Garry Sobers v Imran Khan,Test Cricket:Poll

[kyear2]

I did watch Pakistan play, and from my memories I honestly always rated Waqar the better bolwer. He bowled unplayable deliveries, but to me lacked consistentcy and sometimes experimented too much. To me outside of our own bowlers the best and most exciting were Donald and Waqar.

 

[smash84]

I did watch Pakistan play, and from my memories I honestly always rated Waqar the better bolwer. He bowled unplayable deliveries, but to me lacked consistentcy and sometimes experimented too much. To me outside of our own bowlers the best and most exciting were Donald and Waqar.

Incidentally your own best bowler of that time (Ambrose) and Donald both rated Wasim as the best that they played with or against.

 

[Sanz]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/52071-rank-your-top-20-bowlers-modern-era.html

Not much of a statistics person are you?

No, I am not a stats person. I guess that much should have been clear by now.

I obviously rate Akram ahead of anyone that made his debut after 1985.

 

[bagapath]

How exactly is it blasphemous? Statistically they are better bowlers than Hadlee and Imran. If you were picking them because of their batting abilities I could sympathize but if you say your picking them just because of their bowling over two bowlers with superior statistics then I am sorry that's what's really called personal bias.

As for top 5, Hadlee I could understand but I wouldn't put Imran in there.

i guess you are the kind of person who will look at stats and rank garner above holding. waqar over wasim. and donald over lillee. okay then. imran is not a top 5 pacer and mcgrath and marshall are clearly better than hadlee and imran. i dont have much to discuss with you on this topic.

 

[bagapath]

never seen , any1 rating imran as greatest bowler ever, that means he is not in the league of akram , marshal, lillee, hadlee, holding , mcgrath, ..etc

silly logic. and totally flawed.

he made it to benaud's team as a new ball bowler along with lillee. that should have explained his prowess as a pacer if it needed any proof at all.

imran was a ****ing terror as a fast bowler. for a long time, whenever he started his run up, he was sending shivers up the spines of batters everywhere. he was among the top 3 bowlers in the world - and spent several months at the very top - from 1982 to 1988 when hadlee, marshall and khan himself were hunting batsmen around the globe as the greatest bowlers on the planet. this is just after other giants like lillee, roberts, holding and botham had ruled the previous five year stretch. and just before akram and ambrose became the best in business.

imran is among the top 5 fast bowlers of all time. if anyone ranks him at the very top - due to his great success on dead pakistan wickets and for his amazing stats against the great west indian sides of his era - i wont have a problem with that either.

 

[BlazeDragon]

No, I am not a stats person. I guess that much should have been clear by now.

I obviously rate Akram ahead of anyone that made his debut after 1985.

I don't get how you arrive at that conclusion. I could understand if that was a personal preference. But hey if we are talking about just personal preference I might as well just rate Brett Lee ahead of Wasim Akram.

Wasim Akram is a very entertaining bowler but in no way is he the best of his generation in fact he is far from it.

i guess you are the kind of person who will look at stats and rank garner above holding. waqar over wasim. and donald over lillee. okay then. imran is not a top 5 pacer and mcgrath and marshall are clearly better than hadlee and imran. i dont have much to discuss with you on this topic.

I'm not just about basic stats if that was so I would have rated Lohmann higher than anybody else. I look at overall stats of every bowler and the likes of Mcgrath still makes the top teir above others no matter how you look at it. I would like to see your argument as to why you think Imran and Hadlee should be just as good of bowlers as Mcgrath and Marshall. Because I just don't see it other than personal preference.

Btw, I rate Warne higher than Murali even though he has a higher average. That's because statistics are not just about average like some of guys try and make it out to be.

 

[Darth018]

Incidentally your own best bowler of that time (Ambrose) and Donald both rated Wasim as the best that they played with or against.

So what just because Steyn rated Anderson as the best bowler currently it makes it so? Or just because the likes of Mcgrath and Murali says Brian Lara is the best batsman it make it a fact?

It shows that those guys are humble blokes more than anything else.

 

[Darth018]

Akram wasn't even close to being the best bowler of his generation never mind best of all time.

Awta. People in general tend to overrate him, A LOT.

Wasim Akram is a very entertaining bowler but in no way is he the best of his generation in fact he is far from it.

