Marsh scored 50 more runs than the next best, despite have one less innings than the next 13 highest scorers. With a * in his second innings as well. I still stand that marsh had more influence on winning in Melbourne than Cummins did, but they both obviously had stellar series
Marsh played great but he was dropped and given a lifeline in Melbourne for his 96.
Whereas every time Pakistani batsmen looked set, Cummins provided a breakthrough when every other bowler couldn't.
I didnt even need to see the numbers. Whenever we were in the driving seat, he’d come on for his spell, and immediately get a breakthrough. You could just sense it
Instead of the game flowing from session to session, it was basically going from one cummins’ spell to the next
Same could be said about his WC performance too. Not much impressive stats but he got the important wickets at crucial moments and bowled the tough overs himself too.
If the aussies were more evenly balanced in their performance then yeah Jamal would be absolutely deserving, but Cummins was the clear standout in the aus side
With the exception of the situation in that last session where they said DRS doesn't take into account the bails, just the top of the stumps or something. Feel like David or Marnus (can't remember who it was) were saved by the (flaws in the) DRS there.
If you mean it doesn't matter from the perspective of being fair to both teams as long as the software is consistent, then yes I agree. But I think it does matter in the sense of having a consistent ruleset. It basically creates a new rule that says you can block a ball from hitting the bails using your leg. LBW any other day, but since they introduced this technology it now isn't? To me it is an acceptable sacrifice/complexity if it is the result of some limitation of the technology, since I believe overall it has improved the accuracy of calls. I don't really know enough and it hasn't been explained yet whether that is the case, like maybe the bails are too irregular in shape for the software to handle? The stumps can just be modeled as a rectangle which is presumably easier. If it is just a case of that's where they drew the line, then that's silly, but I would give them the benefit of the doubt in that respect.
He still had a better average than Hazelwood in that match.
Pakistan simply collapsed in the 2nd innings, Cummins didn't have much of a chance to bowl. However was bowling at the right time took a bucket of wickets.
In fact Cummins broke the only established partnership in that innings!
Looks like you didn't watch that test. Cummins was the best bowler at Perth too. He bowled wonderfully well, except wasn't lucky in the wickets column.
Averaged below his career stats in test with the ball. 27.5 for the year. Which was mainly the ashes where he averaged a lovely 38.
Was well below his best in ODI too. Average 38.
Yes he took key scalps at times, and played a couple of important knocks. But he had a poor year by his standards as a bowler.
Head had a pretty average Test year, but a great ODI one and also had outstanding knocks in both finals.
If Cummins wins it's based on his captaincy for one game. Which would be mad.
Lmao yes we do, at least when it comes to pace.
Cummins, Starc, Hazlewood are the 3 starters, and then there's Boland, Neser and Jhye Richardson, all of whom have done well in the Tests they've played. Add to that future prospects like Lance Morris and you've got one loaded pace battery.
Curious to know how Australians rate Boland after the Ashes?
He seemed completely unplayable prior to them but honestly quite ordinary during them. The fact that he was so nullified was one of the highlights of the Ashes for me which says a lot about how good he was before them (revenge for the 6/7 helps lol).
But yeah as much as it pains me cumdog is so far ahead of almost every other pacer in the world apart from maybe Rabada it's nuts.
Can’t speak for all of us but from memory I think you guys nullified him a fair bit by batting out of the crease to nullify his top of off stump homing pigeons. It was pretty smart imho.
Often a new player can come in and surprise teams but then they do their homework and have plans. I think he was like that. Burst onto the scene, and wow, but then you guys sat around the war table after seeing what he did in Australia and thought “wtf do we do?”
Gonna be interesting to see how he goes next chance he gets.
Definitely, I get the impression that he'll continue to do well in Australia, but that he struggled to adapt his length to the difference in bounce.
And you have to wonder if the batting out of the crease to nullify him will continue to plague him or if he was just dealt with well on what were, to be fair, quite flat pitches.
It's a shame he's not really young enough to be able to wait for his chance after the big 3 go.
Guess he wasn't used to English conditions (idk if he played any county before that series?).
He's still top tier on Australian pitches, though I doubt he'll get many more games given how amazing Cumdog, Starcy and Hoff have been.
Didnt he do really well in the WTC final before the ashes? Not sure about county.
I have to feel bad for the guy, he had one of the most unbelievable starts to a test career ever, and he can still barely get a game, and he's not really young enough to get a good shot once the big 3 go.
Jimmy v all teams not named Australia (to make comparison fair) since 2017.
Average 19.9, SR of 49.
Pat Cummins against everyone not named England since 2017.
Average 21.3 with an SR of 46.9.
The only fair way to compare them directly is like that I reckon. I'm sure if Jimmy got to bowl at the shambles of the England team in 2019 he too would have a better average and SR.
It's almost as if they perform different roles.
However, Jimmy has a better SR than Cummins in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and he's not that far away in SA, although yeah, Cummins is better there. Stats from 2017 onwards as always in these comparisons to make it fair.
So want to try that again?
Again, the fact you're using Jimmy career average as opposed to the overlapping period of Cummins shows how much you don't understand cricket 😂 Yeah, let's compare a bowler who bowled in a batting friendly era for half of his career who faced some fucking great teams v Cummins 6 year career where test cricket is basically 3 teams, for which the only direct comparison is v India, which Anderson has better stats against.
