Yasir Shah vs other Asian spinners

[MMHS]

He has far better control than Qadir & variation than Mushi - if he can add a deceiving googly (don't even need to turn much, just enough to pitch outside off & hit off), he'll maintain this 6 wickets/Test - for the quality of Spin play in contemporary cricket, may be even 7.

 

[Adijazz1706]

He has far better control than Qadir & variation than Mushi - if he can add a deceiving googly (don't even need to turn much, just enough to pitch outside off & hit off), he'll maintain this 6 wickets/Test - for the quality of Spin play in contemporary cricket, may be even 7.

Bhai ye 7 thoda zyada hogaya

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Bhai ye 7 thoda zyada hogaya

He is right.

Qadir is vastly overrated in PP.

Great spinner but did very little outside Pakistan.

Mustaq Ahmed was great outside Asia but in Asia he wasn't that great (averaged 30+ I think).

Its just that we have a tendency to over rate the past.

I don't know how Yasir will go from here (cos that's future where anything can happen) but he is on track to become the best ever spinner from Pakistan and one of the best ever from Asia.

 

[MMHS]

Bhai ye 7 thoda zyada hogaya

He is taking 6.5/Test without playing against ZIM & WI - I quoted 7, as that's Syd Barnes average; but easily he can finish with 400 wickets in 60-65 Tests.

 

[MMHS]

He is right.

Qadir is vastly overrated in PP.

Great spinner but did very little outside Pakistan.

Mustaq Ahmed was great outside Asia but in Asia he wasn't that great (averaged 30+ I think).

Its just that we have a tendency to over rate the past.

I don't know how Yasir will go from here (cos that's future where anything can happen) but he is on track to become the best ever spinner from Pakistan and one of the best ever from Asia.

Actually, Mushi had 2 Nine wicket match in AUS, 1 Ten wicket match in NZ & 1 9 wicket match at Oval, (& a 5 fer at Lord's), & a 9 wicket match at Durban.

But, Mushi was unfit & he has bunked at least 5 years. Still should have played lot more Tests, but I think due to internal politics, he left PAK team in 2001-02 & took over 500 wickets for Sussex in 6/7 County season.

Vastly under rated bowler.

 

[endymion248]

He is right.

Qadir is vastly overrated in PP.

Great spinner but did very little outside Pakistan.

Mustaq Ahmed was great outside Asia but in Asia he wasn't that great (averaged 30+ I think).

Its just that we have a tendency to over rate the past.

I don't know how Yasir will go from here (cos that's future where anything can happen) but he is on track to become the best ever spinner from Pakistan and one of the best ever from Asia.

The best ever from Pakistan would by definition be the best ever from Asia as Pakistan has produced the best asian spinners.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

The best ever from Pakistan would by definition be the best ever from Asia as Pakistan has produced the best asian spinners.

lol...no.

Murali, Bedi, Prasanna and Chandrasekhar are universally acknowledged as the best spinners to come out of Asia.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Adijazz....

Oh you meant reg wickets?

Then ignore my post.

 

[MMHS]

The best ever from Pakistan would by definition be the best ever from Asia as Pakistan has produced the best asian spinners.

Better than Murali?

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

But its not like modern day spinners can't overtake yesteryear spinners.

 

[endymion248]

lol...no.

Murali, Bedi, Prasanna and Chandrasekhar are universally acknowledged as the best spinners to come out of Asia.

Murali of course. The other three average above 28, hardly ATG material.

 

[endymion248]

Better than Murali?

Oversight on my part.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Murali of course. The other three average above 28, hardly ATG material.

That's cos you are looking at overall average.

They averaged fine outside Asia and bowled in an era where spinners wouldn't get easy LBW and batsmen would pad up the ball with little fear of lbws.

Google them up and read about how they were raved about in their prime by non Indians.

 

[endymion248]

That's cos you are looking at overall average.

They averaged fine outside Asia and bowled in an era where spinners wouldn't get easy LBW and batsmen would pad up the ball with little fear of lbws.

Google them up and read about how they were raved about in their prime by non Indians.

By that logic, Iqbal Qasim is the best spinner ever from Asia.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

By that logic, Iqbal Qasim is the best spinner ever from Asia.

Maybe he was a good spinner too but those 3 used to get crazy appreciation in their prime.

They are widely considered to be amongst the best in Asia.

Its up to you to accept or reject it endy bhai.

Anyways moving on....

 

[MMHS]

Oversight on my part.

But Yasir is good, unbelievably good, can be even better if PAK keeps playing 10-12 Tests/year. I always like Leggis.

Anil had lot more control, while Qadir was a genius with his variations, but he used to leak lots of runs, struggled against lefties. Anil was almost tooth-less on true surface (did get wickets for his accuracy, but it was like watching a TIGHT medium pacer). Chandra was freak, some of the balls even he himself won't be able to tell which way it'll turn - for that he had back to back Test with 10 wickets, followed by 1/200.

 

[endymion248]

Maybe he was a good spinner too but those 3 used to get crazy appreciation in their prime.

They are widely considered to be amongst the best in Asia.

Its up to you to accept or reject it endy bhai.

Anyways moving on....

It is my approach that I judge players based on stats. These ''appreciation'' and ''impact'' discussions usually are meant to hide the deficiency of a player in terms of consistently bowling good balls or wicket-taking ability, which the stats reveal. You're obviously free to disagree with this approach.

 

[endymion248]

But Yasir is good, unbelievably good, can be even better if PAK keeps playing 10-12 Tests/year. I always like Leggis.

Anil had lot more control, while Qadir was a genius with his variations, but he used to leak lots of runs, struggled against lefties. Anil was almost tooth-less on true surface (did get wickets for his accuracy, but it was like watching a TIGHT medium pacer). Chandra was freak, some of the balls even he himself won't be able to tell which way it'll turn - for that he had back to back Test with 10 wickets, followed by 1/200.

Both Yasir and Ahswin are different from previous Asian spinners (except Murali) in that they consistently take wickets which the spin quartet, Kumble, Qadir or the Mushtaqs never did.

Where would you place Ajmal in the hierarchy (ignoring chucking aspect)?

