Buddy, Akram's good record at home is precisely the reason i claim he was better then McGrath. Because he was better on less bowling friendly surfaces...
Conditions which exist in England, where the ball seams and swings and where Pak bowlers only recently triggered multiple collapses against Aus and Eng. Such conditions also exist in NZ, SA. Australia's pitches also help bowlers more then what Pak or most of the subcontinent/Sharjah pitches do.
But then surely Wasim's poor record in England counts massively against him? Particularly given that Wasim played County Cricket for years.
Not true. Australia over the past 10 years has been the worst place to bowl on the planet. There's plenty of instances of non-subcontinental bowlers going to the subcontinent and doing very well, there's very few instances of non Australian bowlers doing well in Australia.
Australian team being the best team in the same period would explain that. Very recently Steyn, Asif, Amir etc caused them trouble.
67 matches is not "barely playing" at home. Talk about misrepresenting facts..... It is nearly 20% of his career matches. So what is your cut-off for enough matches, 300??? I don't think anybody ever played so many matches in one country.
That might partially explain it.
Australian pitches have gone flatter over the years and that has made it increasingly difficult for visiting bowlers to take wickets against our batsmen but Australia's best two bowlers (Warne and McGrath) actually did better away than at home as well.
I know it's about 20% of his career, so it is nowhere hear as important as you make it out with your comments about his home nation, seeing as he actually bowled more in 2 other countries than in Pakistan.
20% of one's career is a significant portion to be playing at one place. Only in Sharjah has he played more ODI matches (in Australia slightly less i.e. 64 matches). So how is it "nowhere near as important" as I make it out???? He has still played the most number of matches (after Sharjah) in Pakistan and both percentage wise as well as in absolute terms the number of matches he played in Pakistan is reasonably high.
But it's only his 3rd venue in terms of where he's bowled - the importance you attach to by harping on about it being his home suggests that he bowls half the time there!
I would think that Test matches and ODIs are very different games altogether. There are only 10 overs to bowl in ODIs and so many other restrictions in ODIs for the bowlers (they can't bowl too wide, they can't bowl too short, field restrictions etc) so the game plays out very differently for everyone. The bowlers can't take time to settle themselves into a rythm and the batsmen are attacking most of the time. So the game is very different.
Thank You for clarifying that you were throwing in Test match stats in an ODI thread without warning others.
If you want to be pedantic about it, it is his second venue in terms of how many matches he has played. He has played 67 in Pakistan and 77 in Sharjah. So that is what I have been asking you that you don't consider 20% of the matches to be a good enough number????
You would think with the 2 best ODI bowlers ever that Pakistan would have won a bit more. Particularly with Saqlain around as well.
In the 90s Pakistan used to be a pretty decent ODI outfit. They did win a bit.
They were an extremely good ODI side in the 1990's.
???? Other than the 1999 WC final. And there has been a leadership crisis since Imran Khan retired in 1992. Wasim Akram did a fine job for a few years in the until the 99 WC. However their performance has still been better than most other teams in the 90s. Probably only SA, and Aus can lay claim to having played better cricket than Pak in the 90s. SL were decent, India were terrible, NZ were not too good. WI were great in the first half but declined steadily over the decade to become quite **** in the last part of 90s.Not just when it mattered.
This....is my whole point.