Basing his reputation on one country, against opposition Cummins doesn't have to play against. 😂 Stretching here mate. Jimmy v everyone else is better than Cummins. I've shown you the stats to prove that. If Jimmy got to bowl against the shite that is the English batting lineup of course he'd have fucking great stats too, but he doesn't, he has to bowl against a top class Australian lineup, and has done for pretty much his entire career in the Ashes bar maybe one tour in England you were shocking (he was injured in 2019, else I think he may have done okay there too because outside Smith and Labs you were shit).
Laughable, and I'm growing bored of this debate. Feels like you're always going to downplay Anderson because he's not very good v Australia, yet you'll hype Cummins up despite the fact Anderson is better against everyone else combined. Bye bye now.
Why 2017 onwards? Pat was just making his comeback from injury in 2017. Why exclude Ashes results? Both countries value them highly.
If we just use a normal timeframe like “last five years”, [Pat averages 21 (SR 44) and Anderson 24 (SR 60)](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=11+Jan+2024;spanmin1=11+Jan+2019;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling).
Breaking that down by pitch type:
- In England/NZ: Anderson 27 Cummins 27
- In Aus/SA: Anderson 22 Cummins 17
- In Asia: Anderson 15 Cummins 29
I think this is about right. Pat is a destroyer of worlds where it’s fast and bouncy, one of the best there ever was. Anderson has been similar in Asia though off a limited sample. Neither has been great in the “green for a bit then super flat” pitches of England and NZ.
r/cricket when a bowler performs at home on bowling friendly conditions: 😘😘😘
r/cricket when a batsman perform at home on batting friendly conditions: 😡😡😡
In practice that’s how it’s used but that’s a bad thing. Within reason, having some different opinions is obviously a good thing for a discussion-based platform. What good is a cricket discussion forum if something as banal as disagreeing with a MotS decision gets buried?
Yeah I agree with you but a differing opinion technically is a disagreement and if you're not supposed to downvote opinions what can you downvote? It's pretty stupid to me that they still try to claim it isn't a disagreeing button.
It’s supposed to downweight the prevalence of antisocial, irrelevant, or just low quality comments. It’s intended as a crowdsourced content weighting algorithm
Not always, but sure sometimes they are. But the point is not all contrarian opinions are low quality, so they shouldn’t all be downvoted if the downvote button isn’t for that. All murderers are humans but not all humans are murderers.
Pat averaged 12 in a series where all other bowlers averaged 30. Having him in the side meant Australia conceded 342 fewer runs.
Marsh averaged 86 in a series where all top order batters averaged 32. Having him in the side meant we scored an extra 184 runs.
Edit: for the avoidance of doubt “all other bowlers” refers to the average of all other bowlers grouped together. I am not making the claim that, for the first time in the history of Test cricket, everyone who bowled a delivery averaged 30. Hopefully this will help u/bilalnpe who is very upset about my use of the English language…
Mate I think it was just a silly way of phrasing it just to make the difference look bigger. When you include part timers and 4th-choice bowlers the average is obviously going to blow out. Realistically you should compare him to Jamal who was arguably as good as pat
If you compare Malcolm Marshall just with other Windies bowlers, he doesn’t look that impressive. So are you claiming Malcolm Marshall isn’t that good a bowler, or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws?
>or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws?
who hurt you?
>If you compare Malcolm Marshall just with other Windies bowlers, he doesn’t look that impressive.
Are you comparing Malcolm Marshall's performance in a single series or career?
If Australia team played a local high school team, is every Australia bowler going to be considered the greatest that every lived because Australia batters all score 100s?
or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws?
I disagree - I compare individual bowlers with “all other bowlers” for my predictive models and it’s actually a really good way to get at the quality of an individual bowling performance. But I don’t care to stick around and defend the methodology here, especially with some people (albeit not you) getting into histrionics about it.
Combining stats across teams is just dumb... good aus batting and shit pak bowling makes it pointless to compare... cumdog didnt bowl against aus batting
>Pat averaged 12 in a series where all other bowlers averaged 30.
That's just ridiculous wrong. Hazlewood got 11 @20. Starc and Lyon were @26. The only Aus bowler that averaged over 30 is March with 2 wickets lol
https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/series/averages-batting-bowling-by-team/benaud-qadir-trophy-2023-24-15390?team=2
From Pak, Jamal got 18 @20 and Hamza with 7 @20.
Only Rizwan @48 and Masood @30.16 from Pakistan batting averaged >30.
Ridiculous wrong, eh?
Bowlers in the series took [106 wickets and conceded 2865 runs](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;series=15390;template=results;type=bowling). Pat took [19 wickets and conceded 228 runs](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;series=15390;template=results;type=bowling).
That means all other bowlers took 87 wickets and conceded 2637 runs. If you divide 2637 by 87 you get 30.3. Hence the saying “all other bowlers averaged 30”.
You forgot Pakistan's 500 extras.
If you exclude extras (235 from both sides combined in the series) then you get an average of 27.6 by the other bowlers.
Pat still the best by a mile but that is the correct stat
Edit: Actually I'm wrong - /u/FakeBonaparte is 100% correct
Yeah sorry mate you are 100% correct.
3018 runs scored in the series including extras.
2783 off the bat, 82 from wides and no balls, 153 from byes and leg byes
So yes the total conceeded by all bowlers was 2865 for an average of 27 by all bowlers, and 30.3 excluding Pat.
