*Official* India v West Indies Tests & ODIs

[marc71178]

Look at the World Ratings if you don't believe me - they're equal 12th, and in terms of batsmen and bowlers they are about as good a guide as you can get.

 

[marc71178]

Dillon M :30 Wkts:112 ave:30.38 st/rt .61!! 5 wkts:2

Jason M:37 wkts:137 ave :26.1 st/rt :51.7 5wkt :6!!

Those stats are interesting and actually show that Dillon averages more wickets per match than Gillespie.

I also think these are somewhat influenced by the quality of side the 2 play in - Australia regularly bowl sides out quickly and cheaply, and Gillespie therefore doesn't bowl as much as Dillon who has to perform a dual stock/strike role for the West Indies.

This is also borne out by the fact that in 7 matches fewer, (or in percentage terms 81% of the number of games), Dillon has only bowled 40 overs fewer than Gillespie.

A case for a player vastly under-rated by the media?

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by wahindiawah
What amazes me is how you just persists with the comparison of Dillon with Zaheer Khan, Khan isn't an accomplised bowler so whats the point in the comparison?

As for class act, how many calss pacers have an ave greter than 30 in test cricket?? Dillon has 2 hauls of 5 wkts in test cricket, yeah man i'm speechless.And i wonder as to why Ambrose has repeatidly critisize Dillon and Co? Well i guess he was getting jealous of the great Pacer!
[Edited on 4/12/2002 by wahindiawah]

Maybe I pesist with the comparison because some of your countrymen on this board branded Khan as the best left-arm pacer in the world. I'm sorry but they brought it on themselves to say something like that. Anyway, if you were bowling most of your side's overs then surely you will get tired sometime and bowl some bad balls which will inflate your average. Also remember that Dillon has no one else in the team to come on and continue to keep the other team under pressure, he has to do it all himself. Gillespie is part of the strongest attack in the world so he doesn't have to bowl most of the overs for his team and can operate in short spells. Dillon deserves his equal 12th place in the ratings.

 

[marc71178]

Maybe I pesist with the comparison because some of your countrymen on this board branded Khan as the best left-arm pacer in the world.

And Dillon's a right arm bowler?

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by marc71178

Maybe I pesist with the comparison because some of your countrymen on this board branded Khan as the best left-arm pacer in the world.

And Dillon's a right arm bowler?

Yes he is, but I'm not using the left arm part as the arguement. I was using the fact that they said he was the best of his type in the world. Which he isn't.

 

[marc71178]

But what's that got to do with Dillon?

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by marc71178
But what's that got to do with Dillon?

Well he's saying Dillon is rubbish, and he's forgetting that his team have no one even close to Dillon. Except AA

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Keep in mind that Gillespie gets alot better catching support than Dillon.

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
Keep in mind that Gillespie gets alot better catching support than Dillon.

Yup, I would even go as far to say I wouldn't mind him in the England squad even if everyone was fit. He's a trier and one other bit, he's still quick!

 

[Bazza]

Originally posted by wahindiawahWell then you surely sets a low standard in life! Dillon is relatively better(when compared with present WI pacers) but he's not great, nor is a match winning bowler.

When you have 200+ international wickets at <30 let me know.

Also it was said Zaheer is not an established international bowler, but he has played 22 tests and 49 ODIs, which is more than England's current attack put together I would have thought. Also Dillon has only played 30 tests and 74 ODIs. And of course Zaheer has that stellar test average of ~37 in his favour...

 

[Rik]

If Khan isn't an established international bowler then how come he's picked for every India game that he's fit to play in?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Beats me!

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by marc71178
Look at the World Ratings if you don't believe me - they're equal 12th, and in terms of batsmen and bowlers they are about as good a guide as you can get.

I think there are only a few ppl that takes those rating seriously.Just to give you an example,Kumble is still in top ten bowlers and Waqar was at 5-6 slot untill a few months back, the rating is seriously flawed and it counts for nothing!

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by Rik
[

Well he's saying Dillon is rubbish, and he's forgetting that his team have no one even close to Dillon. Except AA

Stop lying and try to be reasonable for a change, will you? .I never called Dillon rubbish, i used the word mediocre and stick to it. You seems to be obsessed with Indian bowlers, it doesn't matter just how bad Indian bowling attack might be right now, what has it to do with Dillon??

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by Rik
If Khan isn't an established international bowler then how come he's picked for every India game that he's fit to play in?

Becasue there is a shortage of quality pacers right now in India, understand?? He's promissing but still have lot to learn.And if one goes by your logic, then Ajit must be an established International allrounder because he's nearly a regular member of Indian onedayer team!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

He is established in ODI cricket....but he still can't play for crap!

 

[wahindiawah]

Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
He is established in ODI cricket....but he still can't play for crap!

He does!

 

[marc71178]

I think there are only a few ppl that takes those rating seriously.Just to give you an example,Kumble is still in top ten bowlers and Waqar was at 5-6 slot untill a few months back, the rating is seriously flawed and it counts for nothing!

AFAIA a great number of people take these ratings seriously - they're certainly far more accurate than anything I can think of...

 

[marc71178]

I never called Dillon rubbish, i used the word mediocre and stick to it.

What is the difference then? Personally I'd think of mediocre as below rubbish in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Once again, I totally agree!!