Shane Warne vs Curtly Ambrose

[smash84]

I don't see large enough gap between IK and Warne.
I see large enough gap between Ambrose and IK/Warne.

Once you stick to that, there is no need to explain why Warne can be better than IK but not better than Ambrose. You going in circles here, it's not that hard.

Now if you don't see it that way then we just have to agree to disagree.

Ok, I guess you would also think Vinod Kambli is a better test batsman than Sachin because he has a higher average.

So yeah, I think we can agree to disagree then if that is the way you see it.

 

[subshakerz]

I know, this is so frustrating. Even when I have dumbed it down so much, I have almost no hope of getting the question answered

Even if he will answer you can guarantee he will take back his argument later to justify his bias. He does this on almost a daily basis. Here is the latest. He argues today why should we discount Imran's poor series in Aus at the end of his career in 1990, when he previously said he himself only evaluates him before that.

(taking away his final series, which is confounding as to why, we don't do this for Punter or Viv) in Australia.

I rate him basically from '76 to '89 period.

 

[akilana]

Unfortunately with certain posters it becomes a waste of time to debate this since they are addicted to surface level reading of stats.

Stop repeating yourself mindlessly every post and please engage in arguments.

Lol

 

[Randomfan]

Ok, I guess you would also think Vinod Kambli is a better test batsman than Sachin because he has a higher average.

So yeah, I think we can agree to disagree then if that is the way you see it.

If that's what you took out of discussion then I can't help you.

I clarly stated that I rate IK over Wasim and Pollock despite avg trend being different. But if you want to draw equivalnece with Kambli and Sachin then carry on... Not much to add.

 

[smash84]

If that's what you took out of discussion then I can't help you.

I clarly stated that I rate IK over Wasim and Pollock despite avg trend being different. But if you want to draw equivalnece with Kambli and Sachin then carry on... Not much to add.

Not only did you not help, but you actively took the discussion to a complete tangent.

My question was simple, yet you took a completely wrong turn and kept answering something that wasn't asked.

Also, I don't understand what "avg trend being different" means, but your ranking of Imran over Wasim and Pollock was irrelevant to the discussion at hand. What is difficult to understand in that?

 

[Randomfan]

Also, I don't understand what "avg trend being different" means, but your ranking of Imran over Wasim and Pollock was irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Let me try and make you understand.

Since you are coming up with conclusion that I am rating players by sorting averages and you are citing Kambli vs Sachin. Wasim has lower average than Ik but I don't rate Wasim higher. Now is it clear?

 

[smash84]

Let me try and make you understand.

Since you are coming up with conclusion that I am rating players by sorting averages and you are citing Kambli vs Sachin. Wasim has lower average than Ik but I don't rate Wasim higher. Now is it clear?

lolwut.

Are you looking at Wasim's batting average and comparing it to Imran's bowling average?

 

[subshakerz]

Let me try and make you understand.

Since you are coming up with conclusion that I am rating players by sorting averages and you are citing Kambli vs Sachin. Wasim has lower average than Ik but I don't rate Wasim higher. Now is it clear?

Bunching up several countries away as an collective raw average and using this as a measuring stick without looking at the countries is a bad approach.

 

[smash84]

The funny part is that on cricinfo's page on Wasim has bowling stats first and batting stats last. For Imran that is the opposite. I damn well knew that Wasim's average was higher than Imran's and yet was confused for a second because i expected to find their averages in the same place on their respective pages.

 

[Coronis]

The funny part is that on cricinfo's page on Wasim has bowling stats first and batting stats last. For Imran that is the opposite. I damn well knew that Wasim's average was higher than Imran's and yet was confused for a second because i expected to find their averages in the same place on their respective pages.

Yeah it seems pretty subjective for some players.

Davidson batting first
Pollock batting first
Imran batting first
Botham batting first
Hadlee bowling first
Kapil bowling first

Seems to be based on allrounder vs bowling allrounder. Interesting that Kapil is considered bowling allrounder compared to the others…

They have interesting classifications for certain players definitely.

Mark Waugh is an AR and Viv is a batting AR apparently. Then you have guys like Steve Waugh, Chappell and Root who bowled a lot more and they’re middle order/top order bats. Pre WWII players tend not to have any classification. Too hard for cricinfo I guess.

 

[smash84]

Yeah it seems pretty subjective for some players.

Davidson batting first
Pollock batting first
Imran batting first
Botham batting first
Hadlee bowling first
Kapil bowling first

Seems to be based on allrounder vs bowling allrounder. Interesting that Kapil is considered bowling allrounder compared to the others…

They have interesting classifications for certain players definitely.

Mark Waugh is an AR and Viv is a batting AR apparently. Then you have guys like Steve Waugh, Chappell and Root who bowled a lot more and they’re middle order/top order bats. Pre WWII players tend not to have any classification. Too hard for cricinfo I guess.

