Asif vs Steyn

[Richard]

I'm not saying that M.Marshall/Donald/Lillee and so on are better than Pollock/McGrath/Asif because they are quicker but they go about their work in different ways and to me I put fast bowlers into different categories. If I had combine them McGrath and Pollock would easily get into my top 7 or 8 fast bowlers in the last 20 years.

What categories? Yeah there are different means which seamers achieve their success but there are different ways batsmen do as well. Personally I just group the best seamers as the best seamers regardless of whether they're hit-the-deck back-of-length seam-and-cut bowlers or pitch-it-up kiss-the-deck swing\reverse-swing bowlers.

Also you mention pace - well pace changes over a career, and all the very best bowlers have shown that pace is only a minor ingredient in success by continuing to achieve as much (sometimes even more) success after their pace has slowed. How fast you bowl is irrelevant to how good you are if you're truly top-notch.

I agree with your comments on Hadlee v Steyn but I also agree with what they are saying. In recent times Steyn has become more shrewd like Hadlee and he also does't bowl as many bad balls as he used to. He now bowls that channel and sets up batsman as he thinks more on his feet now...with an outty, outty and then a inny. Also their smooth load up before release is similar.

Steyn is an all-out attack bowler and while he bowls fewer bad deliveries at the present time than in say 2006 he still bowls plenty enough of them and with his low-slung action will always have a small margin-for-error. Yes he does indeed have the ability to think and to use a wide range of attacking tools but he is and in my book would do best to always remain a bowler who just attacks and doesn't worry about conceding runs.

Hadlee bowled from a much greater height and was also far more pinpoint after 1977.

 

[Richard]

Yup batted 5 or 6 for the Mean Machine and would have batted 6 for SA as well as he batted their for SA against rebels. Averaged 40 in FC cricket and scored 26 000 FC runs and 48 FC hundreds. He was a 1st change bowler in SA. You then have 930 FC wickets at 22's.

I always thought of Rice as a bowling-all-rounder personally. Flintoff not merely would have but did bat at six for England for a fair while, but he was still very much a bowling-all-rounder. Botham at his best between '77/78 and '82 was certainly easily good enough to bat at six but he was certainly still a bowling-all-rounder because his batting was merely good, his bowling was briefly about as good as anyone in history.

I've always thought Rice was broadly speaking similar to Botham, except that he managed to keep-up his performances for longer.

 

[SeamUp]

What categories? Yeah there are different means which seamers achieve their success but there are different ways batsmen do as well. Personally I just group the best seamers as the best seamers regardless of whether they're hit-the-deck back-of-length seam-and-cut bowlers or pitch-it-up kiss-the-deck swing\reverse-swing bowlers.

Also you mention pace - well pace changes over a career, and all the very best bowlers have shown that pace is only a minor ingredient in success by continuing to achieve as much (sometimes even more) success after their pace has slowed. How fast you bowl is irrelevant to how good you are if you're truly top-notch.

Steyn is an all-out attack bowler and while he bowls fewer bad deliveries at the present time than in say 2006 he still bowls plenty enough of them and with his low-slung action will always have a small margin-for-error

We all have our own opinions and I prefer to look at different types of fast bowlers and how they go about their business. Sure pace changes over the years but what made you famous initially doesn't. You just wiser and shrewder as you get older. Case in points are Pollock (bowled late 140's initially), Lillee and Hadlee.

Sorry but I tend to disagree with you on Steyn. Steyn is still setting up batsman how Hadlee did and their effortless release of a cricket bowl while bowling is great to watch. Sure Hadlee is taller and had a higher action but Steyn is no slouch in terms of his height or release point either.

Anyways argue with Boycott and Morrison who played 5 years of test cricket with Hadlee.

 

[SeamUp]

I always thought of Rice as a bowling-all-rounder personally. Flintoff not merely would have but did bat at six for England for a fair while, but he was still very much a bowling-all-rounder. Botham at his best between '77/78 and '82 was certainly easily good enough to bat at six but he was certainly still a bowling-all-rounder because his batting was merely good, his bowling was briefly about as good as anyone in history.

I've always thought Rice was broadly speaking similar to Botham, except that he managed to keep-up his performances for longer.

Like you say, its how you look at it.

In SA he was used as batting all-rounder and was used as 1st change bowler or even 2nd change behind Le Roux, Vd Bijl, Jefferies and was used as a partnership breaker. We still had the spinner plus Barlow.

