Which cricketer has the most complete record?

[vcs]

That's nothing mate. Warne wasn't any good against India so was apparently therefore rubbish. McGrath wasn't as good as Ambrose and didn't average well against NZ. Mark Waugh was over rated, so too Ponting. Langer and Steve Waugh were limited, Gilchrist was a slogger and Hayden a flat track bully. Moreover, the support bowling of Lee, Bichel, Kaspa et al was mediocre while Dizzy was an injury prone crock.

I don't know how we won a game tbh.

Yep, I'd have been better off watching the kids who play in the street across me than all those guys over the last 15 years.

 

[jaideep]

WOOOOOOOOOOW goood for you!!
btw your figures are so wrong!

No,they aren't.

 

[bagapath]

I propose Allan Donald has as complete of a record as Glenn McGrath even though the latter is almost synonymous with consistency.

great bowler. but was not so hot against australia.30+ average IIRC

 

[centurymaker]

No,they aren't.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[jaideep]

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Not the away stats.

 

[smash84]

AWTA. Donald and Waqar are soo underrated among the post-90 bowlers. I reckon it's because blokes like McG, Wasim & Ambrose commanded more respect from the batsman, penetrated their techniques et al. and hence are rated higher by cricketers who played against them while guys like Donald and Waqar bowled less of the OMG-It's-too-good-for-the-batsman-to-nick-it balls but still were as effective on a general level.

Waqar isn't rated very highly probably because somewhat uni-dimensional. As Robelinda pointed out in another thread that Waqar would be bowling for 20 overs and do nothing. Then he would get a wicket and get into rythm. The next thing you know the opposition is all skittled out with all the new batsmen having no clue about that inswinging yorkers. It might be argued that he wasn't a very complete fast bowler like Wasim or McGrath or Hadlee.

Yeah definitely. That and Waqar bowling a lot more **** balls than your typical sub-25 avg bowler. Took wickets faster and bowled more jaffers than anyone but as a batsman you tend to remember bowling spells where your abilities are tested to the max and the bowler finally gets you after setting you up beautifully compared to a spell where someone bowls three nothing balls outside-off which you hit to a fielder for no run and then a jaffer comes and gets you, which happened a lot with Waqar.

You are right. As a batsman you do tend to remember bowlers who make you play and miss and set you up nicely. Waqar didn't have the patience for all that setting up. He just wanted to blast the stumps out of the ground. I remember a Nasser Hussain innterview on youtube where he mentions that "I heard that a new guy called waqar had come into the county circuit and was cleaning up teams like never before and these batsmen were not out caught or anything but bowled and lbws almost all of them". So in a way he was uni-dimensional, which doesn't mean of course that he wasn't effective.

 

[Ikki]

great bowler. but was not so hot against australia.30+ average IIRC

Donald averaged 31 and struck at 62 against Australia. And that is really because of his last ever 2 tests against them otherwise he averaged 27-28 and struck at 58 for most of his career.

McGrath averaged 27 and struck at 72 against S.Africa which I think is a worse record than Donald's against Aus considering the batting line-ups faced.

McGrath also has poor record against both NZ and SA at home. The worst record of Donald's at home is Australia and even that is still better than McGrath's records against NZ and SA.

I feel Donald gets slated way too much for his record against Australia (and even then it was only bad in SA and not Aus). Having said that, McGrath bowled almost twice as many innings in his career. Freak.

 

[smash84]

waqar's record doesn't look as good on closer examination

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Burgey]

Donald averaged 31 and struck at 62 against Australia. And that is really because of his last ever 2 tests against them otherwise he averaged 27-28 and struck at 58 for most of his career.

McGrath averaged 27 and struck at 72 against S.Africa which I think is a worse record than Donald's against Aus considering the batting line-ups faced.

McGrath also has poor record against both NZ and SA at home. The worst record of Donald's at home is Australia and even that is still better than McGrath's records against NZ and SA.

I feel Donald gets slated way too much for his record against Australia (and even then it was only bad in SA and not Aus). Having said that, McGrath bowled almost twice as many innings in his career. Freak.