I hadn't noticed that until I went to confirm Randomfan's numbers. My hypothesis about him was that he probably just looks at straight averages and decides who is better. Then he makes this comment about Wasim having a better average than Imran. I was like...what? I am pretty sure that is not the case but decided to check. I looked at Wasim's average and saw 22.64. I was like when the hell did Wasim drop almost 1 whole run from his average and get better than Imran's 22.81. Then, I checked the header and saw it was batting and fielding. I guess it probably confirms my hypothesis about Randomfan, lol.

I think it would have just been simpler to keep the batting and bowling placeholders in the same place when building the website than to go by the classification of their all-round status (assuming that's what they do).

 

[subshakerz]

I hadn't noticed that until I went to confirm Randomfan's numbers. My hypothesis about him was that he probably just looks at straight averages and decides who is better. Then he makes this comment about Wasim having a better average than Imran. I was like...what? I am pretty sure that is not the case but decided to check. I looked at Wasim's average and saw 22.64. I was like when the hell did Wasim drop almost 1 whole run from his average and get better than Imran's 22.81. Then, I checked the header and saw it was batting and fielding. I guess it probably confirms my hypothesis about Randomfan, lol.

I think it would have just been simpler to keep the batting and bowling placeholders in the same place when building the website than to go by the classification of their all-round status (assuming that's what they do).

At least he has inadvertently revealed his own approach, quick check at Cricinfo and let's say who is better.

 

[sayon basak]

At least he has inadvertently revealed his own approach, quick check at Cricinfo and let's say who is better.

Wasn't that already well known?

 

[subshakerz]

Wasn't that already well known?

Well I suspected he is not really familiar with these players at all.

 

[smash84]

Wasn't that already well known?

Even if it was, it was maybe not quite as clear as in this case.

I hadn't known this about him tbf.

 

[kyear2]

You correct that 14 wickets won't make any one ATG. You got to see entire career against non-minnows.

Ambrose - 45 tests 199 wickets avg 20.9 SR 53
Imran - 47 tests - 184 wickets avg 26.3 SR 60

Both are in different tier.

Can you find any great pacers in that era averaging 26-27? We can add lots of context, but when all said and done, he is averaging 26-27 away against non-minnows when many of his peers averaged cloer to 20-21. You are citing good spells in different countries, if he did not have he won't be rated even among the top 15. So fans do give him credit for good spells. That's the reason he makes a case for tiop 10 pacers.

Having great spells in countries doesn't take away that one isn't necessarily great in those countries.

Great singular performances in said countries didn't mean you were great in said countries.

And Imran is the only player this is done for. Marshall and Hadlee don't require these caveats and like all the great bowlers, basically averaged the same home and away, especially in said era.

Question being... If Imran's away numbers were his overall numbers, would he even be in these discussions?

The answer is quite obvious.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Having great spells in countries doesn't take away that one isn't necessarily great in those countries.

Great singular performances in said countries didn't mean you were great in said countries.

And Imran is the only player this is done for. Marshall and Hadlee don't require these caveats and like all the great bowlers, basically averaged the same home and away, especially in said era.

Question being... If Imran's away numbers were his overall numbers, would he even be in these discussions?

The answer is quite obvious.

I forgot who but someone posted home and away stats for a handful of bowlers and Imran came at the very bottom, even behind Warne the only spinner comparable to pacers on away stats. That's telling for me. So even though yes, he's an atg he has to come after those who don't quite have that disparity. The big 3 are a given. But he comes after Steyn and Ambrose for me as well. This is even allowing for the fact that he played more away games in a greater variety of countries (Ambrose) Why? Because he wasn't particularly special in any of them in terms of both average and SR overall. He did well in WI in terms of average and great sr and wpm. Your thoughts Kyear2???

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Let me try and make you understand.

Since you are coming up with conclusion that I am rating players by sorting averages and you are citing Kambli vs Sachin. Wasim has lower average than Ik but I don't rate Wasim higher. Now is it clear?

I'm going to assume you meant Akram averages lower than Imran in AWAY tests? Which is factually true with or without minnows included.

 

[smash84]

I still haven't gotten any answer to my question as to what are the reasons that Warne is rated as a better bowler than Imran but not better than Ambrose?

I am genuinely curious about that.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I still haven't gotten any answer to my question as to what are the reasons that Warne is rated as a better bowler than Imran but not better than Ambrose?

I am genuinely curious about that.

If you're asking me, I abstained from that particular comparison. There are some comparisons I'm not that invested in and are too close for me to make a real decision. Imran and Warne are close bowling wise (as are Imran and Ambrose and Warne and Ambrose fwiw). I voted for Ambrose here because A. I'm biased and B. I saw Ambrose run through class Australian lineups the best of his time, in a way i didn't see Warne do.