Monty V Swann

[jackbyrne91]

So was having a look at the figures the last ten innings that Monty & Swann have played together.

I just had a hunch that it always felt like Cook turned to Monty more, usually before Swann and he bowled better?

These are the stats - make interesting reading. Is Monty the better bowler?

 

[Spark]

No, as is quite obvious if you watch their styles of bowling and consider precisely why Panesar does well on those wickets.

 

[jackbyrne91]

Which is what Spark?

Monty bowls more aggressively? I would have thought this made him more expensive but it seems he even offers more control than Swann when he has played?

 

[Maximas]

Monty bowls quicker and flatter, and relies more on natural variation off the pitch, while Swann relies more on changes of pace, flight and deception through the air (although he also benefits from natural variation). Generally natural variation is more pronounced on turning pitches - such as the ones played on in the OPs statistics, and because Monty makes more use of natural variation he is able to benefit more from its effects than Swann. However Swann is able to be more effective than Monty on pitches offering less turn because he uses flight and changes of pace to a greater degree and puts more revolutions on the ball, not only this but he is very dangerous on turning pitches as well. Hence Swann is considered the better bowler because he is effective in a variety of conditions moreso than Monty

 

[Spark]

Yep. It's like saying a pacer is better than another because their numbers are better on greentops but only greentops.

 

[Riggins]

I think they're both ****.

 

[NUFAN]

Was there any thought to include wickets or bowling average in the analysis? All those figures suggest is that Panesar keeps an end tidy.

 

[91Jmay]

Both are good bowlers, but Monty is a accurate tie and end down type bowler who gets wickets on decks that suit him where as Swann is a genuine wicket taker in most conditions.

 

[jackbyrne91]

Took it a bit further.

Swann has a better strike rate, basically gets a wicket every 9.2 overs whereas Monty gets a wicket every 11.3 overs, although Monty has a better economy.


I am not trying to say Monty is better than Swann - just intrigued as to what the stats said when I was thinking about it last night/this morning.

 

[Maximas]

Sure, but it's not a fair comparison of stats if they only come from SC conditions given that Monty's bowling style suits them more, it is interesting, but you couldn't make a proper judgement of their overall bowling based on those stats

 

[jackbyrne91]

It is difficult to properly compare when Monty is only really called upon in the Winter tests.

Would love to see him given a go at home next summer if we look to give Swann a rest before the WC.. who knows.

 

[wpdavid]

And obviously there are other factors, as their respective fielding efforts demonstrated e arlier today. I could be persuaded that Panesar might possess a greater threat than Swann against their phalanx of right handers, but there's a helluva cost in other ways.

 

[hendrix]

K means clustering.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

So was having a look at the figures the last ten innings that Monty & Swann have played together.

I just had a hunch that it always felt like Cook turned to Monty more, usually before Swann and he bowled better?

These are the stats - make interesting reading. Is Monty the better bowler?

View attachment 20982

No more so than Mcgill was better than Warne cause he often came out with better figures when they both played together.

A spinner's true colours show when he is THE spinner the side have to turn to

 

[Neil Pickup]

Remember when Panesar was lead spinner in New Zealand? Remember how well that went?

If you didn't, it was 130 overs, 5 for 350.

 

[social]

One thing that I fail to understand is where the notion of Monty being an attacking bowler has come from.

Using yesterday as an example (and it seems to be typical of his bowling), until the last 2 overs where he slowed his pace, he basically bowled the same ball at the same pace over and over again

Might not be bad bowling but it is hardly the most attacking/innovative display that I have ever seen

Swann, on the other hand, seems to be prepared to try lots of different things to take wickets - that is a far more attacking strategy IMO

 

[MW1304]

I would say it is a generally held opinion that Swann is a much more attacking bowler than Monty. Part of his ability to take wickets on pitches that aren't rank turners.

 

[benchmark00]

Remember when Panesar was lead spinner in New Zealand? Remember how well that went?

If you didn't, it was 130 overs, 5 for 350.

So far Swann has 3/270 off 72 overs.

On track.

 

[GIMH]

Massive disparity between the left/right averages for both.

Swann something like low/mid-20s v left and mid-30s v right
Panesar high 20s v right, something like 50 v left

EDIT - I've not studied any of the charts posted in this thread (in fact I haven't looked at them) so apologies if I am duplicating info

 

[archie mac]

And obviously there are other factors, as their respective fielding efforts demonstrated e arlier today. I could be persuaded that Panesar might possess a greater threat than Swann against their phalanx of right handers, but there's a helluva cost in other ways.

I agree, also their batting value is important. As for the better bowler, I think Swann has the better variety and also looks the most dangerous.