Crickets Battle Royal

Danger_dave1

Hello people of the cricket forum, ive decided to stop lurking and start posting, since none of my friends like cricket, or like me talking about it , i shall try post more on the forum.

Now the idea of this thread will be , ill post up 2 cricketers of similar positions e.g Marcus Trescothick vs Mattew Hayden . Then we give our opinion on who we think is better and why, after a day or so we declare a winner between the two .

Now i was thinking just ODI and Test Match level comparisons. Now we wont just talk about figures , like so many of you cricket statisticians like to . No no value of 5 wickets hauls, test 50s/100s in difficult situations, for draws, wins, valiant loses. Who's more important for a team and so on .


So first up a pair of middle order batsmen both still playing with the ashes only round the corner ive decided on an English and an Australian man. Both play in the middle order, both are rocks of there respective teams, one started there test career from a sprint and the other a marathon . Here are the basic stats .

The match up is Mike Hussey "Mr cricket" vs Paul Collingwood















Test Stats

Test matchs played 48 to 59
Averages 53 to 43
Runs scored 3,819 to 4,057
100s/50s 11/19 to 10/19
Top score 182 to 206
Wickets 2 to 15
Bowling Average 51.50 to 61.33
Catches 45 to 78

ODI Stats
ODI matches played 126 to 182
Averages 54.07 to 36.96
Runs scored 3623 to 4843
100s/50s 2/27 to 5/26
Top Score 109 to 120
Wickets 2 to 103
Bowling average 96.50 to 38.86
Catches 102 to 73

Information from http://www.cricketarchive.com/

dfx-

PD Collingwood everytime for me..immovable object. A critical part of the best/most famous England partnerships in recent years..

Cape Town, Adelaide, Cardiff..

TrueDub

Danger_dave1 wrote: »

Hello people of the cricket forum, ive decided to stop lurking and start posting, since none of my friends like cricket, or like me talking about it , i shall try post more on the forum.

Welcome to the forum!

Danger_dave1 wrote: »

Now the idea of this thread will be , ill post up 2 cricketers of similar positions e.g Marcus Trescothick vs Mattew Hayden . Then we give our opinion on who we think is better and why, after a day or so we declare a winner between the two .

Now i was thinking just ODI and Test Match level comparisons. Now we wont just talk about figures , like so many of you cricket statisticians like to . No no value of 5 wickets hauls, test 50s/100s in difficult situations, for draws, wins, valiant loses. Who's more important for a team and so on .

If we're discussing players, we have to include stats, end of story. They may be dry, and they may not reflect the entire contribution of the player to the team, but they are the best measure of a player. Why did you include the stats below if you don't think they're relevant to a discussion?

Danger_dave1 wrote: »

So first up a pair of middle order batsmen both still playing with the ashes only round the corner ive decided on an English and an Australian man. Both play in the middle order, both are rocks of there respective teams, one started there test career from a sprint and the other a marathon . Here are the basic stats .

The match up is Mike Hussey "Mr cricket" vs Paul Collingwood

Test Stats

Test matchs played 48 to 59
Averages 53 to 43
Runs scored 3,819 to 4,057
100s/50s 11/19 to 10/19
Top score 182 to 206
Wickets 2 to 15
Bowling Average 51.50 to 61.33
Catches 45 to 78

ODI Stats
ODI matches played 126 to 182
Averages 54.07 to 36.96
Runs scored 3623 to 4843
100s/50s 2/27 to 5/26
Top Score 109 to 120
Wickets 2 to 103
Bowling average 96.50 to 38.86
Catches 102 to 73

Information from http://www.cricketarchive.com/

I'd pick Collingwood, as he's been a little more consistent over the last few years. I'd be happy to have either in my team though!

Cremated

Very good post DDave,

I'd go for Collingwood for the amount of times over the years during famous English batting collapses he has held strong, now the English batting order is starting to stay quite consistent and he is needed less often these days.

And on the other hand Hussey has been involved in a very solid and quite consistent batting order with Australia, and hasn't always been needed to firm them up,

then if you were to ask the question, who would I prefer in the last 5 overs of a game when 70 was needed of 30 balls, then the answer simply would be Hussey...

djimi

I think on form Hussey is a much better batsman than Collingwood. Collingwood however is probably a bit more consistant overall, certainly recently since Hussey started to look more human with the bat. Off form however Collingwood can look worse than club standard number 11.

I think if I had to pick between them, as in if I were a selector and it was between Collingwood and Hussey for who was batting number 5 in my lineup, Id pick Hussey over Collingwood.

D3PO

Id have Collingwood everytime.

