Wally Hammond vs Jacques Kallis

[subshakerz]

You're the one who said every single Imran / Ambrose poll or ranking ever done here is wrong despite the fact that there is a consensus on the forum and everywhere imaginable that Ambrose is rated higher than Imran.

And yes there's more of a consensus that Barry is a top tier ATG bat and rated slightly ahead of Pollock than there is that Sutcliffe belongs ahead of Hutton or Imran ahead of Ambrose.

Need I remind you since you care so much about CW polls there is a far greater consensus here that Pollock is better than Barry than Ambrose is better than Imran? Feel free to ignore it though and maintain your double standards.

And the edge is clearly for Pollock over Barry outside CW. Don't be bitter about it.

 

[kyear2]

Because most who rate him that highly understand the context of his career.

There no context.

He tampered at home and benefitted from the absolutely most corrupt home umpires ever.

When he was away from home, it was a tougher sled. But he still had some good performances in-between.

But anyone else with that away record and they're excluded from these conversations. But for him everyone makes exceptions and divide up his career like is done for no one else.

 

[subshakerz]

This 20 years stuff is pretty disingenuous in terms of his bowling. He was in the side and bowling for about 13.

You can use his high workload as a more legitimate form of praise if you want to go this route.

His body was still aging. I am not arguing workload but if one fast bowler has a 70-90 test career concentrated around their prime years of early 20s to early 30s and another has it over a 20 year period of teenager to early 40s it obviously gives an unfair stat advantage to the former. This is pretty obvious.

 

[kyear2]

You mean like saying Steyn bowled in a batting era? Etc.

Yeah it helps with bowlers in the same group.

Yes, but Imran didn't.

 

[subshakerz]

There no context.

Age.

 

[kyear2]

You laughed at the idea of an ATG bowler needing context. Then I gave an example of Steyn context in a batting era and you immediately accepted it.

Imran does have context. For an outright pace bowler, he had the longer career of nearly 20 years which did affect his stats, compared to a dozen years or so for Marshall, Donald, Ambrose, etc.

Would you call it silly to account for that?

1971 - 1 match
1972 - 0 matches
1973 - 0 matches
1974 - 3 matches
1975 - 0 matches

 

[kyear2]

Yknow you can check the record and see that it didn't.

His bowling stats got hit in the last three years when he was mainly batting.

Like be honest, you really think comparing a fast bowler who played 20 years with one who played 12-13 is a level playing ground?

Even when we take the time you prescribe to, he's still averaging 25 away and 17 at home.
And again, in a bowling era.

 

[subshakerz]

1971 - 1 match
1972 - 0 matches
1973 - 0 matches
1974 - 3 matches
1975 - 0 matches

I'm not arguing workload but career duration and aging.

 

[subshakerz]

Even when we take the time you prescribe to, he's still averaging 25 away and 17 at home.
And again, in a bowling era.

With WSC it's below 25. So it's excellent. You just don't want to accept he was that good.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah you really didn’t need to relist all those reasons for ignoring those peer reviews. Also lol, Sutcliffe is a lot closer to an ATG XI than Qadir is to a top 5 spinner.




Yes it is. Insight into them and their playing style, rather than any objective view of their record which shouldn’t really change our perspective.

See the line from Morris - Shane Warne is a great legspinner but if you look at Tiger's wickets to number of runs, it will be half of Warne's. I've never seen a better bowler.

The part about his bowling style is what most interests me there, to come to a better understanding of a player with limited footage.

The other parts don’t change my view on Warne vs O’Reilly at all.

Also for anyone interested in the full interview

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/arthur-morris-feet-are-the-most-important-thing-in-batsmanship-673947

Couple of other interesting things are said. (I actually stumbled upon it when looking for Sid Barnes stuff, see if you can spot his one mention)

Didn't say he wasn't.

 

[Coronis]

And do you have consensus here or anywhere that Imran is a top 5 bowler

Does Coronis have consensus here or anywhere that Sutcliffe is the 2nd best opener?

