Why does Pakistan traditionally produce better fast bowlers than India?

[cnerd123]

Also, Bhuvi gets picked only to play on green wickets while Amir has to play on the UAE roads. Saying that, Amir has still been underwhelming since his return (though he's improved in the last few series).

Will be interesting to see how Abbas goes on flat tracks, he's started his career very well.

Also Amir's had a ton of dropped catches

But Bhuvi has been better in the last couple of years. Genuinely world class, just is either injured or not selected

 

[Starfighter]

Even better: Australia would have never won the world cup had Gibbs taken that catch. They undeservedly won that cup.

Would've helped had South Africa not muffed a sharpish but certainly manageable single either. I love all these what ifs.

 

[trundler]

Terry Alderman would be considered the greatest of all time by the English media (Dobell et al) if he had been English.

 

[Starfighter]

Terry Alderman would be considered the greatest of all time by the English media (Dobell et al) if he had been English.

Let's do a what if about Alderman's shoulder and going on the rebel tours too. I'm gonna say we win the '85 Ashes and he takes 340 test wickets.

 

[trundler]

Let's do a what if about Alderman's shoulder and going on the rebel tours too. I'm gonna say we win the '85 Ashes and he takes 340 test wickets.

He took 81 from 12 in England. If he'd been English he would've been taken over 5 WPM at a sub 50 SR and been regarded much higher than Jimmy.

 

[the big bambino]

Zaheer Khan would have been an ATG had he played half of his tests in Eng/NZ and maintained fitness.

Even better: Australia would have never won the world cup had Gibbs taken that catch. They undeservedly won that cup.

Yeah well we could make excuses and arguments like that for just about anyone. But yes I agree that if Zak played half his tests in Eng/NZ then Gibbs would have taken that catch and Aus wouldn't have won that WC ... or something.

 

[trundler]

Zaheer simply wasn't that good but if we're rating McGill close to Warne then sure, go for it.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Srinath was better than Zaheer, and he wasn't anywhere close to being a great pacer.

 

[Kirkut]

Also, Bhuvi gets picked only to play on green wickets while Amir has to play on the UAE roads. Saying that, Amir has still been underwhelming since his return (though he's improved in the last few series).

Will be interesting to see how Abbas goes on flat tracks, he's started his career very well.

The speed gun does not detect red meat in Abbas' case though.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Raw Average doesn't mean anything

Andy Gantueme is not the greatest batsman ever.

Ta da.

lol this has nothing to do with anything any of us are saying. You're trying to claim that runs per innings is a more accurate measure than average.

Career slicing is not invalid. In that case you can not do that in home /away , minnows / best of the era.. Etc
Here Imran clearly not a bowling allrounder after 80% of the career.
When you compare Imran to Miller, Kapil, Botham, Hadlee, Pollock.. Etc he is a 32avg batsman not 37. (even that 32plus is inflated with not outs though)

I know not outs means not outs. But the productivity is still below expectations. Its out of proportion. Where are those actual runs? End of the day, he scored like a 32 avg batsman not 37. (that includes specialist batsman phase)

Ah the old "average inflated by not outs doesn't mean as much" garbage

 

[stephen]

Amir would have been a great bowler but for that match fixing fiasco.
ATG (which means very good all the time), not ATVG (which ironically means not very good all the time). I hope I got that right at last.

You're close.

ATG = All Time Great
ATVG = All Time Very Good

ATVG was a term coined to describe the career of someone like Anderson who is obviously an excellent player but doesn't have the all round record of better players historically. Johnson would arguably fall into the same category. ATVG players are players who on their day might be second to none but have a lot more off days than the true greats.

A batting ATVG would be someone like Michael Clarke who was incredible for a long time but isn't quite as revered as someone like Waugh or Ponting (and for good reason).

 

[Borges]

ATVG players are players who on their day might be second to none but have a lot more off days than the true greats.

Right, I get what you are trying to say. ATVG == All Time Very Good == Not Very Good All the Time.

It doesn't make sense to me, though it apparently does to a lot of other people here.

 

[srbhkshk]

Great > Very Good is basically all there is to it.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Well, if you want a career slice, I like this one: All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo
It includes all series from 79/80 against India up until 89/90, also against India, he took a full bowling workload in most of these series. This is just as valid a career slice as yours. I believe Kapil never had a 50-odd test run where he had similar averages with bat and ball to those.

