• 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.

Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

Is Ravichandran Ashwin an ATG test bowler?

  • Total voters
    75
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
capt_Luffy said:
You can add the names of Steyn, Ambrose, Hutton and Hammond as well. Miller, Sangakkara and Akram are pushing it a little bit for me.
Click to expand...
I think Steyn and Viv have a slightly more complete record for me(no real weaknesses). Ambrose never proved himself in SC for example. Hutton is very close as well, not Hammond tho
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
Coronis said:
Zak Crawley has played 44/54 tests since his debut. Is he good because he’s not getting dropped?
Click to expand...
I worded it wrongly. By early Anderson, I didn't necessarily meant the one from 2003, but 2008. Its on me. Since 2008, Anderson averaged under 30 most years. I get your point; but for me, again; Anderson's no.s and longevity matters as a pacer. Playing close to 200 Test matches is a big accomplishment. That level of fitness, and his value in the English team over the last two decades; yep, he's an ATG for me.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
capt_Luffy said:
I worded it wrongly. By early Anderson, I didn't necessarily meant the one from 2003, but 2008. Its on me. Since 2008, Anderson averaged under 30 most years. I get your point; but for me, again; Anderson's no.s and longevity matters as a pacer. Playing close to 200 Test matches is a big accomplishment. That level of fitness, and his value in the English team over the last two decades; yep, he's an ATG for me.
Click to expand...
Thats not early Anderson then lol.
 
S

Socerer 01

International Captain
TheJediBrah said:
I wouldn't agree with that tbh. Still been somewhat conditions dependent and it's been a bowling era. Late career ATVG at best
Click to expand...
so we’re penalising bowlers for this bowler friendly era but affording no credit to the batsmen in the same time?

this isnt directed at just you, towards people making similar comments in general
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Socerer 01 said:
so we’re penalising bowlers for this bowler friendly era but affording no credit to the batsmen in the same time?
Click to expand...
Bro people here credit batsmen for it all the time, and "penalise" (to use your words) batsmen from the 00s in comparison.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
I worded it wrongly. By early Anderson, I didn't necessarily meant the one from 2003, but 2008. Its on me. Since 2008, Anderson averaged under 30 most years. I get your point; but for me, again; Anderson's no.s and longevity matters as a pacer. Playing close to 200 Test matches is a big accomplishment. That level of fitness, and his value in the English team over the last two decades; yep, he's an ATG for me.
Click to expand...
Yeah so he gets a pat on the back, not an ATG title.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
TheJediBrah said:
Bro people here credit batsmen for it all the time, and "penalise" (to use your words) batsmen from the 00s in comparison.
Click to expand...
He's not your bro, bro. But you're right.

Socerer 01 said:
so we’re penalising bowlers for this bowler friendly era but affording no credit to the batsmen in the same time?

this isnt directed at just you, towards people making similar comments in general
Click to expand...
Which bowler is being penalised?
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
He doesn't need to really. Its not only being good or bad for me, but also how much your team has benefitted from you or how much you have contributed.
Click to expand...
So a 30 average bat who plays for 10 years equals a 60 average bat playing for 5 years? Obviously not. Once a career is long enough, we ignore career length as part of the equation unless we compare with someone with the same level of worldclass output.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
So a 30 average bat who plays for 10 years equals a 60 average bat playing for 5 years? Obviously not. Once a career is long enough, we ignore career length as part of the equation unless we compare with someone with the same level of worldclass output.
Click to expand...
You are using a strawmam here. Neither he is a 30+ averaging bowler nor is he compared with the likes of Glenn McGrath. And on the longevity comparison; it's only true for seeing whether a player is properly tested or not, i.e., on quality solely . I am not making this tier based on whether I would want him in my hypothetical team; but what he has contributed and achieved. And contributions made in 100 matches and 180 matches aren't definitely the same.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
You are using a strawmam here. Neither he is a 30+ averaging bowler nor is he compared with the likes of Glenn McGrath. And on the longevity comparison; it's only true for seeing whether a player is properly tested or not, i.e., on quality solely . I am not making this tier based on whether I would want him in my hypothetical team; but what he has contributed and achieved. And contributions made in 100 matches and 180 matches aren't definitely the same.
Click to expand...
He is ATVG for me and ATG third tier for you then. It's the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top