both at peak of their powers, no outside interference, Trueman did better.

I find it kind of ironic you complain about blind average reading and make that statement, Trueman was injured in the 1958-59 series, the Australians were bluntly cheating, not giving LBWs and allowing their players to throw, and he'd not have played a single game had England not gotten crushed in the first 2 games, he was only called because Peter May ran out of options. 1963 Ashes is the only one where he was at full output, he averaged 26 in a flat series and singlehandedly saved the Ashes from being a loss.

so looking at it

Australia — One series, flat series, 26 average, won a game to make the series 1-1 draw out of the five games. is that not decent enough?

I actually think people are too hard on his away record...like Kyear on Imran

 

[Johan]

Based on what?

those lads were pitful players of pace, almost as pitful as Kiwis against spin bowling, and if you can use cutters 90s Indian wickets weren't hell.

 

[ataraxia]

A 23 bowling average with a healthy SR is better than a 20 bowling average with a high SR.

That's equivalent to saying that a 50 batting average with a high SR is better than a 57.5 batting average with a low SR... hang on... I'm getting a message in my ear... people actually think that? Better change my tune then.

That's equivalent to saying that a 43.5 batting average with a high SR is better than a 50 batting average with a low SR.

 

[subshakerz]

That's equivalent to saying that a 43.5 batting average with a high SR is better than a 50 batting average with a low SR.

Yeah except it isn't because a 23 bowling average isn't equivalent to a 43 batting average, especially if the bowler has 5WPM.

 

[subshakerz]

those lads were pitful players of pace, almost as pitful as Kiwis against spin bowling, and if you can use cutters 90s Indian wickets weren't hell.

Ambrose didn't really use cutters though compared to seam, he especially wasn't as skilled at them as Walsh. And if he toured after 94 should op he certainly was more pitch dependent.

 

[Johan]

Ambrose didn't really use cutters though compared to seam, he especially wasn't as skilled at them as Walsh. And if he toured after 94 should op he certainly was more pitch dependent.

his leg cutter was pretty lethal, combined with the pace he had pre 94, the accuracy and the naturally extracted bounce I don't see any Indian Batsmen except Tendulkar standing upto him consistently.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't think either the first series for Trueman in Windies nor the 72 test for Lillee should count, first tour was a political mess and he wasn't a part of the team constantly even at this point, bowled to ATG batting with an ankle injury. 1960 tour and WSC are the perfect counter parts, 5 tests, both at peak of their powers, no outside interference, Trueman did better.

I find it kind of ironic you complain about blind average reading and make that statement, Trueman was injured in the 1958-59 series, the Australians were bluntly cheating, not giving LBWs and allowing their players to throw, and he'd not have played a single game had England not gotten crushed in the first 2 games, he was only called because Peter May ran out of options. 1963 Ashes is the only one where he was at full output, he averaged 26 in a flat series and singlehandedly saved the Ashes from being a loss.

so looking at it

Australia — One series, flat series, 26 average, won a game to make the series 1-1 draw out of the five games. is that not decent enough?

I actually think people are too hard on his away record...like Kyear on Imran

I already said if he is playing through injury then we can write off those series.

So if you want to exclude 52-53 in WI if he had an ankle injury that's ok. However complaining about not being a regular in the team is special pleading, all cricketers face that and unless you are going to chop those out of others bowlers records the don't bring this up.

And if he was injured entirely in 58-59 then fine we can remove that. I don't accept the other excuses though because again we don't make those exceptions for other cricketers.

So what are we left with? Two series averaging 26 that you yourself describe as decent to good and I agree. But somehow that is sufficient for you and you don't see a problem for an ATG bowler to never have series better than that away from home. At least Imran has several away series that are excellent by these standards so you can't make that comparison.

You are the same guy who went through a fine tooth comb over Tendulkar record and were adamant that ATGs need high yield series against top opposition to impress you.

Sorry, but I don't believe that you believe Trueman has adequate showings away from home compared to others. Nor do I think you think Trueman in WI was qualitatively really better than Lillee in WI to establish some definitive advantage there (21 wickets@26 vs 23 wickets@28 isn't really much difference at all), but you want some point of edge I guess.

I honestly think you want to make a case of relaxing typical away standards to allow for Truemans home advantage to shine brighter.

Anyways I think we have debated it enough.

 

[subshakerz]

his leg cutter was pretty lethal, combined with the pace he had pre 94, the accuracy and the naturally extracted bounce I don't see any Indian Batsmen except Tendulkar standing upto him consistently.

The legcutter was more Walshs stock delivery not Ambrose who rarely bowled it. Again it would depend on the bowling track he played on and if he played before 94.