 

[MMHS]

My main concern for Yasir was... Can he perform on a day 1-2 pitch? Can he do more then just containing runs? He did. And what a performance it was.

Yasir Shah had a brilliant game and deserved MOTM. The beauty about Yasir is his consistent line and length - his ability to ball in good areas; this leads to wickets, not just ability to turn the ball sharply.

Potentially, he can also be a decent batsmen and I hope he works on that as well.

Hopefully this performance will land him and Aamer a county contract.

Probably, if he can add a decent Googly. At present, he is using his drifters & sliders, which is fine on later stages; but on Day one he needs a bit more variation, keeping his accuracy intact.

 

[Surf]

It is my approach that I judge players based on stats. These ''appreciation'' and ''impact'' discussions usually are meant to hide the deficiency of a player in terms of consistently bowling good balls or wicket-taking ability, which the stats reveal. You're obviously free to disagree with this approach.

Well Said

 

[MMHS]

Both Yasir and Ahswin are different from previous Asian spinners (except Murali) in that they consistently take wickets which the spin quartet, Kumble, Qadir or the Mushtaqs never did.

Where would you place Ajmal in the hierarchy (ignoring chucking aspect)?

Over used his Doosra, which is part of his action. I think, he was more than a good finger spinner (his stats are better than most ever) on his conventional offie. Among great Asian finger spinners (haven't seen Mankad), a head of Bhajji, Herath, Qasim, Venkat & Rehman; at per with Ash; but behind Saqui, Murali, Prassanna & Bedi.

In ODI, excluding disclaimers for his action; he is probably among top 2/3 ever.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

It is my approach that I judge players based on stats. These ''appreciation'' and ''impact'' discussions usually are meant to hide the deficiency of a player in terms of consistently bowling good balls or wicket-taking ability, which the stats reveal. You're obviously free to disagree with this approach.

I am heavy on stats too. I agree with your point cos I value effectiveness the MOST too.

But the spinners had it completely different back in those days (60s, 70s especially). LBWs weren't doled out as freely. Many a times shots were not offered. And these spinners bowled in a team which had virtually no good pacers (before Dev) and they used to even open the bowling at times.

When someone like Ian Chappel who has watched modern day spinners says Prasanna was super dangerous, it means something. Boycott took one look at Ojha and Ashwin in 2012 and said they were fine but the spin quartet were better.

These things matter.

Its like comparing ODIs of 80s with now. A lot has changed for spinners.

Its a bit of a tricky territory as to how to acccurately rate the yesteryear ones.

 

[endymion248]

I am heavy on stats too. I agree with your point cos I value effectiveness the MOST too.

But the spinners had it completely different back in those days (60s, 70s especially). LBWs weren't doled out as freely. Many a times shots were not offered. And these spinners bowled in a team which had virtually no good pacers (before Dev) and they used to even open the bowling at times.

When someone like Ian Chappel who has watched modern day spinners says Prasanna was super dangerous, it means something. Boycott took one look at Ojha and Ashwin in 2012 and said they were fine but the spin quartet were better.

These things matter.

Its like comparing ODIs of 80s with now. A lot has changed for spinners.

Its a bit of a tricky territory as to how to acccurately rate the yesteryear ones.

This is why we also compare with contemporaries. And we realize that spinners don't necessarily have it worse since there were excellent spinners at the time like Derek Underwood or Jim Laker. Ashwin is a lot more deadly than any of the spin quarters at home.

 

[big_gamer007]

My dad rates Prasanna on his day as the best spinner ever.. There aren't many videos of him out there but as per him Prasanna on his day was better than anyone else..

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

This is why we also compare with contemporaries. And we realize that spinners don't necessarily have it worse since there were excellent spinners at the time like Derek Underwood or Jim Laker. Ashwin is a lot more deadly than any of the spin quarters at home.

They were considered great spinners too. Derek, Jim and Lance are highly regarded. Top tier next to only Warne and Murali.

Derek Underwood averaged 25 with balanced records playing from 1966.

Bedi played from 1966 and averaged 28 with decent country records and if you take away his last 2 years of struggle before retirement, his average is 26. Not all that different from underwood's stats. Now he did this from 1966 to 1977 without proper pacers (leave alone good pacers). Kapil started at 1979.

Someone like Prasanna averaged 23 for 5 years (including tours of Aus and NZ) and averaged low 20s in Aus series back in those days where we got thrashed left, right and centre. Back in the 60s and 70s.

These things matter.

Calling Ashwin better than Bedi or Prasanna (right now) is a huge stretch. Maybe he is (at home)...maybe not. But I don't find anyone in the domestic circles doing it. Even his own coach won't do it (yet).

Rating yesteryear spinners is a bit of a tricky issue. If I find a reliable yardstick, I will happily apply it for all and change my views. But as of now, I find it stat comparison for current and yesteryear spinners unconvincing. The disparity in viewpoints is so much inspite of someone like Ashwin having such a vastly superior stats.

But then you don't have to look far ahead and just have to see ODI bat stats these days. Someone like Kane Williamson or Amla (avg 50 with 80 SR) are not really better ODI bats than say Aravinda De Silva or Inzi or Martin Crowe.

 

[endymion248]

They were considered great spinners too. Derek, Jim and Lance are highly regarded. Top tier next to only Warne and Murali.

Derek Underwood averaged 25 with balanced records playing from 1966.

Bedi played from 1966 and averaged 28 with decent country records and if you take away his last 2 years of struggle before retirement, his average is 26. Not all that different from underwood's stats. Now he did this from 1966 to 1977 without proper pacers (leave alone good pacers). Kapil started at 1979.

Someone like Prasanna averaged 23 for 5 years (including tours of Aus and NZ) and averaged low 20s in Aus series back in those days where we got thrashed left, right and centre. Back in the 60s and 70s.

These things matter.

Calling Ashwin better than Bedi or Prasanna (right now) is a huge stretch. Maybe he is (at home)...maybe not. But I don't find anyone in the domestic circles doing it. Even his own coach won't do it (yet).

