AthletesTeams
Ashwin vs Sciver-Brunt
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
AshwinWinner
90.5Ashwin wins: Dominance, Longevity
Sciver-Brunt
90.0Sciver-Brunt wins: Peak, Honours
Candidates
Locked to CricketShareable URL · /compare/ravichandran-ashwin-vs-natalie-sciver-brunt
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇮🇳 Ravichandran Ashwin
90.5
Ashwin leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Ravichandran Ashwin
2. Natalie Sciver-Brunt
Category breakdown
Season form · Centuries per year
Career timeline · Centuries per year
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through year 5 · Centuries per year1. 🇬🇧 Natalie Sciver-Brunt5 years played · career day 1,825204 runs
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇮🇳 Ravichandran Ashwin5 years played · career day 2,190196 runs
-3.9% vs Sciver-Brunt at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇮🇳 Ashwin | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 134 | 331 |
| 🇬🇧 Sciver-Brunt | 0 | 0 | 28 | 62 | 204 | 454 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AshwinRetired | Sciver-BruntActive |
|---|---|---|
| Test wickets | 537 | — |
| Five-wicket hauls | 37 | — |
| Test runs | 3,503 | — |
| T20 World Cup titles | 1 | — |
| Player of the Series awards | 11 | — |
| World Cup titles | — | 1 |
| ICC Cricketer of the Year awards | — | 2 |
| ODI runs | — | 4,000 |
| ODI wickets | — | 80 |
| ODI centuries | — | 9 |
| Dominance w25% | 90 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 96 |
| Longevity w20% | 86 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 90 |
| Statistics w15% | 96 | 96 |
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Ashwin90.5
Sciver-Brunt90.0
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Ashwin vs Sciver-Brunt. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.