Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

[kyear2]

@honestbharani just take the L and close the thread.

It seems most of us here aren't in the mood for indulging in your feud and want to move on.

Dude, you're not helping.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Dude, I don't do hate. I'm the guy who has been called a bc by Shri and others multiple times and let it slide while you guys apparently watched in approval.

Hates more your thing.

Tritest **** on the board but a member of the club so gets away with it.

 

[Socerer 01]

just 4 more pages my dudes to get this to a well deserved half century

 

[Socerer 01]

Dude, you're not helping.

wait u realised that only now???

 

[subshakerz]

Dude, you're not helping.

We need to close this thread. This has gone on too long.

 

[capt_Luffy]

He does that in every argument though, and has been accused of such.

He has frustrated and come after me with some of his comments to the point I thought it was personal, and it's to the point where I'm not even allowed to call the name of a certain cricketer in this forum. Has anyone ever defended me in those instances? Did I attack him? That's all I'm saying.

Re the crony thing, you had literally referenced my name in a previous post along with his and tjb and I was defending myself. I do apologise though.

With regards to my posts in this thread, I know what it feels like to be ganged up on here and it's almost tantamount to bullying and I don't like to see it. Yes he brings a lot of it into himself, but he has his opinions and are allowed to state them.

I have nothing against you, Ash or any team or player. I genuinely don't think he's an ATG, same as with Walsh, Anderson, Weekes, Walcott etc. they are all great players but I believe there's a line somewhere. It can't be all players whose name we remember is automatically there.

As I said earlier, Subs has to realize that as protective he is of Imran, apparently you guys are of your players and thread a bit more lightly.

Genuinely hope there's no hard feelings.

There's just one more thing I want to add. When TJB asked why we were all defending Ashwin so fiercely; I made a joke. But honestly, I am not really that big of a Ashwin fan. Yes, I probably rate him higher than a fair few; but not really in a separate tier to Laker (whom I always feel conflicted about being better than Ashwin or not), Grimmett, Verity and even Kumble (if anything, I rate Kumble higher than many). So, it's not so much about just Ashwin; the thing is Subs has very bad habit of going after certain players (be it Ashwin, Jadeja, Kallis or Ambrose) and hyping certain ones (Imran, Ponting, etc.) to prove his POV; and when presented counter argument, constantly shifting his goal post. And at times, that becomes really infuriating. It wasn't the first time, nor I believe will be the last. He just rubs many posters the wrong ways; not necessarily an Indian bias, but it's an issue of his.

 

[honestbharani]

He does that in every argument though, and has been accused of such.

He has frustrated and come after me with some of his comments to the point I thought it was personal, and it's to the point where I'm not even allowed to call the name of a certain cricketer in this forum. Has anyone ever defended me in those instances? Did I attack him? That's all I'm saying.

Re the crony thing, you had literally referenced my name in a previous post along with his and tjb and I was defending myself. I do apologise though.

With regards to my posts in this thread, I know what it feels like to be ganged up on here and it's almost tantamount to bullying and I don't like to see it. Yes he brings a lot of it into himself, but he has his opinions and are allowed to state them.

I have nothing against you, Ash or any team or player. I genuinely don't think he's an ATG, same as with Walsh, Anderson, Weekes, Walcott etc. they are all great players but I believe there's a line somewhere. It can't be all players whose name we remember is automatically there.

As I said earlier, Subs has to realize that as protective he is of Imran, apparently you guys are of your players and thread a bit more lightly.

Genuinely hope there's no hard feelings.

I have absolutely no qualms on someone judging ATG to be so elite that someone like Ash can't make it. Again, it's the shifting goalposts and made up lies to denigrate accomplishments that is annoying and when it comes from such obvious bias, it deserves to be called out. No one is protective of anything here either than our ability to freely discuss Indian cricket without his inane drivel cropping up every thread.

Every single poster who registered annoyance of his posting here have tried to indulge in good faith and finally come to agree with what I concluded of his posting years ago now.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't mind copping abuse and personal insults page after page after page as I have for years for defending my views from the same usual suspects, but for them to just turn around and whinge hypocritically about 'Subz the hater' is just insufferable and pathetic. You have no legs to stand on, sorry.

Hence close this thread and end this nonsense that has gone on far too long.

 

[honestbharani]

@ closing the thread. The answer to the question has always been obvious. All we need to have some rational discussion here is for salty to stop posting in the thread. Apparently he can't do that and instead the thread has to be closed.

 

[subshakerz]

@ closing the thread. The answer to the question has always been obvious. All we need to have some rational discussion here is for salty to stop posting in the thread. Apparently he can't do that and instead the thread has to be closed.

Nobody is stopping you from talking about me as you have from the start but I think you would rather do it until the end of time

 

[ma1978]

You honestly doesn't see how you're just as bad do you.

The statement alone shows your bias on the topic.

