Better ODI bowler::: McGrath or Wasim

[marc71178]

But would just pick Akram as he had a longer career plus almost always bowled his overs in the powerplays plus at the death.

So Akram (whose last ODI was in 2003) always bowled in the powerplays (introduced 2005)?

 

[Cevno]

So Akram (whose last ODI was in 2003) always bowled in the powerplays (introduced 2005)?

Whatever **** they used to call them those days.

"Fielding restrictions" wasn't it?

Powerplays sounds better .

Besides i think they started calling them powerplays before 2007 too.
The actual restrictions and changes were introduced afterwards.

 

[Maximus0723]

uhh, it's not only Wasim who bowled the death overs. There are others too, who did it fairly regularly

@Smalishah84-- Here you go bud

 

[smash84]

uhh, it's not only Wasim who bowled the death overs. There are others too, who did it fairly regularly

@Smalishah84-- Here you go bud

Thanks for the stats. Even the MOTM situation for both of them is very similar.........

Wasim was probably the most regular death bowler that I ever saw. There were others who did that as well but there weren't too many who did it better than him

 

[Blaze 18]

I would rather have Glenn McGrath in my side, but I would rather face him than Wasim Akram. Simply put, Wasim Akram was the more skilled of the two in that he could bowl six different deliveries an over, but McGrath was the more effective. By the way, while McGrath was awesome at getting out big names in big matches, Akram wasn't that bad himself - World Cup 1992 final anyone ?

 

[Faisal1985]

Akram of course.

 

[smash84]

In 2001 Pak played an ODI series in Australia and Wasim was the best bowler in that series. Pakistan won it 2-1. In the final match there was a brilliant all round display from Wasim. One of the best displays of ODI fast bowling against a juggernaut batting line-up.

 

[Son Of Coco]

McGrath. Loved watching them both bowl, but just finished McGrath's book and it reminded me of how much of a legend he was.

 

[smash84]

One of our fellow posters Francis had this to say about Wasim and he nicely summed up my feelings

2. Wasim Akram
Watch his first two wickets in the 1992 World Cup final. They were unplayable. To me they were the fast bowling equivalent of the Gatting Ball. Wasim Akram was the best death bowler I've ever seen. It wasn't uncommon for him to keep sides to less than 40 runs off the last 10 overs if you had Akram bowling half the time. Something about his quick arm action made his deliveries hard to pick.

Stephen Fleming has said it, he's the best fast bowler he ever faced. He got 500 wickets so fast. And while Murali overtook him, Akram is just a level above Murali in ODI's. Mark Taylor once said you need four overs to get used to Akram, but in ODI's it's no use. After four overs he's gone. And then he'll come back with amazing swing.

To me he has everything some players who will make the top 10 don't have...

Some players didn't perform on the big stage. Akram made hugely important runs in the 1992 World Cup final, and then backed it up with two amazing deliveries. Poor Alan Lamb! Imran was the leader of that side, but Akram was the star of that game.

Akram was the first ODI player to take 500 wickets, so he had the longevity. But he did it faster than anybody I've seen. He did it against everybody. Australians feared him.

The best left-arm bowler in cricket history. The best death bowler in history. Maybe the best swing bowler in history. He ticks every box.

 

[salman85]

<-------------

 

[Migara]

Akram is just a level above Murali in ODI's.

Completely disgaree. They were more or less equal, and I have no problem rating Murali over Wasim. Murali's stats are damn good enough to do that.

Wasim (1984 - 2003) 502 @ 23.52, ER - 3.89, SR - 36.2
Murali (1992 - ) 517 @ 23.11, ER - 3.92, SR 35.3

Better average, better SR and better Er when you consider that Murali debut was a decade later than Akram, who enjoyed bowling at an era of lesser SRs from batsmen.

 

[smash84]

Completely disgaree. They were more or less equal, and I have no problem rating Murali over Wasim. Murali's stats are damn good enough to do that.

Wasim (1984 - 2003) 502 @ 23.52, ER - 3.89, SR - 36.2
Murali (1992 - ) 517 @ 23.11, ER - 3.92, SR 35.3

Better average, better SR and better Er when you consider that Murali debut was a decade later than Akram, who enjoyed bowling at an era of lesser SRs from batsmen.

Murali rarely bowled in the last 5 or first 15 overs which is partly the reason for his excellent economy rate. But yes there is little to choose between the two. Another plus point for murali is that he played most of his cricket in a more batsman friendly era.

 

[Teja.]

I'll take Macca

 

[Maximus0723]

Murali rarely bowled in the last 5 or first 15 overs which is partly the reason for his excellent economy rate. But yes there is little to choose between the two. Another plus point for murali is that he played most of his cricket in a more batsman friendly era.

I know u know this but bowling in first 15 and last 10 overs also gives one a greater chance of obtaining a wicket, increasing your SR.

But I agree, both Murali and Wasim are in same tier for me. If one just wants to go by stats then clutching on minute differences in Avg, SR and ER isn't a wise way to judge the players.

 

[smash84]

I know u know this but bowling in first 15 and last 10 overs also gives one a greater chance of obtaining a wicket, increasing your SR.

But I agree, both Murali and Wasim are in same tier for me. If one just wants to go by stats then clutching on minute differences in Avg, SR and ER isn't a wise way to judge the players.

true. but I always felt that the chances of going for runs is a lot more so much so that very very few bowlers can bowl well in the death overs which is so crucial in ODIs

 

[smash84]

it would be interesting to see what bagapath and PEWS have to say on this.

 

[Migara]

true. but I always felt that the chances of going for runs is a lot more so much so that very very few bowlers can bowl well in the death overs which is so crucial in ODIs

That has merit, and it will allow bowlers to pick more wickets as well. Murali did bowl end overs in some occasions but was never a designated death bowler. That is why as a spinner Jayasuriya's record is noteworthy. He was the first spinner to bowl successfully at the death then followed by a more successful Saqlain. Huge chunk of Jaya's overs were bowled between 40-50 overs.

 

[Furball]

However Wasim was better looking as a bowler.

Which causes people to massively under-rate McGrath. Wasim had a whole box of tricks up his sleeve, whereas McGrath doesn't really appear to do anything. Except get batsmen out. Again and again.

 

[Beleg]

akram.

people really really really underestimate the effect of ****e **** fielding and the infighting.

and playing in sharjah.

 

[Top_Cat]

Tougher question to answer than I thought because they did such different jobs. McG did bowl a lot at the death for the Aussies but his real value was what he did with the new-ball. A lot of the time, not only would the oppo be a couple of wickets down after his first 6 or 7 overs, they'd also have to bust a gut against the other bowlers just to bring their run-rate back up to 4/over. No-one did that better and the only guy I could think of who was probably equal was big Ambi.

Contrast that with Wasim who was a fairly fearsome proposition to come in both early in your knock and with 10 overs to go. No matter the conditions or state of the game, you knew you were going to have to contend with big swing and skiddy pace which is tough to work with when you're trying to get under the ball and land it a few rows back. Remember him taking a few hat-tricks early on in his career. Does he hold the record?

Dunno how directly comparable they are, tbh. They were both the absolute best at what they did and for long periods of time.