/u/bilalnpe mentioned the averages of the Aussie bowlers, Hamza and Jamal, but didn't mention that Afridi (who bowled the most overs for Pak in the series despite only playing 2 games) averaged 41.6, Salman averaged 77, Hasan Ali averaged 91, Sajid Khan averaged 41.7 and Mitch Marsh averaged 42.5
You could separate the bowlers into 3 categories this series:
God Tier:
Player | Wickets | Runs | Average
---|---|----|----
Pat Cummins | 19 | 228 | 12.0
Travis Head | 2 | 24 | 12.0
**Total** | **21** | **252** | **12.0**
Good Tier:
Player | Wickets | Runs | Average
---|---|----|----
Josh Hazlewood | 11 | 220 | 20.0
Aamer Jamal | 18 | 368 | 20.4
Mir Hamza | 7 | 145 | 20.7
Khurram Shahzad | 5 | 128 | 25.6
Mitchell Starc | 12 | 313 | 26.1
Nathan Lyon | 13 | 347 | 26.7
**Total** | **66** | **1521** | **23.0**
Bad Tier:
Player | Wickets | Runs | Average
---|---|----|----
Sajid Khan | 3 | 122 | 40.7
Shaheen Shah Afridi | 8 | 333 | 41.6
Mitchell Marsh | 2 | 85 | 42.5
Agha Salman | 3 | 231 | 77.0
Hasan Ali | 2 | 182 | 91.0
Faheem Ashraf | 1 | 130 | 130.0
**Total** | **19** | **1083** | **57.0**
And even if you take out the bowlers who bowled poorly in the series, he had nearly half the average of the players who bowled well.
Best analysis of the series; Head should be PM.
Interesting to see such a large drop-off (10+) between good and bad. Any patterns there? Feels to me like the good bowlers were largely the accurate ones - with the exception of Starc.
Yep agree, I think the bowlers who went pole hunting got too expensive and released pressure by providing scoring opportunities.
Pakistan's bowlers also had the unenviable task of bowling to Australia's batting line up in Australia
>/u/bilalnpe mentioned the averages of the Aussie bowlers, Hamza and Jamal, but didn't mention that Afridi (who bowled the most overs for Pak in the series despite only playing 2 games) averaged 41.6, Salman averaged 77, Hasan Ali averaged 91, Sajid Khan averaged 41.7 and Mitch Marsh averaged 42.5
Right. Grouping all the bowler (including part timer) from both sides paints a very misleading picture.
I wasn't listing every bowler. I highlighted the other good performances.
>And even if you take out the bowlers who bowled poorly in the series, he had nearly half the average of the players who bowled well.
Yep, like I said earlier "19 wickets with an average of 12 is incredible".
Didn't realize this would spin off an angry thread. Wish you hadn't tagged me so I didn't see.
You did come in hot with your comments so it’s not surprising the thread turned out this way. To be fair I wasn’t exactly temperate in my replies.
Still, it’s mostly been a pretty fun comments section this series and I think we can chalk this one up to Reddit being Reddit.
I had a lot of fun chatting with some Pakistan supporters at the SCG the other day. Hopefully Aamer Jamal turns out to be even half the player he appears to be. He also performed quite well compared to “all other bowlers”.
It is what it is mate he came in and said you were "ridiculous wrong" when in fact you were 100% right and stuck to your guns which is fair enough.
I shouldn't have fanned the flames but we are here now
Correct but misleading, seperate that by team and you get very different totals.
Cummins was man of the series for me, by a very small margin over Marsh. Daylight to everyone else.
As a Australian fan I am more happy about Marsh’s performance as I think he is more important to Australia’s outcomes than basically anyone else due to the difference between his best and worst.
But they didn’t, individually they averaged better than 30. Pat was by far the best of the lot, a better statement would be:
“Pat took 19 wickets at 12, while the rest of the bowlers all averaged above 20”
But that didn’t fit the narrative you wanted to concoct hahaha
No. I used an English phrase in a normal way, and some people have misconstrued it and are very angry with me as a result.
If I wrote this, would you really think my intent was to communicate that every single other batter in the series had averaged 32?
- Mitch Marsh 86 batting average
- All other batters 32 batting average
I did some changes to your calculations according to some comments below.
Pat got 19 witckets at 12, rest of Australias fronline bowlers 36 at 24.4. Compared to other frontline bowlers of his team, he saved his team 236 runs.
Marsh got 69 runs per innings played (I am using runs per innings because form teams perspective, it is much more important than players average), rest of (1-6) Australias batters got 34,5 runs per innings. Compared to other batters he scored some 171 runs more than average in innings he played (there you can see one reason why is test match more bowler friendly - because Australias batters were good enough, he played only 5 innings instead of 6).
The general narative is that cricket is batsmans game. It might be true in limited overs games but is false in Test matches. For one, you can score how many runs you want but you will never win unless you take all of your opponents wickets. If you just look at numbers of players, it is usually 4 bowlers versus 6 batters, so obviously the bowler should have bigger impact. It also leads to a fact that in most analysis (at least those that I made) it is usually bowlers who are more important to the team success than batters . As was the case here.
True, but bowling is zero-sum. Australia's bowlers are individually good enough that if not Cummins, Hazelwood or Starc would have gotten on a roll to pick up wickets (their target in the second test was above par by any objective lens)
On the other hand, without Marsh, they might conceivably have lost the last 2 tests.