Rating yesteryear spinners is a bit of a tricky issue. If I find a reliable yardstick, I will happily apply it for all and change my views. But as of now, I find it stat comparison for current and yesteryear spinners unconvincing. The disparity in viewpoints is so much inspite of someone like Ashwin having such a vastly superior stats.

But then you don't have to look far ahead and just have to see ODI bat stats these days. Someone like Kane Williamson or Amla (avg 50 with 80 SR) are not really better ODI bats than say Aravinda De Silva or Inzi or Martin Crowe.

Yes, and he average 30 for most of his career. His average went down to 26 at one point in time when he played on rank turners at home with home umpires and went up to 28 later on. This is why we consider careers as a whole rather than selective stats.

Not having a pacer in the team allowed them to have more wickets for themselves. How much did Bedi average when he played with Kapil? 40+?

Of course nobody in India is going to say that Ashwin is better than the quartet as they over-rated the same spin quartet they never saw playing to high heavens.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Yes, and he average 30 for most of his career. His average went down to 26 at one point in time when he played on rank turners at home with home umpires and went up to 28 later on. This is why we consider careers as a whole rather than selective stats.

Not having a pacer in the team allowed them to have more wickets for themselves. How much did Bedi average when he played with Kapil? 40+?

Of course nobody in India is going to say that Ashwin is better than the quartet as they over-rated the same spin quartet they never saw playing to high heavens.

1. You talking about Bedi?

In 1960s, he averaged 25.68.
Till he faded, he averaged 26.
Total career, average 28.

There were a couple of bad years in 70s so the average might go up and down.

When comparing career stats, people ignore the part where one declines (this is different from peak).

Dravid, Ponting average 51 in tests. Does that mean they are equal to guys who average that now? No. They averaged 57-58 (for about 130+ tests) before their last few years decline.

Overall career rarely gives a proper picture.

Bedi was solid from 1966 to 1977 with an average of 26 which in his context is amazing.

2. Bedi played from 1966 to 1979. Kapil started from 1978. So obviously over the hill Bedi played with Kapil and then retired.

 

[endymion248]

1. You talking about Bedi?

In 1960s, he averaged 25.68.
Till he faded, he averaged 26.
Total career, average 28.

There were a couple of bad years in 70s so the average might go up and down.

When comparing career stats, people ignore the part where one declines (this is different from peak).

Dravid, Ponting average 51 in tests. Does that mean they are equal to guys who average that now? No. They averaged 57-58 (for about 130+ tests) before their last few years decline.

Overall career rarely gives a proper picture.

Bedi was solid from 1966 to 1977 with an average of 26 which in his context is amazing.

2. Bedi played from 1966 to 1979. Kapil started from 1978. So obviously over the hill Bedi played with Kapil and then retired.

8 years is not a lean patch, it is the peak you are speaking of. If he had 8 averages years with 2-3 great years then why only take the 2-3 good years? Do we judge Waqar only based on pre-93 stats? Nit-picking gives a flawed image. He averaged 29 over his career, there were some years he was better than that, some years worse. Why only take a few of those years?

 

[Haz95]

Yasir has taken a major step forward and is rapidly becoming a bowler who's almost already at tier 2 e.g. bedi, prasanna and could even become tier 1- Warne, Murali level .

To take a 10fer in England is no mean feat. I feel he can do even better in Australia and considering current Indias spin playing credentials, I see him dismantling them too.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

8 years is not a lean patch, it is the peak you are speaking of. If he had 8 averages years with 2-3 great years then why only take the 2-3 good years? Do we judge Waqar only based on pre-93 stats? Nit-picking gives a flawed image. He averaged 29 over his career, there were some years he was better than that, some years worse. Why only take a few of those years?

I took stats from 1966 - 1977.

11 years out of his 13 year career.

What 8 years?

I never spoke of peak either.

 

[endymion248]

I took stats from 1966 - 1977.

11 years out of his 13 year career.

What 8 years?

I never spoke of peak either.

His career average was over 27 from 1971 to 1878.

This means that, given his earlier average of 26, those were lean years.

So, when you say that we should consider that he averages 26 because that was his average at one point in time, I ask you why not the 40 points in time before and after where his average was higher?

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

His career average was over 27 from 1971 to 1878.

This means that, given his earlier average of 26, those were lean years.

So, when you say that we should consider that he averages 26 because that was his average at one point in time, I ask you why not the 40 points in time before and after where his average was higher?

What are you even talking about?

How much more simpler can I make it for yuou.

Bedi played from 1966 to 1979.

He averaged 28.

From 1966 to 1977 he averaged 26.

Generally ;players in their last years regress and Bedi averaged ;lots before retiring.

Its done for all. Dravid, ponting and Tendulkar's average all dropped from 57 to 53 odd. If they maintained 57 average after a LONg time, that gets counted and analyzed in comparison.

Bedi TILL 1977 averaged 26 so its not all that bad. Later it raised to 28 (after 2 years).

And if you say his average was over 27 in 70s....it was 25 in 60s....Whatever happened to oevrall stats now?

Its simple:

bedi career average 28.
bedi average till 2 years of hjis retirment 26.

You can take whatever data point you want but I have explained why we leave out the final fading years for players during comparison.

The End.

 

[endymion248]

What are you even talking about?

How much more simpler can I make it for yuou.

Bedi played from 1966 to 1979.

He averaged 28.

From 1966 to 1977 he averaged 26.

Generally ;players in their last years regress and Bedi averaged ;lots before retiring.

Its done for all. Dravid, ponting and Tendulkar's average all dropped from 57 to 53 odd. If they maintained 57 average after a LONg time, that gets counted and analyzed in comparison.

Bedi TILL 1977 averaged 26 so its not all that bad. Later it raised to 28 (after 2 years).

And if you say his average was over 27 in 70s....it was 25 in 60s....Whatever happened to oevrall stats now?

Its simple:

bedi career average 28.
bedi average till 2 years of hjis retirment 26.

You can take whatever data point you want but I have explained why we leave out the final fading years for players during comparison.

The End.

Your way of thinking is flawed.