McGrath's home record against NZ includes that wretched series where they just let him go all the time didn't it? Worked for them that time but fmd it was **** cricket to watch.

 

[Debris]

Waqar isn't rated very highly probably because somewhat uni-dimensional. As Robelinda pointed out in another thread that Waqar would be bowling for 20 overs and do nothing. Then he would get a wicket and get into rythm. The next thing you know the opposition is all skittled out with all the new batsmen having no clue about that inswinging yorkers. It might be argued that he wasn't a very complete fast bowler like Wasim or McGrath or Hadlee.

Australians tend to judge him a bit harshly because of his poor record in Australia where he tended to look a bit second-rate next to Akram. It also felt a bit like he was a bit of an expert at knocking the tail over to buff his stats (anyone know if he had a high percentage of tail-enders amongst his wickets?). You can't really knock his record, though, and the batsmen who faced him rate him highly.

 

[smash84]

wasim has a higher percentage of tailenders than Waqar in his tally

 

[Debris]

Is there a place to look at this sort of breakdown or is this extreme nerdiness on your part, Smalish?

 

[honestbharani]

That's nothing mate. Warne wasn't any good against India so was apparently therefore rubbish. McGrath wasn't as good as Ambrose and didn't average well against NZ. Mark Waugh was over rated, so too Ponting. Langer and Steve Waugh were limited, Gilchrist was a slogger and Hayden a flat track bully. Moreover, the support bowling of Lee, Bichel, Kaspa et al was mediocre while Dizzy was an injury prone crock.

I don't know how we won a game tbh.

Well, SS was not around with his anti-jinxing.. That was the secret of your noughties invincibles, if truth be told..

 

[Burgey]

Well, SS was not around with his anti-jinxing.. That was the secret of your noughties invincibles, if truth be told..

Lol.. True that.

 

[gwo]

Is there a place to look at this sort of breakdown or is this extreme nerdiness on your part, Smalish?

then do a little bit of maths...

 

[four_or_six]

anyone else ever account for the fact that tendulkar debuted at 16? Had he debuted at something more reasonable like 18-20 his average would be close to or above 60.
although we can play what if's all day. fact remains india was ****ty enough to need a 16 year old averaging 42ish to play for them.

edit: that's probably another reason he is rated so highly.

Miscer, please don't avoid the swear filter. Just type out the full word and let the filter star it out. Thanks.

 

[jaideep]

Is there a place to look at this sort of breakdown or is this extreme nerdiness on your part, Smalish?

HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

 

[abmk]

In matches involving either mcgrath or wasim akram or donald-

tests-lara averages 40.46 compared with tendulkar's 34.30.
odis-lara averages 44.31 compared with tendulkar's 31.74.

funny cos' lara never got a century against Pak with wasim in the Pak side, nor with donald in the SA side. He had more trouble with donald than sachin did clearly, wasn't better against wasim either from what I remember.

sachin had 3 tons vs donald+wasim, all 3 brilliant ones -> 111 as an 18 year old at durban out of a total of 227, 169 at capetown when India were down 58/5 and the 136 vs Pak at chennai in 99. that is not even mentioning the 97 on a tough mumbai pitch in 2000 and the match-saving 50 odd in his debut series

lara's only real innings that was great vs either of these 2 was an 80 odd in the 4th innings vs SA

There is a reason why donald chose him over lara, even wasim said he's pick sachin over lara if forced to

lara did better against mcgrath no doubt

 

[abmk]

Um, let's just move on.

I propose Allan Donald has as complete of a record as Glenn McGrath even though the latter is almost synonymous with consistency. I grew up watching them and I still can't understand why Donald is not regularly named amongst the top bowlers of all time.

Donald is definitely up there IMO. One of the most complete bowlers of all-time and quite under-rated

sad that he had to miss a few years of his peak due to the apartheid at the beginning of his career.

 

[vcs]

Lara's record against Raju must surely be worth a look.