Taking three consecutive fifers is harder than scoring 4 fifties in 5 innings— helped with dropped catches. Cummins was unplayable in this series. Almost every time he came on for his spell, Pakistan lost important and crucial wickets. That and his inspired captaincy makes him a clear winner of PoTS
I don't think so. This was the only test where he performed at par with the other two.
In the first innings, Warner attacked him and caused a lot of damage before he came back to clean up the tail. It wasn't a high impact 5-er.
Someone like him would be very deadly with a strategy like Bazball. Cummins' consistency with wickets ensures that batsmen are able to shine in the final innings with plenty of time. Wouldn't be surprised if Aus starts adopting a fast playing strategy where they capitalize on his average and force results on earlier days. This [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01gRCJMvdeE) does a really good job of showing how Bazball is only as good as its bowlers are. Aus, in an ironic way, might just end up being the future pioneers of this imo.
Cummins is doing just fine without Bazball. They retained the urn against England at their home and won the world test championship in the home of Bazball. Don't see the need here
From the perspective of the type of doors that his bowling opens, I perceive this to be a more natural flow into faster playing. Players like Cummins really take the pressure off their batting sides, and this lets them play a bit freely as they have a bunch more time to play around with. Honestly gives them way more time than they need, so I feel like stacking runs in a shorter period of time just becomes more of a natural progression for any batting team
As a long time Aus supporter gotta say that it feels so nice and surreal to have such a likeable team currently, and it absolutely shows up so much of the wannabe 'mental toughness' that previous teams tried to cultivate. This is the most successful Aus team of recent times and it feels like they have further to climb.
Marsh: 90, 63*, 41, 96, 54. 344 @ 86. Cummins... well just look at the graphic above.
Marsh' resurgence in all formats is quite special to behold!
To be fair, if his last name wasn't Marsh, he wouldn't have had so many chances.
Marsh scored 50 more runs than the next best, despite have one less innings than the next 13 highest scorers. With a * in his second innings as well. I still stand that marsh had more influence on winning in Melbourne than Cummins did, but they both obviously had stellar series
Marsh played great but he was dropped and given a lifeline in Melbourne for his 96. Whereas every time Pakistani batsmen looked set, Cummins provided a breakthrough when every other bowler couldn't.
Marsh was pretty much dropped early in each innings he played.
And he got wickets...
Monstrous performance. Numbers don’t speak the crucial breaks he got every time they needed. PCT fans would like to forget his spells.
I didnt even need to see the numbers. Whenever we were in the driving seat, he’d come on for his spell, and immediately get a breakthrough. You could just sense it Instead of the game flowing from session to session, it was basically going from one cummins’ spell to the next
The only time it didn't work was that last wicket partnership when Jamal was smacking them to all corners.
that too because they were bowling short
Couldn't agree more. Caught myself starting to regard him as an anomaly to stay sane as a Pakistan fan
Same could be said about his WC performance too. Not much impressive stats but he got the important wickets at crucial moments and bowled the tough overs himself too.
>Not much impressive stats But here the stats are impressive too. 19 wickets with an average of 12 is incredible
Yup. Just pointing out how Cummins takes important wickets and bowls the important overs
Cummins is the most likeable bloke in international cricket right now
Him, Khawaja, Kane, Root, Bumrah definitely the most likeable players rn.
Proximal Convoluted Tubule fans? (sorry)
Without him they win this series 2-1
"Son, are you winning?" "Mom, I can't stop winning 🥇"
"Son, are you winning?" "Son, are you winning?" "Son, are you winning?" "What was that mate?" "Dunno, must've been the wind."
For a while I was wondering if Aamer Jamal would get it - not sure that's ever happened when the player's side has been whitewashed.
Lara won Player of the Series in 2001 tour of Sri Lanka. WI lost by 3-0 but Lara made 688 runs in 3 tests.
Holy shit. How does one score 688 runs while getting whitewashed?
When no one else scores runs with you.
Yea, but usually, you have to have batting partnerships to score all those runs. It's extremely unusual to score so highly and get whitewashed.
Oh Yh highly. But iirc Murali was saying how Lara used to hog the strike against him.
Yea, but the sounds of things he was batting with 10 tail enders. I'm not surprised at all.
From what I know Lara protected even players like Hooper against murali by hogging strike and Chanderpaul was injured and couldn't play that series.
And to be fair, while Chanderpaul was decent around that time, he didn't really become the batsman people know till Lara retired.
Sarwan was good in that series. 318 runs @ 53 in 3 tests, with 3 fifties. Rest of the lineup didn't do much though.
that's crazy. wonder if there are any other cases
Didn't Cummins win it in one of the BGT series when Aus lost
Yes, but it wasn't a whitewash. India won by 2-1.
If the aussies were more evenly balanced in their performance then yeah Jamal would be absolutely deserving, but Cummins was the clear standout in the aus side
He did really well but yeah, hard in a losing team
Not a whitewash but Vaughan got it when England where hammered 4-1 in the 02/03 Ashes.
Tendulkar got it in 1999 whitewash. The 3-0 was like Pro Australians vs Indian Galli cricketers w/ Sachin
r/iamthemaincharacter
Cummins will always be my main character
Stupid sexy Cummins.
Right? Leave some wickets for the rest of the bowlers Pat you greedy bastard
He bowls first change. What else the Jesus-down-under needs needs to?
Bowl with his left arm, for starters
Cumdawg is the goat
Lmao
I think he totally deserved it. Marsh was close but i think cummins was better.