Thats how good our era of the 70's and 80's could have been.

 

[Richard]

We all have our own opinions and I prefer to look at different types of fast bowlers and how they go about their business. Sure pace changes over the years but what made you famous initially doesn't. You just wiser and shrewder as you get older. Case in points are Pollock (bowled late 140's initially), Lillee and Hadlee.

I'd say what makes you famous is how good you are TBH. The only categorisations I make are seam\spin - each to their own, of course.

Sorry but I tend to disagree with you on Steyn. Steyn is still setting up batsman how Hadlee did and their effortless release of a cricket bowl while bowling is great to watch. Sure Hadlee is taller and had a higher action but Steyn is no slouch in terms of his height or release point either.

Steyn's a moderate 6ft0ins and does a very bad job of optimising his height because he has one of the more collapsed actions you'll see. It works for him and I'd not want him to change it, but it does have disadvantages. I'd imagine there's a fair difference in the would-be release point of Hadlee and Steyn.

Of course Steyn and Hadlee may have some things in common, in their brainpower and smooth bowling-actions, but you can find similarities in any bowler if you look far enough. Hadlee is one of the most unique bowlers in history - few if any have so well combined just about all traits of the seam bowler, that's why Hadlee has some amount of case to be the best there ever has been. Steyn as I've said a fair few times is for mine much, much more comparable with Waqar Younis.

Anyways argue with Boycott and Morrison who played 5 years of test cricket with Hadlee.

Sadly they don't post on here. I can only say whether I think they're right or wrong, not take it out.

 

[Black_Warrior]

The comparision is hard. Its like comparing Allan Donald with Glenn McGrath. Their styles are totally different. Steyn is an attacking bowler, lethal pace, swings the ball, will blast away the opposition on his day. Asif is a more patient bowler, will hit the deck, go past the off stump consistently, and wait till the batsman nicks one.

If you want to compare Steyn, compare him with Donald, Waqar, Bond, Akhtar, Lee etc.
If you want to compare Asif, compare him with McGrath, Walsh, Stuart Clark, Shaun Pollock etc.

 

[Richard]

^Walsh? Did you mean Ambrose?

Walsh for much of his career was a different type of bowler again to the likes of Ambrose, McGrath, Pollock, Asif, Clark - the sort of bowler who routinely bowled short and was used as the scalpal of the bowling-attack rather than being a particularly attacking or defence-as-a-form-of-attack type.

Also as I say Steyn for me is a step on again from the likes of Donald, Hadlee, Lillee, Bond etc. - they were bowlers who fell down on the attack side of defence but were far from profligate. Steyn is just absolutely, all about attack, runs conceded is almost an irrelevance - more like Waqar and, well... anyone else think of anyone comparable? Darren Gough of a notably lesser quality... perhaps Gubby Allen from a much earlier time?

 

[Top_Cat]

^Walsh? Did you mean Ambrose?

Walsh for much of his career was a different type of bowler again to the likes of Ambrose, McGrath, Pollock, Asif, Clark - the sort of bowler who routinely bowled short and was used as the scalpal of the bowling-attack rather than being a particularly attacking or defence-as-a-form-of-attack type.

Also as I say Steyn for me is a step on again from the likes of Donald, Hadlee, Lillee, Bond etc. - they were bowlers who fell down on the attack side of defence but were far from profligate. Steyn is just absolutely, all about attack, runs conceded is almost an irrelevance - more like Waqar and, well... anyone else think of anyone comparable? Darren Gough of a notably lesser quality... perhaps Gubby Allen from a much earlier time?

Garner was all-out attack too. When he played for SA, would sometimes go for runs but woudl take enough wickets to keep his average down. Bowled different lines/lengths though so lumping him in an 'all-out attack' category is problematic.

 

[Black_Warrior]

^Walsh? Did you mean Ambrose?

Walsh for much of his career was a different type of bowler again to the likes of Ambrose, McGrath, Pollock, Asif, Clark - the sort of bowler who routinely bowled short and was used as the scalpal of the bowling-attack rather than being a particularly attacking or defence-as-a-form-of-attack type.