That statement can be unquestionably said about 20 cricketers in history and Ash isn't one of them.

You guys like on subs but are equally as culpable in the argument and atmosphere, just can't see it.

I agree it can be said for 20 guys unquestionably or less

But that’s also why parsing whether Garner is an ATG but Anderson or Walsh are not is so lame. You don’t have to be Dale Steyn to be an ATG. And you can say it’s definitional but it’s really not. That’s when you get into horrible arguments using small sample size events by people who never saw it.

 

[honestbharani]

60% again is pretty conclusive.

 

[subshakerz]

I agree it can be said for 20 guys unquestionably or less

But that’s also why parsing whether Garner is an ATG but Anderson or Walsh are not is so lame. You don’t have to be Dale Steyn to be an ATG. And you can say it’s definitional but it’s really not. That’s when you get into horrible arguments using small sample size events by people who never saw it.

Line has to be drawn somewhere. We prefer more exclusive criteria.

 

[kyear2]

My problem here is not whether Ashwin is in top 30 cricketers of all time (I think he is as a total package, not only as a bowler). I can accept he could possibly be seen in that next tier which I’m happy to consider ATGs. I have a problem with the highly unsound arguments used to knock him down and the lack of acknowledgment that those apply to many others, and I’d prefer to believe people are contrary (or even nation

I agree it can be said for 20 guys unquestionably or less

But that’s also why parsing whether Garner is an ATG but Anderson or Walsh are not is so lame. You don’t have to be Dale Steyn to be an ATG. And you can say it’s definitional but it’s really not. That’s when you get into horrible arguments using small sample size events by people who never saw it.

My unsound argument is that he's not good enough away from home. Is he a great player away from the SC against good opposition. No he's not, it's not complicated tbh.

Why Garner and not Walsh or Anderson? Impact, quality. I've stated my criteria, none of these guys can sniff a place in an ATG squad less team.

I used a football analogy, Curtis Martin or even Frank Gore, stuck around for ever and built up numbers, great numbers. But never had the single season impact nor are they nearly as good as a Barry Sanders or a Gale Sayers. Longevity alone in my book doesn't make you great.

This isn't to be contrarian or racist, I have a way of looking at things regardless of individual.

But gain, I've stated my criteria, what's yours?

 

[ma1978]

My unsound argument is that he's not good enough away from home. Is he a great player away from the SC against good opposition. No he's not, it's not complicated tbh.

Why Garner and not Walsh or Anderson? Impact, quality. I've stated my criteria, none of these guys can sniff a place in an ATG squad less team.

I used a football analogy, Curtis Martin or even Frank Gore, stuck around for ever and built up numbers, great numbers. But never had the single season impact nor are they nearly as good as a Barry Sanders or a Gale Sayers. Longevity alone in my book doesn't make you great.

This isn't to be contrarian or racist, I have a way of looking at things regardless of individual.

But gain, I've stated my criteria, what's yours?

Has to meet at least two (and more likely three) of the following:

1. Considered to be the best in the world at their respective area of focus for a meaningful period of time (met By Ashwin)

2. Best player in the best team in the world (met by Ashwin)

3. Track record of accomplishment over a long period of time - eta dependent but today it’s 400+ wickets and a sub 25 average for a bowler (met by Ashwin)

4. Individual iconic performances (met by Ashwin though perhaps his weakest claim)

5. Peer rating, by the best of his time and eminent journalists (met by Ashwin)

6. Historical remembrance (too soon to tell)

 

[ma1978]

Line has to be drawn somewhere. We prefer more exclusive criteria.

but you apply those inconsistently.

 

[capt_Luffy]

My unsound argument is that he's not good enough away from home. Is he a great player away from the SC against good opposition. No he's not, it's not complicated tbh.

Why Garner and not Walsh or Anderson? Impact, quality. I've stated my criteria, none of these guys can sniff a place in an ATG squad less team.

I used a football analogy, Curtis Martin or even Frank Gore, stuck around for ever and built up numbers, great numbers. But never had the single season impact nor are they nearly as good as a Barry Sanders or a Gale Sayers. Longevity alone in my book doesn't make you great.

This isn't to be contrarian or racist, I have a way of looking at things regardless of individual.

But gain, I've stated my criteria, what's yours?