Hell yeah.

 

[smash84]

So what just because Steyn rated Anderson as the best bowler currently it makes it so? Or just because the likes of Mcgrath and Murali says Brian Lara is the best batsman it make it a fact?

It shows that those guys are humble blokes more than anything else.

kyear2 had said that he rated Waqar and Donald as better bowlers also the WI bowlers as better than Wasim. Now if he thought that Waqar>Wasim I was pointing out that Ambrose and Donald didn't share the same opinion as kyear2. When did I say it was a fact? I was only pointing out the subjectivity of the statement

 

[Sanz]

I don't get how you arrive at that conclusion. I could understand if that was a personal preference. But hey if we are talking about just personal preference I might as well just rate Brett Lee ahead of Wasim Akram.

Wasim Akram is a very entertaining bowler but in no way is he the best of his generation in fact he is far from it.

You have the right to your opinion but I am not sure why you would object to my choice. Wasim bowled for 8 years before Mcgrath made his debut, I don't really consider Mcgrath as a bowler from same generation. Their careers overlapped but Wasim had played 50 tests before Mcgrath made his debut.

Wasim was fast when needed, could swing both ways, equally effective with both new and old ball, he produced wickets almost every time his team needed to.
With him in the team you could almost guarantee that there were no lower order partnership between the No. 9 and no. 8 type batsmen. Many top batsmen of his era consider him the most difficult bowler they faced and he almost has the stats to match all that. And in addition he could also entertain you all day long with his bowling.

I am not really sure why you find it so difficult to accept that many cricket fans can consider Akram as one of the best and best of his era.

 

[BlazeDragon]

You have the right to your opinion but I am not sure why you would object to my choice. Wasim bowled for 8 years before Mcgrath made his debut, I don't really consider Mcgrath as a bowler from same generation. Their careers overlapped but Wasim had played 50 tests before Mcgrath made his debut.

Wasim was fast when needed, could swing both ways, equally effective with both new and old ball, he produced wickets almost every time his team needed to.
With him in the team you could almost guarantee that there were no lower order partnership between the No. 9 and no. 8 type batsmen. Many top batsmen of his era consider him the most difficult bowler they faced and he almost has the stats to match all that. And in addition he could also entertain you all day long with his bowling.

I am not really sure why you find it so difficult to accept that many cricket fans can consider Akram as one of the best and best of his era.

I am not objecting your opinion you can rate Umar Gul as the greatest bowler for all I care.

I am pretty sure I remember seeing you get all uptight in the Mcgrath vs Marshall thread when people were saying Mcgrath was a better bowler than Marshall and you were saying that its a "statistical fact" that Marshall is a better bowler than Mcgrath. I'm just surprised you moved away from statistics all of a sudden that's all.

Like I said before if its a personal preference thing I can just rate Brett Lee ahead of Wasim Akram. I could go on and type paragraphs about how great Lee is and all that too but I can't ever statically prove it that he is the best. Its the same with Wasim here. I personally don't have a problem at all if you say Wasim Akram is the greatest bowler as long as your saying its a personal opinion of yours. But if your gonna say its a "statistical fact" that he is the best that's when I really have a problem.

 

[Sanz]

I am not objecting your opinion you can rate Umar Gul as the greatest bowler for all I care.

Yes, Wasim Akram and Umar Gul are at the same level as bowlers and the difference between Mcgrath/Akram's bowling is of such a magnitude that it is really impossible for anyone to accept Akram as the better bowler.

Wait..There is another thread in Cricketweb where Akram is at par with Mcgrath as a bowler among CW members.

I am pretty sure I remember seeing you get all uptight in the Mcgrath vs Marshall thread when people were saying Mcgrath was a better bowler than Marshall and you were saying that its a "statistical fact" that Marshall is a better bowler than Mcgrath. I'm just surprised you moved away from statistics all of a sudden that's all.

I think you need to read my posts first and figure the contexts where the statement was made. That I consider Marshall as better bowler than Mcgrath has nothing to do with Stats.

Like I said before if its a personal preference thing I can just rate Brett Lee ahead of Wasim Akram. I could go on and type paragraphs about how great Lee is and all that too but I can't ever statically prove it that he is the best. Its the same with Wasim here. I personally don't have a problem at all if you say Wasim Akram is the greatest bowler as long as your saying its a personal opinion of yours. But if your gonna say its a "statistical fact" that he is the best that's when I really have a problem.