Here's some r.i's

Lara: 51.52 (ave 52.88)
Tendulkar 48.39 (ave 53.78)
G Smith: 45.20 (ave 48.25)
Cook 42.59 (ave 45.11)
Chanderpaul: 42.38 (ave 51.37)
Waugh: 42.02 (ave 51.06)

Do some of these look a bit surprising to you? Clearly Lara is way better than the rest and Graeme Smith is a surprising dark horse. Heck, Cook's better than Waugh or Chanderpaul! Do you see how, when compared to their averages, r/i varies widely? There's no quality-related coupling between the two.

Above link is not working for me.

And those Runs per Innings stats seems ok.
Not much difference between Tendulkar and Lara. Same with Cook and Waugh, Waugh played in a tougher era.
Even if Cook averaged 52, Waugh is still the greater batsman for the era he played and for his many epic innings. So its not just avg (or RI). We wont Rate Sachin 2nd to Bradman league if his RI is 42. Right?

Also,
From 71 tests 102 innings ( Bowling AR phase)
Imran 2794 runs
27.39 RI, 32.87 avg, 4 x 100s, 11 x 50s
25.5 innings per 100
9.28 innings per 50

Kapil 131 tests 184 innings
5248 runs
28.5 RI, 31.05 avg, 8 x 100s, 27 x 50s
23 innings per 100
6.8 innings per 50

And if you calculate the number of balls faced
Lets assume Imran's SR 50 and Kapil 80
Imran 5588 balls to score 2794 runs
Kapil 6560 balls 5248 runs

Kapil would have scored 2794 runs in 3492 balls, or 4470 runs 5588 balls.
Imran gets point for remaining not out, but for actual runs he had enough chances. Kapil is better at getting more runs per innings.

Its very clear that, Kapil is better in all the parameters except avg. Which is slightly better for Imran (1.8 points)

 

[Starfighter]

You really haven't the foggiest do you?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

lol this has nothing to do with anything any of us are saying. You're trying to claim that runs per innings is a more accurate measure than average.



Ah the old "average inflated by not outs doesn't mean as much" garbage

Kapil scored more runs per innings than Imran the bowling allrounder. Fact.
Imran had equal or more chances, Still he scored less. Fact.
Kapil Scored more centuries per innings. Fact.
Kapil scored more 50s per innings. Fact.
There are multiple atg batting performances in Kapils records. Fact.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You really haven't the foggiest do you?

1.8 points difference in avg decides the better batsman. Wow.
Despite Kapil scored quicker, more 100s, More 50s, More Atg performances.
No point in arguing. I quit.

 

[Starfighter]

Your slicing Imran's career isn't valid, nor is your use of runs per innings, this has been explained to you multiple times, if you can't work this out then you should go away and study the issues, which have all been explained to you multiple times, and only come back when you fully understand them. You're like the drunk man and the lamppost, using your numbers for support rather than illumination.

 

[Starfighter]

Above link is not working for me.

Try clicking on it. Here's the numbers in case you're wondering

	Span	Mat	Runs	HS	Bat Av	100	Wkts	BBI	Bowl Av	5	Ct	St	Ave Diff
unfiltered	1971-1992	88	3807	136	37.69	6	362	8/58	22.81	23	28	0	14.88	Profile
filtered	1979-1989	54	2377	135*	41.70	5	250	8/58	18.37	18	17	0	23.32

I've simply filtered Imran's stats from when he began his golden run until he stopped taking a full bowling workload. Kinda destroys your claim about Imran being a mere 'bowling' allrounder, against your own more disingenuous slice which includes the part of his career when he was more or less a specialist bowler. Kapil hasn't a single similar run in his record.

 

[TheJediBrah]

1.8 points difference in avg decides the better batsman. Wow.
Despite Kapil scored quicker, more 100s, More 50s, More Atg performances.
No point in arguing. I quit.

You can't just make up numbers and complain when people don't go along with it. There's close to a 7 run difference in averages.

Just picking Kapil's best period and comparing it to Imran's worst period to try and prove your point is hilarious