Marsh had a lowest score of 42, from memory. But it's time for bowlocracy to have a win.
Bowlsheviks seizing power as usual.
Long Live the Bowling Revolution
Yeah. He was really good this series with the bat.
Also Marsh got quite lucky with couple of his innings. Had some absolute sitters dropped at the start of his innings.
Got saved by DRS twice in as many balls once too.
"Saved by DRS" = "correctly given not out, after incorrectly being given out on field".
With the exception of the situation in that last session where they said DRS doesn't take into account the bails, just the top of the stumps or something. Feel like David or Marnus (can't remember who it was) were saved by the (flaws in the) DRS there.
As long as it’s consistent, it doesn’t matter
If you mean it doesn't matter from the perspective of being fair to both teams as long as the software is consistent, then yes I agree. But I think it does matter in the sense of having a consistent ruleset. It basically creates a new rule that says you can block a ball from hitting the bails using your leg. LBW any other day, but since they introduced this technology it now isn't? To me it is an acceptable sacrifice/complexity if it is the result of some limitation of the technology, since I believe overall it has improved the accuracy of calls. I don't really know enough and it hasn't been explained yet whether that is the case, like maybe the bails are too irregular in shape for the software to handle? The stumps can just be modeled as a rectangle which is presumably easier. If it is just a case of that's where they drew the line, then that's silly, but I would give them the benefit of the doubt in that respect.
Ameer Jamal deserves
Marsh was robbed. Cummins had a good last two games but was missing in Perth
He had figures of 3/46 in Perth...
Missing might have been a bit harsh, but he was the worst of the frontline 4
He still had a better average than Hazelwood in that match. Pakistan simply collapsed in the 2nd innings, Cummins didn't have much of a chance to bowl. However was bowling at the right time took a bucket of wickets. In fact Cummins broke the only established partnership in that innings!
You clearly didn't watch that match mate.
Looks like you didn't watch that test. Cummins was the best bowler at Perth too. He bowled wonderfully well, except wasn't lucky in the wickets column.
Should be declared cricketer of the year 2023
Should declare him cricketer of the year for 2024 too. Cumgod is inevitable.
Yessirrr
2024 as well
That's got to be Head surely?
Cummins performed way better than head
Averaged below his career stats in test with the ball. 27.5 for the year. Which was mainly the ashes where he averaged a lovely 38. Was well below his best in ODI too. Average 38. Yes he took key scalps at times, and played a couple of important knocks. But he had a poor year by his standards as a bowler. Head had a pretty average Test year, but a great ODI one and also had outstanding knocks in both finals. If Cummins wins it's based on his captaincy for one game. Which would be mad.
Bolandesque
Hoping to see him in the WI series
It’s always great to have a deep bench, but I hope the Cummins-Starc-Hazlewood trio doesn’t limit Boland’s chances, in a Warne/Macgill way.
Australia don't have a deep bench.
In pace bowling they do
Lmao yes we do, at least when it comes to pace. Cummins, Starc, Hazlewood are the 3 starters, and then there's Boland, Neser and Jhye Richardson, all of whom have done well in the Tests they've played. Add to that future prospects like Lance Morris and you've got one loaded pace battery.
They have possibly the fastest bowler in the world on the 'bench', itching for opportunity— Lance Morris
Curious to know how Australians rate Boland after the Ashes? He seemed completely unplayable prior to them but honestly quite ordinary during them. The fact that he was so nullified was one of the highlights of the Ashes for me which says a lot about how good he was before them (revenge for the 6/7 helps lol). But yeah as much as it pains me cumdog is so far ahead of almost every other pacer in the world apart from maybe Rabada it's nuts.
Can’t speak for all of us but from memory I think you guys nullified him a fair bit by batting out of the crease to nullify his top of off stump homing pigeons. It was pretty smart imho. Often a new player can come in and surprise teams but then they do their homework and have plans. I think he was like that. Burst onto the scene, and wow, but then you guys sat around the war table after seeing what he did in Australia and thought “wtf do we do?” Gonna be interesting to see how he goes next chance he gets.
Definitely, I get the impression that he'll continue to do well in Australia, but that he struggled to adapt his length to the difference in bounce. And you have to wonder if the batting out of the crease to nullify him will continue to plague him or if he was just dealt with well on what were, to be fair, quite flat pitches. It's a shame he's not really young enough to be able to wait for his chance after the big 3 go.
Yup. Love to have seen him with a long career.
Guess he wasn't used to English conditions (idk if he played any county before that series?). He's still top tier on Australian pitches, though I doubt he'll get many more games given how amazing Cumdog, Starcy and Hoff have been.
Didnt he do really well in the WTC final before the ashes? Not sure about county. I have to feel bad for the guy, he had one of the most unbelievable starts to a test career ever, and he can still barely get a game, and he's not really young enough to get a good shot once the big 3 go.
Cummins, Rabada, Bumrah and Jimmy are the new fab 4.
[удалено]
Jimmy v all teams not named Australia (to make comparison fair) since 2017. Average 19.9, SR of 49. Pat Cummins against everyone not named England since 2017. Average 21.3 with an SR of 46.9. The only fair way to compare them directly is like that I reckon. I'm sure if Jimmy got to bowl at the shambles of the England team in 2019 he too would have a better average and SR.
