-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram vs Curtly Ambrose
- Thread starter jaideep
- Start date
kingkallis
International Coach
Akram bowled a lot on Asian wickets where he had to rely A LOT on his ability to swing the ball. Thats not the case with Steyn or Ambrose. So Akram = Steyn > Ambrose for me.
smash84
The Tiger King
Steyn the best of the lot for mine.
Wasim and Ambrose both not too far off obv. Wasim did suffer a lot due to the awful fielding side that he had. Wasn't uncommon to see multiple chances go down off his bowling and arguably had more difficult tracks to bowl on to. However Ambrose and Steyn shade it over him for having more wickets in their column. Also while Akram was probably more "skillful" with the ball on song Steyn and Ambrose were more destructive. They could run through sides more often than Akram could. Steyn in beast mode is a sight to behold. Can run through great bating line ups and can do it on all sorts of tracks.
So Steyn for mine
i might vote Ambrose on another day
Wasim and Ambrose both not too far off obv. Wasim did suffer a lot due to the awful fielding side that he had. Wasn't uncommon to see multiple chances go down off his bowling and arguably had more difficult tracks to bowl on to. However Ambrose and Steyn shade it over him for having more wickets in their column. Also while Akram was probably more "skillful" with the ball on song Steyn and Ambrose were more destructive. They could run through sides more often than Akram could. Steyn in beast mode is a sight to behold. Can run through great bating line ups and can do it on all sorts of tracks.
So Steyn for mine
i might vote Ambrose on another day
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Why?
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This, for me on what I have seen i'd only have Marshall, Hadlee and McGrath ahead of him.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Did not mean to say that he was behind by a long margin, just a step below Curtly and Steyn. Steyn and Curtly both more destructive (higher SR and ran through line-ups more often) and hit higher high-s. Both were rated #1 for a considerable time while Akram never really was. In ODIs, it's no contest Akram but in tests Ambrose and Steyn both ahead for me. Akram also tailed off pretty badly in tests over his last few years but I suppose that's bound to happen when you go on for 19 years.
What split it between Ambrose and Steyn was the latter's performances in Asia and his ability to reverse it menacingly. I see that it's not Ambrose's fault that he never toured Asia much and on another day would have voted for him.
Last edited:
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
Ambrose can make a batsman piss his pants.
Steyn comes a close second.
Steyn comes a close second.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Of the 3, who is most likely to get thrashed by TOTAB?
To add to your reasons: Wpm, % of top order wickets, general quality of wickets, ability to bowl to a plan against batsmen via consistent bowling, putting the ball in the right area (too much of an in between length to be effective).
Akram wins on variety and the eye test, but he just wasn't as effective as a lot of other bowlers.
I think Steyn and Ambrose are both top 5, with a big group below them that I don't think Akram makes, or only just makes.
On Steyn vs Ambrose, not much of an opinion about who to pick in an ATG side. In a regular side though, Steyn is ahead based in his vastly superior strike rate- he leaves less bowling for inferior bowlers to do.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm not holding WPM against Akram because he was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in 1996 I think and was averaging over 4 WPM for that period but he really went on for too long and the ODI workload affected his test game. He did pick up a very high % of lower order wickets. A ball pitching leg and swinging all the way to 2nd slip while missing the edge is an entertaining spectacle but pretty useless (an extreme example, yes and not to suggest Akram wasn't a legendary bowler in his own right).
In an ATG side, Steyn edges Donald and Waqar for the lethal, high SR bowler whilst Ambrose is edged by (this sounds so wrong but I'm not going to change it) McGrath as the disciplined rhythm/corridor bowler IMO.
Everyone has a because XYZ like Akrams diabetes. You can discount them to some extent, but they should never be completely ignored. Akram may have had a lower WPM because of diabetes, but he's still a worse bowler for having a lower WPM.
Add Marshall to the strike bowler category. Considering the era, his SR is nearly as impressive as Steyns.
Agreed on McGrath vs Ambrose.
Add Marshall to the strike bowler category. Considering the era, his SR is nearly as impressive as Steyns.
Agreed on McGrath vs Ambrose.
Same top 5, same order except I might put hadlee anywhere from 3-5 depending on the day.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There's also the fact that his 104 tests were played over 19 years, as opposed to McGrath 124 over a shorter period. But still, I see your point. He should have taken more wickets. Both Waqar and Imran have more WPM.
Marshall can be contained by no category. The most complete fast bowler ever. He gets in the team on account of being Marshall.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Why are we talking about wpm again? It's a bull**** stat for judging the quality or effectiveness of a bowler. It's influenced by far too many other factors.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
By itself, it's meaningless but it is helpful to an extent because it's a product of SR. It's a support argument. No one's rating Hadlee over Marshall because of WPM.