From 1966 to start of 1972, he averaged 28.9

From 1966 to start of 1973, he averaged 27.8

From 1966 to start of 1974, he averaged 28.2

From 1966 to start of 1975, he averaged 30.4

From 1966 to start of 1976, he averaged 30.3

Why are you taking ''TILL 1977" and not anyone of those years?

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Cos thats how its done for all comparisons.

Its standard procedure.

Explained why (with examples) like 2 times already and now you asking me for the 3rd time.

Its not that my way of thinking is flawed but it seems like you haven't done a lot of player comparison stat analysis cos you seem to question what is widely accepted in stat analysis.

From 1966 to 69, he averaged 25. And several in data points it would be lesser or else a player can't average 26 till fag end of his career.

 

[endymion248]

Cos thats how its done for all comparisons.

Its standard procedure.

Explained why (with examples) like 2 times already and now you asking me for the 3rd time.

Its not that my way of thinking is flawed but it seems like you haven't done a lot of player comparison stat analysis cos you seem to question what is widely accepted in stat analysis.

From 1966 to 69, he averaged 25. And several in data points it would be lesser or else a player can't average 26 till fag end of his career.

That comparison is done for players who only decline towards the end. For example Tendulkar had an average of above 55 for his whole career and it declined towards the end. In Bedi's case, you can see the table I posted above. The 26 was a blip due to home series, not caracteristic as his cumulative average was far above that before AND after that point in time.

And, no, his average was never under 25 at any data point as you can see on the screenshot above. It was above 30 often and it reached 26 at one or two point in his careers, which is why your saying that ''this is a 26 average player'' is extremely flawed.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

That comparison is done for players who only decline towards the end. For example Tendulkar had an average of above 55 for his whole career and it declined towards the end. In Bedi's case, you can see the table I posted above. The 26 was a blip due to home series, not caracteristic as his cumulative average was far above that before AND after that point in time.

And, no, his average was never under 25 at any data point as you can see on the screenshot above. It was above 30 often and it reached 26 at one or two point in his careers, which is why your saying that ''this is a 26 average player'' is extremely flawed.

It was 25.68 in the 60s.

Then early 70s, it was hovering around 28 for most part (except 2 years). Rarely ever 30.

Then dropped to 26 and then rose to 28 again due to final regression.

During 1976 and 77, where he got things right and his average dropped...

This is what he performed in thsoe 2 years as opposed to hyour claim of home pitches and umpires

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...6;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

17 tests
90 wickets
Avg 21


Avg in India - 18
Avg in Aus - 21.38
Avg in NZ - 30
Avg in WI - 25.33

Basically he NAILED IT wherever he went. in those 2 years.

So taking 26 as his average before final regression is perfectly fine and a far more simple way of approach.

You can take 28 but he fair and square made his average drop to 26 with great performances.

Ashwin too recently made his average go down from 30 to 25. For most of his career, it was 28-30. Does that mean we take that as the main thing?

If you are good enough to get it down, you are good enough. And in bedi's case, dude nailed it overseas too and got it down properly.

so nothing wrong in saying he averaged 26 before he declined.

Basically keep things simple bro.

You are over analyzing it.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

A 10 yar old career average doesn't improve due to some minor blip.

Bedi played 25% of his career tests in THOSE 2 YEARS (and his career was for 13 years).

And he averaged 21 in that and got his numbers down.

So years cannot be used as an indicator (as it depends on how many tests you play per yar which is out of your hands).

That's why overall stats before regression is a simple but accurate reflection of performance.

 

[endymion248]

It was 25.68 in the 60s.

Then early 70s, it was hovering around 28 for most part (except 2 years). Rarely ever 30.

Then dropped to 26 and then rose to 28 again due to final regression.

During 1976 and 77, where he got things right and his average dropped...

This is what he performed in thsoe 2 years as opposed to hyour claim of home pitches and umpires

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...6;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

17 tests
90 wickets
Avg 21


Avg in India - 18
Avg in Aus - 21.38
Avg in NZ - 30
Avg in WI - 25.33

Basically he NAILED IT wherever he went. in those 2 years.

So taking 26 as his average before final regression is perfectly fine and a far more simple way of approach.

You can take 28 but he fair and square made his average drop to 26 with great performances.

Ashwin too recently made his average go down from 30 to 25. For most of his career, it was 28-30. Does that mean we take that as the main thing?

If you are good enough to get it down, you are good enough. And in bedi's case, dude nailed it overseas too and got it down properly.

so nothing wrong in saying he averaged 26 before he declined.

Basically keep things simple bro.

You are over analyzing it.

You are the one over-analyzing it by saying that we should consider 26 rather than his whole-career average of 28. At some point he had an average of 30, at some point he had an average of 26. This is how it works, players have good years and they have bad years. Bedi had 2 awesome years (which you mentionned) and he was bad in the early 70s. Result: an average of 28.4 at the end of his career. This is why we consider players over their whole careers and not just at single data points after 2 good years. He played 2 bad years after those 2 good years, why only stop at the 2 good years?

 

[endymion248]

A 10 yar old career average doesn't improve due to some minor blip.

Bedi played 25% of his career tests in THOSE 2 YEARS (and his career was for 13 years).

And he averaged 21 in that and got his numbers down.

So years cannot be used as an indicator (as it depends on how many tests you play per yar which is out of your hands).

That's why overall stats before regression is a simple but accurate reflection of performance.

His average was above 27 from test 23 to test 54. His average was under 27 from test 55 to test 58. His average was above 27 from test 59 to test 67. This is the definition of a minor blip. His average was 26 only for 3 tests.

Bedi is NOT a 26 average player and he is certainly not comparable to a player whose overall average is 25.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Yeah...of course.

Playing 25% of your tests in a 2 year period (with overseas tours) and averaging 21 is a minor blip.

After all a player can choose how many tests he plays per year.

So let's go from "rank turner home pitches and home umpires"which was the cause for average to go down to "breaking down his career avg on a test by test basis".

Absurd way of looking at things endy bhai.

I believe I have presented rock solid irrefutable evidence as to why Bedi can be considered a 26 average player.

I am more convinced now after I dug in and found data than I was before. Haha.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Ajmal lol.He isnt even fit to tie the shoelaces of Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Not to mention that Ajmal was caught chucking and stopped from bowling.