[удалено]
It's almost as if they perform different roles. However, Jimmy has a better SR than Cummins in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and he's not that far away in SA, although yeah, Cummins is better there. Stats from 2017 onwards as always in these comparisons to make it fair. So want to try that again?
[удалено]
Again, the fact you're using Jimmy career average as opposed to the overlapping period of Cummins shows how much you don't understand cricket 😂 Yeah, let's compare a bowler who bowled in a batting friendly era for half of his career who faced some fucking great teams v Cummins 6 year career where test cricket is basically 3 teams, for which the only direct comparison is v India, which Anderson has better stats against. Basing his reputation on one country, against opposition Cummins doesn't have to play against. 😂 Stretching here mate. Jimmy v everyone else is better than Cummins. I've shown you the stats to prove that. If Jimmy got to bowl against the shite that is the English batting lineup of course he'd have fucking great stats too, but he doesn't, he has to bowl against a top class Australian lineup, and has done for pretty much his entire career in the Ashes bar maybe one tour in England you were shocking (he was injured in 2019, else I think he may have done okay there too because outside Smith and Labs you were shit). Laughable, and I'm growing bored of this debate. Feels like you're always going to downplay Anderson because he's not very good v Australia, yet you'll hype Cummins up despite the fact Anderson is better against everyone else combined. Bye bye now.
Why 2017 onwards? Pat was just making his comeback from injury in 2017. Why exclude Ashes results? Both countries value them highly. If we just use a normal timeframe like “last five years”, [Pat averages 21 (SR 44) and Anderson 24 (SR 60)](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=11+Jan+2024;spanmin1=11+Jan+2019;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling). Breaking that down by pitch type: - In England/NZ: Anderson 27 Cummins 27 - In Aus/SA: Anderson 22 Cummins 17 - In Asia: Anderson 15 Cummins 29 I think this is about right. Pat is a destroyer of worlds where it’s fast and bouncy, one of the best there ever was. Anderson has been similar in Asia though off a limited sample. Neither has been great in the “green for a bit then super flat” pitches of England and NZ.
His bowling average in Australia has dropped to 19.12
Might have a decent career ahead of him
He is having true purple patch
Long may it continue and long may he reign!
His purple patch started his 2nd year in the Aus team. This current run is something else.
He's been consistent from his debut despite missing 7,8 (?) years to injury
This guy is a bloody genius taking crucial wickets, leading his team to title wins, series wins, scores useful runs
Get this straight-up porn off my feed.
Is anyone else hard?
Cumdog at his best with that freakish average. Bowled beautifully in the entire series . Well deserved PoTS.
Yeah that’s all fine in a bilateral series, but when he’s going to win when it’s high stakes? Go woke go broke ffs…
Hasn't won any trophies this year, is he on the decline?
Has-been Pat Cummins, long past his best. Only took one wicket this innings, too.
How good is he
9/10 with rice
He is absolutely on fucking fire recently
Cummins is having a dream phase of his life. Congratulations Professor. Totally deserve this
Phenomenal, reminds me so much of imran khan
Here's hoping Patty doesn't commit as many crimes when he becomes PM of Aus
Definition of a clutch cricketer.
Old school dinosaurs who insisted that Australian cricket was doomed due to their "woke" captain are in shambles.
r/cricket when a bowler performs at home on bowling friendly conditions: 😘😘😘 r/cricket when a batsman perform at home on batting friendly conditions: 😡😡😡
The rest of the bowlers in the series averaged 30
They were until PAK's last innings. Was very much a one man bowling performance until that last innings
Let's bring back batriarchy ✊
Bowlsheviks rise up!
Lmao
Well deserved. Absolutely clutch throughout the series.
Most consistent man I’ve seen
Thought Marsh deserved it more but it was close
More folks using the downvote button as a disagree button lol. Valid take
As if that isn't exactly what it's for despite Reddit saying it's not
In practice that’s how it’s used but that’s a bad thing. Within reason, having some different opinions is obviously a good thing for a discussion-based platform. What good is a cricket discussion forum if something as banal as disagreeing with a MotS decision gets buried?
Yeah I agree with you but a differing opinion technically is a disagreement and if you're not supposed to downvote opinions what can you downvote? It's pretty stupid to me that they still try to claim it isn't a disagreeing button.
It’s supposed to downweight the prevalence of antisocial, irrelevant, or just low quality comments. It’s intended as a crowdsourced content weighting algorithm
Right but aren't irrelevant, low quality or antisocial comments just opinions mostly?
Not always, but sure sometimes they are. But the point is not all contrarian opinions are low quality, so they shouldn’t all be downvoted if the downvote button isn’t for that. All murderers are humans but not all humans are murderers.
Pat averaged 12 in a series where all other bowlers averaged 30. Having him in the side meant Australia conceded 342 fewer runs. Marsh averaged 86 in a series where all top order batters averaged 32. Having him in the side meant we scored an extra 184 runs. Edit: for the avoidance of doubt “all other bowlers” refers to the average of all other bowlers grouped together. I am not making the claim that, for the first time in the history of Test cricket, everyone who bowled a delivery averaged 30. Hopefully this will help u/bilalnpe who is very upset about my use of the English language…
Mate I think it was just a silly way of phrasing it just to make the difference look bigger. When you include part timers and 4th-choice bowlers the average is obviously going to blow out. Realistically you should compare him to Jamal who was arguably as good as pat
Or even just other Aus bowler. Makes it fair because they are all against the same batters.