I will add one thing to my ATG criteria; and it's that that I give plenty of value to service you provided rather just being good. To put bluntly, between Waqar and Walsh; while making a team I would prefer to have Waqar Younis; but if I can choose only one of them to be an ATG, that's Walsh for me. My ATG criteria is simply:
1. Be very good for a fairly long time, across a variety of places; mostly statistically but also by peer and press ratings. But a monster in some places, with sufficient backing by results; and being atleast good in most others can also do the trick.
2. The value you provided to your team. And it's the latter that really makes Anderson, despite being a lower tier bowler than most in the tier; a close to automatic ATG for me.
By these 2 criterias, I have 4 ATG tiers; the 1st being the very best, close to spotless; the second with minor hick ups and then the third with some major hickups but still results to back up.
Tier God:
Bradman, Grace
Tier 1:
Sobers, Imran, Hadlee, Hobbs, Tendulkar, Marshall, McGrath
Tier 2:
Barnes, Murali, Warne, Smith, Lara, Steyn, Ambrose, Viv, Gavaskar, Gilchrist, Kallis, Hammond, Hutton, Akram
Tier 3:
O'Reilly, Miller, Headley, Chappell, Lillee, Trueman, Donald, Sutcliffe, G Pollock, Garner, Sangakkara, Holding, Lindwall, Davidson, S Pollock, Ranjitsinhji, Trumper
Tier 4:
Botham, Knott, Waqar, Walsh, Cummins, Roberts, Anderson, Procter, Ashwin, Laker, Grimmett, Verity, Kumble, Border, Waugh, Ponting, Dravid, Weekes, ABD, Barry, Walcott, Miandad, Barrington, Flower, Ames, Root, Rhodes, Worrell, Tayfield
The ones I will consider pushing it: Kohli, Nourse, Williamson, Dev, Evans, Younis, Compton, Benaud, Shakib, Jadeja, Rabada, Statham, Lohman, Spofforth, Richardson, Hill, Healy, Bedser, Faulkner, Woolley, Boycott, May, Kanhai, G Smith, Lloyd, Crowe, Harvey, Willis, Philander, Underwood, Bedi, Benaud, Chandrashekhar, Trumble, Herath, Briggs, Greenidge, Chanderpaul, Shrewsbury, Simpson, Lyon, MaCartney.
Also, who are those footballers?? Never heard of them, and I believe I am moderately well versed in football....

 

[kyear2]

Has to meet at least two (and more likely three) of the following:

1. Considered to be the best in the world at their respective area of focus for a meaningful period of time (met By Ashwin)

2. Best player in the best team in the world (met by Ashwin)

3. Track record of accomplishment over a long period of time - eta dependent but today it’s 400+ wickets and a sub 25 average for a bowler (met by Ashwin)

4. Individual iconic performances (met by Ashwin though perhaps his weakest claim)

5. Peer rating, by the best of his time and eminent journalists (met by Ashwin)

6. Historical remembrance (too soon to tell)

You don't care how they performed away from home conditions?

 

[ma1978]

You don't care how they performed away from home conditions?

Trhat should be captured in my other criteria

 

[kyear2]

I will add one thing to my ATG criteria; and it's that that I give plenty of value to service you provided rather just being good. To put bluntly, between Waqar and Walsh; while making a team I would prefer to have Waqar Younis; but if I can choose only one of them to be an ATG, that's Walsh for me. My ATG criteria is simply:
1. Be very good for a fairly long time, across a variety of places; mostly statistically but also by peer and press ratings. But a monster in some places, with sufficient backing by results; and being atleast good in most others can also do the trick.
2. The value you provided to your team. And it's the latter that really makes Anderson, despite being a lower tier bowler than most in the tier; a close to automatic ATG for me.
By these 2 criterias, I have 4 ATG tiers; the 1st being the very best, close to spotless; the second with minor hick ups and then the third with some major hickups but still results to back up.
Tier God:
Bradman, Grace
Tier 1:
Sobers, Imran, Hadlee, Hobbs, Tendulkar, Marshall, McGrath
Tier 2:
Barnes, Murali, Warne, Smith, Lara, Steyn, Ambrose, Viv, Gavaskar, Gilchrist, Kallis, Hammond, Hutton, Akram
Tier 3:
O'Reilly, Miller, Headley, Chappell, Lillee, Trueman, Donald, Sutcliffe, G Pollock, Garner, Sangakkara, Holding, Lindwall, Davidson, S Pollock, Ranjitsinhji, Trumper
Tier 4:
Botham, Knott, Waqar, Walsh, Cummins, Roberts, Anderson, Procter, Ashwin, Laker, Grimmett, Verity, Kumble, Border, Waugh, Ponting, Dravid, Weekes, ABD, Barry, Walcott, Miandad, Barrington, Flower, Ames, Root, Rhodes, Worrell, Tayfield
The ones I will consider pushing it: Kohli, Nourse, Williamson, Dev, Evans, Younis, Compton, Benaud, Shakib, Jadeja, Rabada, Statham, Lohman, Spofforth, Richardson, Hill, Healy, Bedser, Faulkner, Woolley, Boycott, May, Kanhai, G Smith, Lloyd, Crowe, Harvey, Willis, Philander, Underwood, Bedi, Benaud, Chandrashekhar, Trumble, Herath, Briggs, Greenidge, Chanderpaul, Shrewsbury, Simpson, Lyon, MaCartney.
Also, who are those footballers?? Never heard of them, and I believe I am moderately well versed in football....

Those are a lottttttt