Saqlain Mushtaq was no doubt a class spinner but his record isnt better than that of Bedi or Chandra and is close to Prasannas.

And Mushtaq Ahmed has a inferior record to Bedi Prasanna or Chandra.

 

[endymion248]

Yeah...of course.

Playing 25% of your tests in a 2 year period (with overseas tours) and averaging 21 is a minor blip.

After all a player can choose how many tests he plays per year.

So let's go from "rank turner home pitches and home umpires"which was the cause for average to go down to "breaking down his career avg on a test by test basis".

Absurd way of looking at things endy bhai.

I believe I have presented rock solid irrefutable evidence as to why Bedi can be considered a 26 average player.

I am more convinced now after I dug in and found data than I was before. Haha.

How can a player be considered a 26 average player when his career average was 26.5 (never under that) only for 3 test matches or a few weeks? This is a new domain of stats you are starting.

For 90% of his career, his average was above 27 AND he ended his career with an average of 28.5. But yet we are going to pretend he averaged 26 because you feel like it?

I did a test by test breakdown because you said that years were not enough (even though you started it by saying ''from 1966 to 1977"). It doesn't matter how you look at it, test or times, Bedi was not a 26 average player.

 

[cricketjoshila]

lol...no.

Murali, Bedi, Prasanna and Chandrasekhar are universally acknowledged as the best spinners to come out of Asia.

Starts from Subhash Gupte.Then Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Then Kumble and now Ashwin.

Pakistan has produced spinners like Saqi and Qadir and now Yasir but the overall quality isnt better than India.

 

[cricketjoshila]

That's cos you are looking at overall average.

They averaged fine outside Asia and bowled in an era where spinners wouldn't get easy LBW and batsmen would pad up the ball with little fear of lbws.

Google them up and read about how they were raved about in their prime by non Indians.

In that era spinners were defensively played by the batters and these spinners started with a new ball.

 

[endymion248]

Ajmal lol.He isnt even fit to tie the shoelaces of Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Not to mention that Ajmal was caught chucking and stopped from bowling.

Saqlain Mushtaq was no doubt a class spinner but his record isnt better than that of Bedi or Chandra and is close to Prasannas.

And Mushtaq Ahmed has a inferior record to Bedi Prasanna or Chandra.

If Saqlain and Mushtaq are inferior based on average then Iqbal Qasim is superior to them based on the same average.

 

[Rudi hater]

Ajmal lol.He isnt even fit to tie the shoelaces of Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Not to mention that Ajmal was caught chucking and stopped from bowling.

Saqlain Mushtaq was no doubt a class spinner but his record isnt better than that of Bedi or Chandra and is close to Prasannas.

And Mushtaq Ahmed has a inferior record to Bedi Prasanna or Chandra.

Saqi had alot better SR compare to Bedi. 80.3 to 67.6 Saqi had more variety Bedi was good but not ATG.

 

[cricketjoshila]

If Saqlain and Mushtaq are inferior based on average then Iqbal Qasim is superior to them based on the same average.

And how many wickets does Iqbal Qasim has?What was his performance outside of Asia?

And Saqlain may be has a case to be compared with Chandra and Bedi.Mushtaq was surely a inferior bowler.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Saqi had alot better SR compare to Bedi. 80.3 to 67.6 Saqi had more variety Bedi was good but not ATG.

Totally different eras.And Bedi is considered the greatest Left arm spinner in history.

And Saqi definately isnt a ATG overall.A good test spinner,the best ODI spinner ever but not an ATG overall.

 

[Rudi hater]

Totally different eras.And Bedi is considered the greatest Left arm spinner in history.

And Saqi definately isnt a ATG overall.A good test spinner,the best ODI spinner ever but not an ATG overall.

And Bedi was same as Saqi nothing more than a good spinner.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

How can a player be considered a 26 average player when his career average was 26.5 (never under that) only for 3 test matches or a few weeks? This is a new domain of stats you are starting.

For 90% of his career, his average was above 27 AND he ended his career with an average of 28.5. But yet we are going to pretend he averaged 26 because you feel like it?

I did a test by test breakdown because you said that years were not enough (even though you started it by saying ''from 1966 to 1977"). It doesn't matter how you look at it, test or times, Bedi was not a 26 average player.

How many times should I repeat his average in 60s were 25.68.

Seriously.....I would have repeated it like 5 times atleast. Maybe 10.

Here check this:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround

Which means by 31 Dec 1969, he had an average of 25.68.

This is after 19 tests which constitutes 28.3% of his CAREER tests.

Then 25% of his career tests have been in those 2 years we discussed where he averaged 21.

That itself is above 53% of his career..

I am not starting any new domain in stats. Its just that you are not accepting standard procedure (stat analysis before regression).

And even to humour you, I dug in and gave you lots of proof.

Its upto you to accept or reject it. Makes no difference. The numbers speaks volumes.

 

[endymion248]

And how many wickets does Iqbal Qasim has?What was his performance outside of Asia?

And Saqlain may be has a case to be compared with Chandra and Bedi.Mushtaq was surely a inferior bowler.

Iqbal Qasim was slightly worse than Chandra and Bedi. However, Mushtaq was much better yet you are calling him an inferior bowler so I am assuming that record outside of Asia is not the be and end all for you, otherwise you will have to accept that Mushtaq was much better than Chandra/Bedi/Prasana:

As for number of wickets, h e took 171 wickets, which is a similar number to Prasana.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Starts from Subhash Gupte.Then Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Then Kumble and now Ashwin.

Pakistan has produced spinners like Saqi and Qadir and now Yasir but the overall quality isnt better than India.

I left out Gupte cos it was way too old era and he didn't get as much coverage as the others did. He probably was a better spinner than them.

Kumble has wickets and is a certified Indian legend (and considered a great spinner worldwide) but his aura outside Asia isn't much. Same goes for Ashwin (as of now).

But Prasanna, Bedi and Chandrasekhar from the quartet are widely recognizsed as one of the best to come from Asia.

 

[endymion248]

Ajmal lol.He isnt even fit to tie the shoelaces of Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Not to mention that Ajmal was caught chucking and stopped from bowling.