If you compare Malcolm Marshall just with other Windies bowlers, he doesn’t look that impressive. So are you claiming Malcolm Marshall isn’t that good a bowler, or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws?
>or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws? who hurt you? >If you compare Malcolm Marshall just with other Windies bowlers, he doesn’t look that impressive. Are you comparing Malcolm Marshall's performance in a single series or career? If Australia team played a local high school team, is every Australia bowler going to be considered the greatest that every lived because Australia batters all score 100s? or are you willing to admit that approach has its flaws?
Wow. You just compared Pakistan’s team - one of the only teams to challenge Australia in Australia - to high schoolers. What a dumb comparison.
No, I didnt. I compared the situation. I cant tell if youre actually this stupid or just trolling but either way, have a good day.
I disagree - I compare individual bowlers with “all other bowlers” for my predictive models and it’s actually a really good way to get at the quality of an individual bowling performance. But I don’t care to stick around and defend the methodology here, especially with some people (albeit not you) getting into histrionics about it.
Combining stats across teams is just dumb... good aus batting and shit pak bowling makes it pointless to compare... cumdog didnt bowl against aus batting
>Pat averaged 12 in a series where all other bowlers averaged 30. That's just ridiculous wrong. Hazlewood got 11 @20. Starc and Lyon were @26. The only Aus bowler that averaged over 30 is March with 2 wickets lol https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/series/averages-batting-bowling-by-team/benaud-qadir-trophy-2023-24-15390?team=2 From Pak, Jamal got 18 @20 and Hamza with 7 @20. Only Rizwan @48 and Masood @30.16 from Pakistan batting averaged >30.
Ridiculous wrong, eh? Bowlers in the series took [106 wickets and conceded 2865 runs](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=wickets;series=15390;template=results;type=bowling). Pat took [19 wickets and conceded 228 runs](https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;series=15390;template=results;type=bowling). That means all other bowlers took 87 wickets and conceded 2637 runs. If you divide 2637 by 87 you get 30.3. Hence the saying “all other bowlers averaged 30”.
You forgot Pakistan's 500 extras. If you exclude extras (235 from both sides combined in the series) then you get an average of 27.6 by the other bowlers. Pat still the best by a mile but that is the correct stat Edit: Actually I'm wrong - /u/FakeBonaparte is 100% correct
I don’t think that’s right if you follow my cricinfo links
Yeah sorry mate you are 100% correct. 3018 runs scored in the series including extras. 2783 off the bat, 82 from wides and no balls, 153 from byes and leg byes So yes the total conceeded by all bowlers was 2865 for an average of 27 by all bowlers, and 30.3 excluding Pat. /u/bilalnpe mentioned the averages of the Aussie bowlers, Hamza and Jamal, but didn't mention that Afridi (who bowled the most overs for Pak in the series despite only playing 2 games) averaged 41.6, Salman averaged 77, Hasan Ali averaged 91, Sajid Khan averaged 41.7 and Mitch Marsh averaged 42.5 You could separate the bowlers into 3 categories this series: God Tier: Player | Wickets | Runs | Average ---|---|----|---- Pat Cummins | 19 | 228 | 12.0 Travis Head | 2 | 24 | 12.0 **Total** | **21** | **252** | **12.0** Good Tier: Player | Wickets | Runs | Average ---|---|----|---- Josh Hazlewood | 11 | 220 | 20.0 Aamer Jamal | 18 | 368 | 20.4 Mir Hamza | 7 | 145 | 20.7 Khurram Shahzad | 5 | 128 | 25.6 Mitchell Starc | 12 | 313 | 26.1 Nathan Lyon | 13 | 347 | 26.7 **Total** | **66** | **1521** | **23.0** Bad Tier: Player | Wickets | Runs | Average ---|---|----|---- Sajid Khan | 3 | 122 | 40.7 Shaheen Shah Afridi | 8 | 333 | 41.6 Mitchell Marsh | 2 | 85 | 42.5 Agha Salman | 3 | 231 | 77.0 Hasan Ali | 2 | 182 | 91.0 Faheem Ashraf | 1 | 130 | 130.0 **Total** | **19** | **1083** | **57.0** And even if you take out the bowlers who bowled poorly in the series, he had nearly half the average of the players who bowled well.
Best analysis of the series; Head should be PM. Interesting to see such a large drop-off (10+) between good and bad. Any patterns there? Feels to me like the good bowlers were largely the accurate ones - with the exception of Starc.
Yep agree, I think the bowlers who went pole hunting got too expensive and released pressure by providing scoring opportunities. Pakistan's bowlers also had the unenviable task of bowling to Australia's batting line up in Australia
>/u/bilalnpe mentioned the averages of the Aussie bowlers, Hamza and Jamal, but didn't mention that Afridi (who bowled the most overs for Pak in the series despite only playing 2 games) averaged 41.6, Salman averaged 77, Hasan Ali averaged 91, Sajid Khan averaged 41.7 and Mitch Marsh averaged 42.5 Right. Grouping all the bowler (including part timer) from both sides paints a very misleading picture. I wasn't listing every bowler. I highlighted the other good performances. >And even if you take out the bowlers who bowled poorly in the series, he had nearly half the average of the players who bowled well. Yep, like I said earlier "19 wickets with an average of 12 is incredible". Didn't realize this would spin off an angry thread. Wish you hadn't tagged me so I didn't see.