Does that stop either of you from rating him where you do?

No, but we don’t rank players based on consensus, which you mention as one of the major factors for a lot of the players and where you rate them, however you don’t always follow the consensus, only referencing it in some cases, which I think is subz issue.

On a different topic, Hammond didn’t just like the Australian pitches. This is him on the 28/29 tour, about 5 months before he got married.

 

[subshakerz]

No, but we don’t rank players based on consensus, which you mention as one of the major factors for a lot of the players and where you rate them, however you don’t always follow the consensus, only referencing it in some cases, which I think is subz issue.

If he just stuck to one standard, it would be far easier to debate with him.

 

[capt_Luffy]

If he just stuck to one standard, it would be far easier to debate with him.

Has he still said that Qadir is viable as the #4 spinner Ever???

 

[subshakerz]

Has he still said that Qadir is viable as the #4 spinner Ever???

Predictably, he is claiming he didn't imply what he clearly was implying.

 

[kyear2]

Need I remind you since you care so much about CW polls there is a far greater consensus here that Pollock is better than Barry than Ambrose is better than Imran? Feel free to ignore it though and maintain your double standards.

And the edge is clearly for Pollock over Barry outside CW. Don't be bitter about it.

Show it.

This the 3rd time of asking. You're full of ****.

I have presented at least a dozen examples of where he's rated either the best batsman ever seen or played against or at least the best opener.

I've shown how 4 of the top 6 bowlers of his era all rated him higher than not only Pollock but Sunny, you have selective vision.

He was the consensus best batsman in the world for the first half of the 70's and it took the start of the greatest non Bradman peak ever to end his time at the top.

You just create facts in your head and run with them.

 

[OverratedSanity]

So while the phrasing was clumsy, I didn't say he was a candidate for 4th, I don't think he's a candidate for 4th, but also I wouldn't care or be distressed if someone said that he was. For me it really is a free for all after the top 3, that's honestly how I see it.

You are willing to accept Qadir being ranked as the 4th greatest spinner ever but have had months long arguments where you refuse to accept the arguments where someone might select Imran in an ATG XI? Surely you can see the latter is a much more reasonable opinion.

Stuff like this just makes me want to take nothing you say seriously tbh. You just bury your absurd opinions in long walls of text to make it look less absurd somehow.

 

[kyear2]

With WSC it's below 25. So it's excellent. You just don't want to accept he was that good.

I have him top 10.

You're the only one on this forum who refused to acknowledge that his home record is greatly impacted by malfeasance in multiple ways.

A 8 point gap between home and away.

 

[Coronis]

Didn't say he wasn't.

No, you said you’d have less issue with someone naming him a top 5 spinner than Sutcliffe being in an ATG XI. Which makes no sense if you clearly agree that Qadir is further away from the top 5 than Sutcliffe is from making the XI. You understand that right?

 

[subshakerz]

Show it.

This the 3rd time of asking. You're full of ****.

I have presented at least a dozen examples of where he's rated either the best batsman ever seen or played against or at least the best opener.

I've shown how 4 of the top 6 bowlers of his era all rated him higher than not only Pollock but Sunny, you have selective vision.

He was the consensus best batsman in the world for the first half of the 70's and it took the start of the greatest non Bradman peak ever to end his time at the top.

You just create facts in your head and run with them.

Dude the Wisden and ESPN rankings represented the Brit and Intl pundit establishment group think respectively and both had Pollock ahead. And Cricket SA themselves chose Pollock (your Kapil excuse is weak sauce, if there was widespread notion that Barry was better there would be an outcry). And plenty of peer ratings had Pollock as a Sobers level bat.

All of the above gives Pollock the edge.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I have him top 10.

You're the only one on this forum who refused to acknowledge that his home record is greatly impacted by malfeasance in multiple ways.

A 8 point gap between home and away.

6.5 being rounded up to 8 is some new age maths brother