Gritty determinded and much more often than not has had to hold together an English innings where as Hussey has come in much more often in no pressure situations when the runs are flowing and there is no pressure.

Danger_dave1

TrueDub wrote: »

Why did you include the stats below if you don't think they're relevant to a discussion?

Sorry I think i was not that clear, i just meant to say that stats are not everything, the value of a century against india is better than for example against Bangladesh. We need stats for both ODI and Tests. I didnt want to bring in first class stats, twenty twenty etc.


So its a staggering 4 -1 to Collingwood,

Im going to say Collingwood. After watching his knocks in Cardiff and adelaide, the grit the guy has is fantastic, His 78 or so in cardiff was one of the best knocks Ive seen, just because of the atmosphere in the ground and the pressure of it on the final day.

So its 5-1 to Collingwood

Ill post up another two players tomorrow night . Hopefully it will be a closer pair

Beasty

Not sure of the maths, but surely it was 5-1 with your vote dave, and I'm going to make it 6-1

If your granny's life depended on it you'd have to go for Collingwood. He scores the runs when it really matters. He can also bowl a bit, and is one of the best fielders around, in pretty much any position.

riffmongous

Definitely Collingwood, his tail shepherding abilities have saved England so many times.

No disrespect to Hussey but I feel England would have had a much harder time replacing Collingwood than Australia would with Hussey

djimi

Looks like Im seriously out numbered on this one

gumbynation

the huss all the way.
collingwood is an sap. whinging and moaning about having to play 'mickey mouse' ODIs against the likes of Ireland after winning the ashes.
his behavior at stormont last year was appalling.

the fact that he has scored 'important runs' at difficult times for england is more an indictment of the rest of the english batting in recent years and should not be a measure of his capabilties with the bat.

I accept that hussey has looked much more human over the last 2 seasons, however id take hussey any day - he has a better batting average in tests and ODIs and he is an awesome fielder - every bit as good as collingwood.

Danger_dave1

Well Hussey was well beaten by Collingwood in that one. Thought it might be a little closer. So next a bowling pair .

Two crickets, different stories one cast off by his selectors to soon ? one the rock of India's attack for the last few years. So who's better in your opinion ?










Zaheer Khan vs Steve Harmison

Zaheer khan Stats

Test ODIs
Matches 72 168
Runs scored 969 719
Batting average 13.45 13.07
100s/50s 0/3 0/0
Top score 75 34*
Balls bowled 14,411 8,577
Wickets 242 235
Bowling average 32.98 29.93
5 wickets in innings 9 1
10 wickets in match 1 n/a
Best bowling 7/87 5/42
Catches/stumpings 18/ – 35/–









Steve Harmison Stats

Competition Test ODI
Matches 63 58
Runs scored 743 91
Batting average 11.79 8.27
100s/50s 0/0 0/0
Top score 49* 18*
Balls bowled 13,375 2,899
Wickets 226 76
Bowling average 31.82 32.64
5 wickets in innings 8 1
10 wickets in match 1 n/a
Best bowling 7/12 5/33
Catches/stumpings 7/– 10/–


My vote goes to Zaheer Khan, what really made me see him as a top rate bowler was india's series down under in 2008. Consistent in all 4 test's , top bowler. Good swing bowler, but can just play his length when hes getting nothing from the ball or deck.

d'Oracle

Zaheer for me.
I'd have to think it over, but the stats make them look closer than they are.

Danger_dave1

d'Oracle wrote: »

Zaheer for me.
I'd have to think it over, but the stats make them look closer than they are.

But is that because england jettisoned him to soon ? could he still be playing cricket for england taking wickets at Test and ODI ?

So score is 2-0 to Zaheer Khan

d'Oracle

Danger_dave1 wrote: »

But is that because england jettisoned him to soon ? could he still be playing cricket for england taking wickets at Test and ODI ?

So score is 2-0 to Zaheer Khan

No I think its because they jettisoned him, brought him back and his form lasted about five minutes before he went in his shell again.

I think ditching him the second time was wise.
Up and down players were their down fall over the last few years.

HonalD

I've only seen one in real time - Harmison was very fast! But Khan would get the nod - 3-0 I believe.

djimi

On his day Harmison is/was one of the finest fast bowlers you could ever hope to see. But he was so inconsistant and could never really be relied on apart from maybe one season around 2005.

Khan gets the nod for me; a fine bowler who has consistency and will always do a job for India.

djimi

HonalD wrote: »

I've only seen one in real time - Harmison was very fast! But Khan would get the nod - 3-0 I believe.

I remember being at the first ODI against England in Stormont and that first ball he bowled to Dominic Joyce, the one that flew ten feet over his head, I remember being utterly amazed by his pace!

dfx-

Another one for Khan...