Really? I am not trying to question you, you probably have seen more of him than me..but from what I saw of him in the 90s, I remember the words "control, accuracy, discipline' being associated with him, hence I added Walsh. Ambrose was a more deadly bowler, bit of a raging bull, someone opposition batsmen would fear, not the fear of getting out, but just the fear of facing him, getting hit etc. Asif, Pollock, McGrath, are not that kind of abowler, firstly they are pretty lean to begin with

 

[age_master]

Asif is good, but Steyn is better.

 

[silentstriker]

I hate this term 'attacking', McGrath has a strike rate better than many of these so called 'attacking' bowlers. Steyn's strike rate so far in his career is absolutely ridiculous though...less than 40 and it just got lower.....

And that includes now two trips to India. Awesome man, worthy of my avatar.

 

[irfan]

Both Asif and Steyn are very good bowlers, but the difference I find between them is that Asif tends to move the ball a lot more of the seam (in favourable conditions) and thus seems to miss the edge a lot more often than Steyn who can find the edge a lot easier with late swing.
This is the reason why Asif is comparatively better against top-order batsman as they are more likely to nick the big off/leg-cutters whereas he is going to have a lot more trouble against the tail who will simply swing and miss.
Steyn, though, is far, far better against at the tail as the OP pointed out simply because 145 kph, accurate, late swing will do for late order batsman far more easily than 130 kph seamers as they are more likely to slightly misjudge Steyn's delivery and not have a lot of time to re-adjust whereas they have a fraction more time with Asif.

I also feel that Asif has a few more tricks up his sleeve but with Steyn rapidly developing his inducker that gap is closing fast.

Essentially, the only time I'd pick Asif over Steyn is favourable conditions/pitch against a side with a fantastic top 6 (i.e India/Aus) as I reckon he would use the conditions better. In every other scenario, however, I'd pick Steyn because he is going to take the pitch out of the equation and get me wickets faster

 

[Black_Warrior]

I hate this term 'attacking', McGrath has a strike rate better than many of these so called 'attacking' bowlers. Steyn's strike rate so far in his career is absolutely ridiculous though...less than 40 and it just got lower.....

And that includes now two trips to India. Awesome man, worthy of my avatar.

Strike rate and "attacking" are two different things..atleast in my books..
When I say "attacking", I mean a bowler who will bombard the opposition with pace, bouncers, yorkers etc. That does not necessarily mean he will have a higher strike rate. I dont mean to put down McGrath by any means..just stating his approach is different, not inferior

 

[wfdu_ben91]

I think Asif is slightly better. From my recollections, Asif troubles the better batsman in world cricket allot more on a consistent basis then what Steyn does. This is something which has always been overlooked when comparing Steyn and Asif.

At the moment, most people are still in the knee-jerk reaction of Steyn's spell, similar to Virender Sehwag after he got 290 odd after doing absolutely nothing for almost a year and suddendly his this alltime great.

 

[Streetwise]

Both first rate bowlers.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I find it surprising that no-one has mentioned the stats in the opening post. Rather interesting numbers.

 

[pasag]

I find it surprising that no-one has mentioned the stats in the opening post. Rather interesting numbers.

I remember a lot was made of it about a year or two back after they were highlighted on a blog on cricinfo .

 

[Prince EWS]

Really good thread. Don't really have an answer myself but hopefully we'll see a good discussion between each side. Surprised by the lack of Asif love really; I rate them pretty much equally although I suppose a fair tie-breaker is the fact that Steyn's maintained it all for longer so far.

 

[Uppercut]

Really good thread. Don't really have an answer myself but hopefully we'll see a good discussion between each side. Surprised by the lack of Asif love really; I rate them pretty much equally although I suppose a fair tie-breaker is the fact that Steyn's maintained it all for longer so far.

The thing is, even though they're close, I don't think anyone could make a very convincing case for Asif. There's not much between them but what is between them is pretty clear.

 

[Xuhaib]

Asif cannot do what Steyn did in the last test, however thats not an attack on Asif neither Mcgrath or Ambrose would have done it they are just not the ideal sort of bowlers for those conditions.

Still feel Asif is finding his way back after an 18 month gap where he did not even play club cricket let alone FC his avg speed was up by 7-8 kmph during the odi's when you compare it with the series against NZL.

I would go for Steyn since I am more a fan of swing with pace then L&L seamers also Steyn has done it for longer but I have to admit Asif 06-07 is the best Pakistani seamer I have seen since Waqar 90-95.