Does that invalidate his record? He was caught chucking and had to change his action. But ICC didn't invalidate his past record as they have no proof that he had been chucking when he took those wickets.

Even Ashwin admitted to chucking during a certain period where he had changed his action to emulate Narine, does that mean ALL his wickets are illegal?

 

[endymion248]

Starts from Subhash Gupte.Then Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Then Kumble and now Ashwin.

Pakistan has produced spinners like Saqi and Qadir and now Yasir but the overall quality isnt better than India.

In LOIs, Pakistan's spinners clearly have a better record.

In tests, no, it's not possible to say Pakistan is better. Neither is it possible to say India is better. Neither team produced a truly great spinner like Murali or Warne.

They produced a lot of spinners who took a lot of wickets thanks to longevity but none with a great average. Pakistan has Iqbal Qasim, Mushtaq Ahmed, Mushtaq Mohammed, Saqlain, Qadir, Ajmal and Kaneria. India has Prasana, Gupte, Bedi, Chandra, Kumble and Harbhajan. Pakistanis have better averages, Indians have more wickets. It depends on what you prefer but it's not possible to say for sure that one is better than the other like it is possible to say that Australia produced better spinners than Pakistan (or India) in tests.

 

[as-95]

Ajmal lol.He isnt even fit to tie the shoelaces of Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Not to mention that Ajmal was caught chucking and stopped from bowling.

Saqlain Mushtaq was no doubt a class spinner but his record isnt better than that of Bedi or Chandra and is close to Prasannas.

And Mushtaq Ahmed has a inferior record to Bedi Prasanna or Chandra.

Ajmal's action was cleared in the initial ICC rules that were present during Murali's era regarding bowling actions. Only rule changes cause him to be unfairly banned. Regardless, the ban doesn't take away from his legacy as an ATG spinner. He was superior to anyone the Indians have produced and your delusion wont allow you to see that. Bedi,Prasanna and co are nobodies in the cricketing world outside India wheras Mushtaq is universally seen as an ATG on par woth Murali (whilst superior in ODIs)

 

[endymion248]

Ajmal's action was cleared in the initial ICC rules that were present during Murali's era regarding bowling actions. Only rule changes cause him to be unfairly banned. Regardless, the ban doesn't take away from his legacy as an ATG spinner. He was superior to anyone the Indians have produced and your delusion wont allow you to see that. Bedi,Prasanna and co are nobodies in the cricketing world outside India wheras Mushtaq is universally seen as an ATG on par woth Murali (whilst superior in ODIs)

Thora ziyada nahin ho gaya )

 

[as-95]

Starts from Subhash Gupte.Then Bedi Prasanna Chandra.Then Kumble and now Ashwin.

Pakistan has produced spinners like Saqi and Qadir and now Yasir but the overall quality isnt better than India.

Casually leaving out ATG spinners like Ajmal whilst including bang average players like Ashwin)

Typically selective and attempting to disguise the truth.

We have indeed produced Saqi, Qadir and now Yasir but if you are going to use Ashwin to attempt to argue India has produced better spinners, use similar ones from Pakistan.

Along with Saqi,Qadir and Yasir, we have Ajmal and Mushtaq Ahmed. Even Kaneria and Iqbal Qasim are better than Ashwin whilst the first 6 are superior to India's best.

 

[as-95]

Totally different eras.And Bedi is considered the greatest Left arm spinner in history.

And Saqi definately isnt a ATG overall.A good test spinner,the best ODI spinner ever but not an ATG overall.

I would certainly say that being the best ever spinner in a major format(as you state), whilst being very good in another makes you an ATG. You have unconciously stated that he is an ATG by saying that he is the best ODI spinner ever. If he was Indian, your tume would obviously be be different.

Jealousy is bad for your health

 

[cricketjoshila]

Iqbal Qasim was slightly worse than Chandra and Bedi. However, Mushtaq was much better yet you are calling him an inferior bowler so I am assuming that record outside of Asia is not the be and end all for you, otherwise you will have to accept that Mushtaq was much better than Chandra/Bedi/Prasana:

As for number of wickets, h e took 171 wickets, which is a similar number to Prasana.

Why are you only posting Overseas stats?Its one of the important factors.

There is a difference of only 1 percentage point between the avg of Chandra Bedi and Mushtaq overseas.But overall Mushtaq Avgs 33 with the ball to 28 of Bedi and 30 of Chandra.

Similarly while Qasim has a slightly better overall avg than Bedi and Chandra,his overseas avg is inferior to Bedi and Chandra.

So if you take the whole package of overall avg and overseas performances plus the number of wickets that Bedi and Chandra have they are clearly the better bowlers.

Add to that Kumble with his 600 plus wickets and Ashwin,Bhajji and Gupte and Pakistani spin department is inferior.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Casually leaving out ATG spinners like Ajmal whilst including bang average players like Ashwin)

Typically selective and attempting to disguise the truth.

We have indeed produced Saqi, Qadir and now Yasir but if you are going to use Ashwin to attempt to argue India has produced better spinners, use similar ones from Pakistan.

Along with Saqi,Qadir and Yasir, we have Ajmal and Mushtaq Ahmed. Even Kaneria and Iqbal Qasim are better than Ashwin whilst the first 6 are superior to India's best.

Ajmal is ATG.LOL,He is a chucker who was banned from bowling.

And Ashwin has a test avg of 25 to Ajmal's 28-29.

LOL.

Kumble has 600 plus wickets and is better that Qadir or Mushtaq or Kaneria or whatever else you have named.

Add to that Gupte Ashwin Chandra Bedi Prasanna et al and Pakistani spin bowling doesnt even come near.

 

[cricketjoshila]

In LOIs, Pakistan's spinners clearly have a better record.

In tests, no, it's not possible to say Pakistan is better. Neither is it possible to say India is better. Neither team produced a truly great spinner like Murali or Warne.