In what is a distinctly average Indian pace attack, Khan is vital..and possibly very difficult to replace and left armed. Whereas well Harmison wouldn't push the current English attack except maybe Broad on his day

Danger_dave1

So a resounding win for both Collingwood and Khan. Next up Stephen Fleming vs Rahul Dravid. The Tactician verus the Wall. Both have been captains, both have scored big runs for there respective countries in both test and ODI.



















So the stats are as follows

Stephen Fleming

Career statistics
Competition Test ODI
Matches 111 280[1]
Runs scored 7,172 8,037
Batting average 40.06 32.40
100s/50s 9/46 8/49
Top score 274* 134
Balls bowled – 29
Wickets – 1
Bowling average – 28.00
5 wickets in innings – 0
10 wickets in match – n/a
Best bowling – 1/8
Catches/stumpings 171/– 133/–


Rahul Dravid

Competition Test ODI
Matches 142 339
Runs scored 11,552 10,765
Batting average 52.75 39.43
100s/50s 29/58 12/82
Top score 270 153
Balls bowled 120 186
Wickets 1 4
Bowling average 39.00 42.50
5 wickets in innings 0 0
10 wickets in match 0 n/a
Best bowling 1/18 2/43
Catches/stumpings 196/0 196/14

djimi

Dravid. Im not basing that on stats or figures or anything else; that is my gut opinion as a cricket fan. You put Dravid up against any batsman of his generation and there are only a very small handful he is not going to win against. One of the finest batsmen of my lifetime and a batsman I would have in any test team.

dfx-

I'm going to be the outlier on this one I think...I'll opt for Fleming. One wall in Collingwood would be ok for me if I could get Fleming..

d'Oracle

Dravid.

The psychological effect he must have on bowlers.....
Also shown in IPL that he can mix it in T20.
And his stats are better.

djimi

dfx- wrote: »

I'm going to be the outlier on this one I think...I'll opt for Fleming. One wall in Collingwood would be ok for me if I could get Fleming..

Youd pick Collingwood over Dravid...?

Danger_dave1

Stephen FLeming for me , played in weaker team than dravid, played on much tougher wickets at home. Although he scored less runs, i believe he was a better player and won many games other captains would have lost .

crackit

Enough of the lurking and time to register and get chatting away to you lads!

I'll cast retroactive votes for Hussey, although, not by much. Collingwood is a much better player away from home in Test Matches but his inability to truly master his native conditions sees him miss out IMO. Two fantastic fielders as well it must be said.

Then I'll give Zaheer the nod over Harmison. Harmison, at his peak, was a better bowler but he had a 3 year period of excellence before fading away. Zaheer has not maybe reached the heights Harmison did but has been a consistent performer through the years. Zaheer does a good job most days but when Harmison is off form he is dreadful.

Last one, Fleming v Dravid. I think Dravid is a fantastic player but I have to go for Fleming because of the impact his efforts had on a cricketing nation with limited depth. He was a real leader of his team and although the raw stats stack up in Dravids favour its Fleming who gets the nod for me!

dfx-

djimi wrote: »

Youd pick Collingwood over Dravid...?

No, but I'd rather Fleming to be with him than Dravid. I don't know if Dravid has the leadership qualities that Fleming would

HonalD

Dravid - easily for me!

TheDrog

Fleming for me, he shone as a batsman in sides where he had little or no support

Danger_dave1

So 4-3 to fleming this one is much closer, ill put up a new set tonight, so anyone lurking out there, but your votes in now

djimi

Im amazed so many people have picked Fleming over Dravid tbh. If we are talking about purely batsman qualities (ignore the fact that Fleming was the better captain and that he played in a weaker team), if it was a case of putting one of them into a test side on batting ability alone, would people still go for Fleming over Dravid?

Danger_dave1

djimi wrote: »

Im amazed so many people have picked Fleming over Dravid tbh. If we are talking about purely batsman qualities (ignore the fact that Fleming was the better captain and that he played in a weaker team), if it was a case of putting one of them into a test side on batting ability alone, would people still go for Fleming over Dravid?

Well personally i wouldnt just judge a batsmen by figures alone, because then Ian Bell would be way to close to alot of these guys, with the amount of time he has left in test cricket.

You cant rate a player by batting ability alone, otherwise the likes of Ian bell would have to be rated very highly .

dfx-

If you were to pick on batting ability, Dravid wins every time, but to pick a player you'd have overall, there's more Fleming has to offer along with decent batting and without Tendulkar, Ganguly, Laxman to build partnerships on flatter wickets..