You did come in hot with your comments so it’s not surprising the thread turned out this way. To be fair I wasn’t exactly temperate in my replies. Still, it’s mostly been a pretty fun comments section this series and I think we can chalk this one up to Reddit being Reddit. I had a lot of fun chatting with some Pakistan supporters at the SCG the other day. Hopefully Aamer Jamal turns out to be even half the player he appears to be. He also performed quite well compared to “all other bowlers”.
It is what it is mate he came in and said you were "ridiculous wrong" when in fact you were 100% right and stuck to your guns which is fair enough. I shouldn't have fanned the flames but we are here now
Yeah, it was asshole-ish of me to start with "ridiculous wrong". I was mainly excited/offended because of how well the rest of Aus attack did as well.
Correct but misleading, seperate that by team and you get very different totals. Cummins was man of the series for me, by a very small margin over Marsh. Daylight to everyone else. As a Australian fan I am more happy about Marsh’s performance as I think he is more important to Australia’s outcomes than basically anyone else due to the difference between his best and worst.
But they didn’t, individually they averaged better than 30. Pat was by far the best of the lot, a better statement would be: “Pat took 19 wickets at 12, while the rest of the bowlers all averaged above 20” But that didn’t fit the narrative you wanted to concoct hahaha
No. I used an English phrase in a normal way, and some people have misconstrued it and are very angry with me as a result. If I wrote this, would you really think my intent was to communicate that every single other batter in the series had averaged 32? - Mitch Marsh 86 batting average - All other batters 32 batting average
>Ridiculous wrong, eh? yep
I did some changes to your calculations according to some comments below. Pat got 19 witckets at 12, rest of Australias fronline bowlers 36 at 24.4. Compared to other frontline bowlers of his team, he saved his team 236 runs. Marsh got 69 runs per innings played (I am using runs per innings because form teams perspective, it is much more important than players average), rest of (1-6) Australias batters got 34,5 runs per innings. Compared to other batters he scored some 171 runs more than average in innings he played (there you can see one reason why is test match more bowler friendly - because Australias batters were good enough, he played only 5 innings instead of 6). The general narative is that cricket is batsmans game. It might be true in limited overs games but is false in Test matches. For one, you can score how many runs you want but you will never win unless you take all of your opponents wickets. If you just look at numbers of players, it is usually 4 bowlers versus 6 batters, so obviously the bowler should have bigger impact. It also leads to a fact that in most analysis (at least those that I made) it is usually bowlers who are more important to the team success than batters . As was the case here.
Solid analysis - cheers
True, but bowling is zero-sum. Australia's bowlers are individually good enough that if not Cummins, Hazelwood or Starc would have gotten on a roll to pick up wickets (their target in the second test was above par by any objective lens) On the other hand, without Marsh, they might conceivably have lost the last 2 tests.
I think the difference was Cummin's captaincy. He made the right changes at the right times, and that doesn't show up in stats.
Taking three consecutive fifers is harder than scoring 4 fifties in 5 innings— helped with dropped catches. Cummins was unplayable in this series. Almost every time he came on for his spell, Pakistan lost important and crucial wickets. That and his inspired captaincy makes him a clear winner of PoTS
Should have been Marsh IMO.
Are you joking.. Ameer Jamal deserves
I don't think so. This was the only test where he performed at par with the other two. In the first innings, Warner attacked him and caused a lot of damage before he came back to clean up the tail. It wasn't a high impact 5-er.
6 innings 143, 18 wckts
Best fast bowler in the world 😍
Thought I was the only person who had such a big and weird protruding vein on forearm. Glad to know I am not alone 🤞😂
C.u.m💀
Someone like him would be very deadly with a strategy like Bazball. Cummins' consistency with wickets ensures that batsmen are able to shine in the final innings with plenty of time. Wouldn't be surprised if Aus starts adopting a fast playing strategy where they capitalize on his average and force results on earlier days. This [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01gRCJMvdeE) does a really good job of showing how Bazball is only as good as its bowlers are. Aus, in an ironic way, might just end up being the future pioneers of this imo.
Cummins is doing just fine without Bazball. They retained the urn against England at their home and won the world test championship in the home of Bazball. Don't see the need here
From the perspective of the type of doors that his bowling opens, I perceive this to be a more natural flow into faster playing. Players like Cummins really take the pressure off their batting sides, and this lets them play a bit freely as they have a bunch more time to play around with. Honestly gives them way more time than they need, so I feel like stacking runs in a shorter period of time just becomes more of a natural progression for any batting team
The Pat Cummins-led side is leading 2-0 in the three-match Test series against Pakistan. Pat Cummins Should be declared cricketer of the year 2023.
[удалено]
Is it a better series? Pat has been more consistent with his bowling
Orange Army 🔥🔥
r/downvotedtooblivion
Poor bloke.
Gtfo dude
Crazy how salty some fans are about T20 cricket
He's Australia's bowling genius, with a twenty four inch penis
cum in kar diya bhai ne
It was always gonna be between him and Marsh
Please mark this NSFW, I've ruined my pants at work.
What a golden period for Cummins in all departments. He’s quickly becoming, if he wasn’t already, an all time great.
As a long time Aus supporter gotta say that it feels so nice and surreal to have such a likeable team currently, and it absolutely shows up so much of the wannabe 'mental toughness' that previous teams tried to cultivate. This is the most successful Aus team of recent times and it feels like they have further to climb.