They produced a lot of spinners who took a lot of wickets thanks to longevity but none with a great average. Pakistan has Iqbal Qasim, Mushtaq Ahmed, Mushtaq Mohammed, Saqlain, Qadir, Ajmal and Kaneria. India has Prasana, Gupte, Bedi, Chandra, Kumble and Harbhajan. Pakistanis have better averages, Indians have more wickets. It depends on what you prefer but it's not possible to say for sure that one is better than the other like it is possible to say that Australia produced better spinners than Pakistan (or India) in tests.

LOI's Saqlain was better no doubt.The best perhaps.

And the Spin armoury is not about one bowler only.Lanka has produced a ATG in Murali but that doesnt mean their spin bwling is overall better than India or Pakistan.

Indian spinners have taken more test wickets than their Pakistani counterparts at a similar avg over all.There by they are better.

Now coming to Australia,well historically they have produced the best cricket teams.Balance of great Batsmen plus great fast bowlers and great spinners.

 

[Rudi hater]

Ajmal is ATG.LOL,He is a chucker who was banned from bowling.

And Ashwin has a test avg of 25 to Ajmal's 28-29.

LOL.

Kumble has 600 plus wickets and is better that Qadir or Mushtaq or Kaneria or whatever else you have named.

Add to that Gupte Ashwin Chandra Bedi Prasanna et al and Pakistani spin bowling doesnt even come near.

Amount of matches he played if any of Pakistani spinners played they would have taken the same amount of wickets. He played on turning tracks in India with little bit of help from home upmires..

 

[kajukatri]

Average indian spinners Grade high : in ICC ranking

LOI's Saqlain was better no doubt.The best perhaps.

And the Spin armoury is not about one bowler only.Lanka has produced a ATG in Murali but that doesnt mean their spin bwling is overall better than India or Pakistan.

Indian spinners have taken more test wickets than their Pakistani counterparts at a similar avg over all.There by they are better.

Now coming to Australia,well historically they have produced the best cricket teams.Balance of great Batsmen plus great fast bowlers and great spinners.

According to ICC ranking [ test cricket ] Jadeja number 6 and Ashwin number 2.Shah now number 1.jimmy number 3 and Woakes number 36th. Mishra A 's ranking will be going up after WI series,no doubt indian spinners are great, I am starving to watch ind.vs eng.5 test / 3 ODI /3 T20 in india

 

[cricketjoshila]

Amount of matches he played if any of Pakistani spinners played they would have taken the same amount of wickets. He played on turning tracks in India with little bit of help from home upmires..

Is it Kumbles problem that Pakistani spinners are not good enough to get 300wkts?

I think Kumble avgs 4.5 wickets a test match.Thats very standard.

And Pakistani pitchee also had enough help for spinners and the less said about Pakistani umpires the better.

Problem is Pakistani spinners come to the test scene with a bang with a mystery kind of variation.Saqlain's doosra or Mushtaq's almost undetectable googly Qadirs googly and ability to bowl 2 different kinds of leg spin.But once the batsmen are able to play out that mystery delivery they have they somehow are not able to rediscover other ways of foxing the batsman.That reflects in the relative short life of Pakistani spinners.

 

[endymion248]

Why are you only posting Overseas stats?Its one of the important factors.

There is a difference of only 1 percentage point between the avg of Chandra Bedi and Mushtaq overseas.But overall Mushtaq Avgs 33 with the ball to 28 of Bedi and 30 of Chandra.

Similarly while Qasim has a slightly better overall avg than Bedi and Chandra,his overseas avg is inferior to Bedi and Chandra.

So if you take the whole package of overall avg and overseas performances plus the number of wickets that Bedi and Chandra have they are clearly the better bowlers.

Add to that Kumble with his 600 plus wickets and Ashwin,Bhajji and Gupte and Pakistani spin department is inferior.

You are the one who asked what Qasim's overseas average is as if it would discredit him.

For overall average, the difference between Mushtaq and Chandra is the same as the difference between Qasim and Chandra.

So either Qasim>Chandra>Mushtaq

or

Mushtaq>Chandra>Qasim based on overseas performance

 

[endymion248]

LOI's Saqlain was better no doubt.The best perhaps.

And the Spin armoury is not about one bowler only.Lanka has produced a ATG in Murali but that doesnt mean their spin bwling is overall better than India or Pakistan.

Indian spinners have taken more test wickets than their Pakistani counterparts at a similar avg over all.There by they are better.

Now coming to Australia,well historically they have produced the best cricket teams.Balance of great Batsmen plus great fast bowlers and great spinners.

In LOIs, it's not just Saqi. Pakistan also has many spinners with average under 30.

In Tests, like I said, both teams are relatively equal. Yes, Indians took more wickets but Pakistanis have lower averages (none of the retired indian spinner has an average under 28 while several Pakistanis do).

 

[Adijazz1706]

In LOIs, it's not just Saqi. Pakistan also has many spinners with average under 30.

In Tests, like I said, both teams are relatively equal. Yes, Indians took more wickets but Pakistanis have lower averages (none of the retired indian spinner has an average under 28 while several Pakistanis do).

You are arguing with Joshila? Bhai aap thik to ho. Joshila is like

 

[Rudi hater]

Is it Kumbles problem that Pakistani spinners are not good enough to get 300wkts?

I think Kumble avgs 4.5 wickets a test match.Thats very standard.

And Pakistani pitchee also had enough help for spinners and the less said about Pakistani umpires the better.

Problem is Pakistani spinners come to the test scene with a bang with a mystery kind of variation.Saqlain's doosra or Mushtaq's almost undetectable googly Qadirs googly and ability to bowl 2 different kinds of leg spin.But once the batsmen are able to play out that mystery delivery they have they somehow are not able to rediscover other ways of foxing the batsman.That reflects in the relative short life of Pakistani spinners.

Nobody can beat 10 wickets that kumble got when he swtiched end to indian umpire...all of sudden Kumble was transformed man...turning it mile.... hehe

 

[Syed1]

You are arguing with Joshila? Bhai aap thik to ho. Joshila is like

I'm pretty sure Joshila thinks that Mishra is the best leggie in the world. Ashwin is the best offie in the world. Bhuv/Ishant/Umesh/Any other Kumar is the best pacer in the world.