Nobody is asking you to prove and you will never be able to convince me with any amount of stats to me. I watched the guy making his debut in 1985 and since than have watched him bowl more than any other bowler. Have watched Mcgrath bowl a lot as well and I don't have any doubt in my mind about who is the better bowler.

And Of course it is a personal opinion. Please show me where I said that Wasim is statistically the greatest bowler.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Strike Rate trumps everything else. So statistically Waqar is the greatest.

 

[The Sean]

You have the right to your opinion but I am not sure why you would object to my choice. Wasim bowled for 8 years before Mcgrath made his debut, I don't really consider Mcgrath as a bowler from same generation. Their careers overlapped but Wasim had played 50 tests before Mcgrath made his debut.

Wasim was fast when needed, could swing both ways, equally effective with both new and old ball, he produced wickets almost every time his team needed to.
With him in the team you could almost guarantee that there were no lower order partnership between the No. 9 and no. 8 type batsmen. Many top batsmen of his era consider him the most difficult bowler they faced and he almost has the stats to match all that. And in addition he could also entertain you all day long with his bowling.

I am not really sure why you find it so difficult to accept that many cricket fans can consider Akram as one of the best and best of his era.

All of this. I reckon Wasim gets pretty seriously under-rated around these parts. An absolutely magnificent bowler, and certainly top tier IMO.

 

[honestbharani]

All of this. I reckon Wasim gets pretty seriously under-rated around these parts. An absolutely magnificent bowler, and certainly top tier IMO.

yep.. seconded.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

All of this. I reckon Wasim gets pretty seriously under-rated around these parts. An absolutely magnificent bowler, and certainly top tier IMO.

While I don't think he's top tier in tests (unquestionably, an ATG still), he's certainly one of the very best in ODIs. A fair case could be made for him as the greatest ODI bowler ever as well. The way he sent down those nuts was one of the most legendary sights in cricket and I think few people would disagree there.

IMHO some of the reaction on his forum is a compensation (of some sorts) for the fact that Akram is somewhat overrated in a few other factions. There are people outside this forum who reckon than Akram and Davidson do not even "belong to the same bracket" and that the Pakistani paceman is miles ahead.

 

[ankitj]

IMHO some of the reaction on his forum is a compensation (of some sorts) for the fact that Akram is somewhat overrated in a few other factions.

yeah, pretty much.

 

[smash84]

You have the right to your opinion but I am not sure why you would object to my choice. Wasim bowled for 8 years before Mcgrath made his debut, I don't really consider Mcgrath as a bowler from same generation. Their careers overlapped but Wasim had played 50 tests before Mcgrath made his debut.

Wasim was fast when needed, could swing both ways, equally effective with both new and old ball, he produced wickets almost every time his team needed to.
With him in the team you could almost guarantee that there were no lower order partnership between the No. 9 and no. 8 type batsmen. Many top batsmen of his era consider him the most difficult bowler they faced and he almost has the stats to match all that. And in addition he could also entertain you all day long with his bowling.

I am not really sure why you find it so difficult to accept that many cricket fans can consider Akram as one of the best and best of his era.

awta

All of this. I reckon Wasim gets pretty seriously under-rated around these parts. An absolutely magnificent bowler, and certainly top tier IMO.

awta. I also don't quite see how is not top tier?

While I don't think he's top tier in tests (unquestionably, an ATG still), he's certainly one of the very best in ODIs. A fair case could be made for him as the greatest ODI bowler ever as well. The way he sent down those nuts was one of the most legendary sights in cricket and I think few people would disagree there.

IMHO some of the reaction on his forum is a compensation (of some sorts) for the fact that Akram is somewhat overrated in a few other factions. There are people outside this forum who reckon than Akram and Davidson do not even "belong to the same bracket" and that the Pakistani paceman is miles ahead.

Why isn't he top tier in tests?

awt second para

 

[quytst0rm]

Strike Rate trumps everything else. So statistically Waqar is the greatest.

By that logic Steyn is the best ever and has no equal, not that it's too far fetched if he maintains his form till he retires.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I will happily accept Steyn as the greatest, but only when he retires and has the strike rate to back that up.