Top Five Cricketers from each country

[h_hurricane]

What are you talking about he was a total minnow basher

I agree I was carried away a bit here. Not that I didn't rate Botham highly earlier. Always did.

 

[smalishah84]

What are you talking about he was a total minnow basher

The 80s Aussies were minnows tbf

 

[Burgey]

The 81 side wasn’t. Really only lacked GC.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

It was more a bit later than that, when a few players had retired and the South African rebel tours took place, that the depth in Australian cricket was very thin indeed

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

It is not right to include first class matches

ICC and Wisden don’t call them tests. They’re not tests

7 tests mean nothing.

Procter doesn’t belong here.

That's technicality.
This stats gives you clear indication of what he is capable of. And there is a small matter of injustice.

Ok , if given a choice
Who will make in to your team ..
Irfan Pathan or Mike Procter ?

 

[Borges]

Ok , if given a choice Who will make in to your team ..Irfan Pathan or Mike Procter ?

Irfan Pathan.

The other guy did not play a sufficient number of test matches; so who knows how he might have turned out; may have ended up like Botham for most of his career.

 

[Burgey]

That's technicality.
This stats gives you clear indication of what he is capable of. And there is a small matter of injustice.

Ok , if given a choice
Who will make in to your team ..
Irfan Pathan or Mike Procter ?

"Who'd make your team - a known gimp or someone who potentially could have been great?"

"Who'd make your team - Barry Richards or SS Das?"

"Don't you mean Barry Richards or Geoff Boycott?"

"No, I want to try and prove what I think is my point by throwing in a comparative special needs option against a really highly regarded bloke who never got a chance in tests, as opposed to comparing him with someone of comparable ability."

****ing woeful. This is Cevno standard posting.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Irfan Pathan.

The other guy did not play a sufficient number of test matches; so who knows how he might have turned out; may have ended up like Botham for most of his career.

Bradman played 52 .. Dravid 164.. so

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

"Who'd make your team - a known gimp or someone who potentially could have been great?"

"Who'd make your team - Barry Richards or SS Das?"

"Don't you mean Barry Richards or Geoff Boycott?"

"No, I want to try and prove what I think is my point by throwing in a comparative special needs option against a really highly regarded bloke who never got a chance in tests, as opposed to comparing him with someone of comparable ability."

****ing woeful. This is Cevno standard posting.

You missed the point .

Irfan eligible
Procter not

 

[Burgey]

There's no point to miss.

 

[bagapath]

That's technicality.
This stats gives you clear indication of what he is capable of. And there is a small matter of injustice.

Ok , if given a choice
Who will make in to your team ..
Irfan Pathan or Mike Procter ?

7 tests don't give me an indication of anything.

As for choosing...
I'll take Procter anyday if I am building a first class team

For tests he is not eligible.

Injustice. My foot.

This forum is comparing sporting abilities. Not setting the world right.

 

[mr_mister]

Hick and Ramprakash the best examples historically of why we can't just assume Rice, Procter and Richards would have been as good as Botham, Hadlee and Gavaskar at test level

 

[Red Hill]

That's technicality.
This stats gives you clear indication of what he is capable of. And there is a small matter of injustice.

Ok , if given a choice
Who will make in to your team ..
Irfan Pathan or Mike Procter ?

Mike Procter

EVERY ****ING TIME!

lol

 

[aussie tragic]

Graeme Hick was the next Bradman based on FC stats, but he was then worked out at Test level, so figuring out the best Test players should remain based on Test performance, not what they might have achieved

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

There are plenty of reasons..

Procter played 7 tests , did exceptionally well .
Played 9 unofficial tests against 2 top tests teams , did exceptionally well .
Played against strong opponents in FC level for a long period , did exceptionally well .
He was a bowling allrounder, ATG level in primary skill + just a step below specialist category in secondary skill.

How many bowlers had a test career that is far inferior to their FC level ? I can't remember many.
Also , even if his test performances drops 10% in both departments from his FC performances, still he is a 30 AVG batsman and 25 AVG bowler Botham - Kapil category.

Normally a 50 AVG FC Batsman tends to AVG 40 plus in tests , Hick , Ramprakash.. etc are exceptions. Among Bowlers it's even more rarer.

So you can not simply dismiss an extra ordinary FC career based on pure assumptions. When all the evidences available support his ATG claim.

There is ZERO evidence / sign / indication against Procter greatness. Period.

 

[marc71178]

Conversely there is no evidence that he would’ve been as good as you’re claiming because he simply didn’t play enormous things games. Period.

 

[bagapath]

There are plenty of reasons..

Procter played 7 tests , did exceptionally well .
Played 9 unofficial tests against 2 top tests teams , did exceptionally well .
Played against strong opponents in FC level for a long period , did exceptionally well .
He was a bowling allrounder, ATG level in primary skill + just a step below specialist category in secondary skill.

How many bowlers had a test career that is far inferior to their FC level ? I can't remember many.
Also , even if his test performances drops 10% in both departments from his FC performances, still he is a 30 AVG batsman and 25 AVG bowler Botham - Kapil category.

Normally a 50 AVG FC Batsman tends to AVG 40 plus in tests , Hick , Ramprakash.. etc are exceptions. Among Bowlers it's even more rarer.

So you can not simply dismiss an extra ordinary FC career based on pure assumptions. When all the evidences available support his ATG claim.

There is ZERO evidence / sign / indication against Procter greatness. Period.

Other than guess work there is nothing going on here mate.
Not good for me

 

[Burgey]

Bradman played for twenty years .. Dravid 16.. so

ftfy

 

[mr_mister]

Richie Benaud an interesting example, averaged 36.5 in FC and 24 in tests. Since his 63 tests were about 25% of his FC career, I'll assume he averaged ~40 in shield/county.

Quite an underachiever with the bat at test level. Procter's set of FC and test batting averages nearly identical.

 

[aussie tragic]

Richie actually averaged 41.20 in FC matches excluding Tests that he averaged 24.45.

Mark Waugh is another under achiever in Tests. Averaged 58.10 in FC matches excluding his 41.81 in Tests

Also Keith Miller, averaged 53.45 in FC matches excluding his 36.97 in Tests.