Oh also Jaddu is the best left-armer in the world.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Nobody can beat 10 wickets that kumble got when he swtiched end to indian umpire...all of sudden Kumble was transformed man...turning it mile.... hehe

Keep whining about that.The video was posted here and most posters agreed that except one decision rest all were spot on.

Read Steve Waugh or Mike Gatting or a few other international captains regarding Pakistani umpires.

 

[Rudi hater]

Keep whining about that.The video was posted here and most posters agreed that except one decision rest all were spot on.

Read Steve Waugh or Mike Gatting or a few other international captains regarding Pakistani umpires.

There were 3-4 decisons that were so wrong...you can say what you like. The reason why there is no decent indian umpire on ICC elite planel in the last 25 years.

 

[Rudi hater]

Keep whining about that.The video was posted here and most posters agreed that except one decision rest all were spot on.

Read Steve Waugh or Mike Gatting or a few other international captains regarding Pakistani umpires.

Forget about reading it I saw it with my own eyes how aweful Indian umpires were in 70s and 80s.

 

[Rudi hater]

 

[Abdullah719]

All the posts on here were previously on another thread.



Let's avoid derailing threads in future.

 

[zoro]

He is right.

Qadir is vastly overrated in PP.

Great spinner but did very little outside Pakistan.

Mustaq Ahmed was great outside Asia but in Asia he wasn't that great (averaged 30+ I think).

Its just that we have a tendency to over rate the past.

I don't know how Yasir will go from here (cos that's future where anything can happen) but he is on track to become the best ever spinner from Pakistan and one of the best ever from Asia.

Did you ever see Qadir bowl live or are you just basing your opinions by statsguru? Imran and Qadir were the main bowlers for Pakistan in the early 80's. Qadir troubled everyone inside and outside asia. Viv has actually said Qadir was the most trickiest bowler he ever faced. Micheal Holding in the Eng vs Pak test match at Lords on commentary also said Viv had to use all his skills to keep out Qadir. Qadir had the most variations of any legspinner i have ever seen. However, Warne turned the ball more than any legspinner i have ever seen along with his drift and control which made him the greatest of all time. Or perhaps you just rate legspinners who dont turn the ball like Kumble ?

 

[zoro]

Did you ever see Qadir bowl live or are you just basing your opinions by statsguru? Imran and Qadir were the main bowlers for Pakistan in the early 80's. Qadir troubled everyone inside and outside asia. Viv has actually said Qadir was the most trickiest bowler he ever faced. Micheal Holding in the Eng vs Pak test match at Lords on commentary also said Viv had to use all his skills to keep out Qadir. Qadir had the most variations of any legspinner i have ever seen. However, Warne turned the ball more than any legspinner i have ever seen along with his drift and control which made him the greatest of all time. Or perhaps you just rate legspinners who dont turn the ball like Kumble ?

Continuation..

Qadir was like Wasim the most skilled of all time.
Warne is like Mcgrath the most controlled and successful of all time.
And Yasir could possibly be like Steyn, the best of his generation but in a time when batsmen are not that good with a few exceptions, but too early to say.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Did you ever see Qadir bowl live or are you just basing your opinions by statsguru? Imran and Qadir were the main bowlers for Pakistan in the early 80's. Qadir troubled everyone inside and outside asia. Viv has actually said Qadir was the most trickiest bowler he ever faced. Micheal Holding in the Eng vs Pak test match at Lords on commentary also said Viv had to use all his skills to keep out Qadir. Qadir had the most variations of any legspinner i have ever seen. However, Warne turned the ball more than any legspinner i have ever seen along with his drift and control which made him the greatest of all time. Or perhaps you just rate legspinners who dont turn the ball like Kumble ?

I never said Qadir was a bad spinner. He was a good spinner but overrated.

Heard he was damn good in Pakistan abut struggled outside Pakistan. Stats wise too, its the same. He averaged 47 outside of Pakistan and the minimum he averaged in an away country was 34.

As for Kumble...yes, he was not the most pleasing of leg spinners but he had a more far effective career than Qadir which is what matters.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I was specifically talking about tests.

Qadir's googly and his numbers in ODI are amazing.

 

[zoro]

I never said Qadir was a bad spinner. He was a good spinner but overrated.

Heard he was damn good in Pakistan abut struggled outside Pakistan. Stats wise too, its the same. He averaged 47 outside of Pakistan and the minimum he averaged in an away country was 34.

As for Kumble...yes, he was not the most pleasing of leg spinners but he had a more far effective career than Qadir which is what matters.

I've been reading your posts for a long time now and i rate you as the best poster on this forum. Your data analysis is fantastic and to having stats are essential to have a debate but like you and others on this forum who try to prove your point with stats i would just say that stats are not scientific regarding cricket as to be scientific you can only have one variable i.e. the player and these stats have several variables such as weather conditons, pitch, team constitution(players) etc, not to mention time(different generations). Therefore, it is essential that you have watched these players in different conditions for a considerable time, even though this will only give a subjective view depending on your understanding of the game and honesty can be a better guide to a player than never seeing them and judging on stats alone. By the way Kumble may not have spun the ball much but was a damn good bowler in asian conditions, equally as important to India as Sacchin was . My point was not to disrespect Kumble but was to show that he is the second leading legspinner with 600 wickets(third in alltime wicket takers list) so if someone never saw him play would think he must of spun the ball like a kiddy's spinning top toy but he didnt. I guess what i am saying is you cant base your arguments on stats alone.

 

[Acricketfan]

How many times should I repeat his average in 60s were 25.68.

Seriously.....I would have repeated it like 5 times atleast. Maybe 10.

Here check this:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround

Which means by 31 Dec 1969, he had an average of 25.68.

This is after 19 tests which constitutes 28.3% of his CAREER tests.

Then 25% of his career tests have been in those 2 years we discussed where he averaged 21.

That itself is above 53% of his career..

I am not starting any new domain in stats. Its just that you are not accepting standard procedure (stat analysis before regression).

And even to humour you, I dug in and gave you lots of proof.

Its upto you to accept or reject it. Makes no difference. The numbers speaks volumes.

I am surprised that bothered to argue for this long.