Top 10 Greatest Fast Bowlers of All Time in Tests?

[nightprowler10]

Nah. Akram's peak from 90 - 97 coincided with Waqar's from 90- 94, but even at their peaks, Akram was widely considered the better bowler.

Waqar's peak is a tad overrated. Definitely he was a demon, but took a lot of cheap wickets against low quality batting lineups, and was often thrashed in his new ball spells only to clean up the tail with the old ball. He only became a dangerous new ball bowler later in his career. Just look at his series against England in 92 and West Indies in 93, he took much less wickets with the new ball.

This is one reason why I considered Imran's peak in the mid-80s as even better than Waqar's, he was dangerous with both old and new, took wickets against better opposition.

Waqar has said himself he didn't really know what to do with the new ball early part of his career.

 

[Starfighter]

Nah. Akram's peak from 90 - 97 coincided with Waqar's from 90- 94, but even at their peaks, Akram was widely considered the better bowler.

Waqar's peak is a tad overrated. Definitely he was a demon, but took a lot of cheap wickets against low quality batting lineups, and was often thrashed in his new ball spells only to clean up the tail with the old ball. He only became a dangerous new ball bowler later in his career. Just look at his series against England in 92 and West Indies in 93, he took much less wickets with the new ball.

This is one reason why I considered Imran's peak in the mid-80s as even better than Waqar's, he was dangerous with both old and new, took wickets against better opposition.

It's Wasim who has the disproportionately higher amount of tail-end wickets though. I suppose you're forgetting those matches when he was captain where he wouldn't bowl Waqar at the tail so he could keep the wickets for himself.

 

[Victor Ian]

It's Wasim who has the disproportionately higher amount of tail-end wickets though. I suppose you're forgetting those matches when he was captain where he wouldn't bowl Waqar at the tail so he could keep the wickets for himself.

Haha - Is this true? It makes me love Akram even more if so.

 

[ankitj]

Over their entire careers, Akram picked 35% of his wickets from tail (8-11), Waqar 29%. That's sizable difference.

In 89-93, Waqar took more top-middle order wickets than both Akram and Ambrose.

Edit: Sorry, the stats I was looking at were wrong. No way to get that in statsguru it seems.

 

[ankitj]

Haha - Is this true? It makes me love Akram even more if so.

Yes, I have heard this from several Pakistani fans. So it was apparently a thing. Akram was quite insecure about Waqar doing so well early in his career.

Edit: a reference:

Wasim v Waqar: A Loving Friendship That Turned Into A Hostile Feud

Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis were the best of friends before a mysterious feud wrecked their relationship. John Crace wonders where it all went wrong.

wisden.com

 

[Victor Ian]

Over their entire careers, Akram picked 35% of his wickets from tail (8-11), Waqar 29%. That's sizable difference.

In 89-93, Waqar took more top-middle over wickets than both Akram and Ambrose.

View attachment 28285

Excellent. Hughes needs to be top of more lists.

 

[Starfighter]

Haha - Is this true? It makes me love Akram even more if so.

More in ODIs from what I've seen, not uncommon to see scorecards where Wasim and the third pacer bowled out and Waqar only bowled seven or so overs. I've seen quite a few Pakistan fans talk about it in both formats.

 

[ankitj]

Excellent. Hughes needs to be top of more lists.

Sorry I was looking at wrong statsguru filters. No way to get those stats it seems.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

More in ODIs from what I've seen, not uncommon to see scorecards where Wasim and the third pacer bowled out and Waqar only bowled seven or so overs. I've seen quite a few Pakistan fans talk about it in both formats.

also the late 90s/early 00s scorecards conspicuously have either Wasim or Waqar in the team, so the fabled attack of Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib/Saqlain pretty much never happened

 

[honestbharani]

also the late 90s/early 00s scorecards conspicuously have either Wasim or Waqar in the team, so the fabled attack of Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib/Saqlain pretty much never happened

Think it happened in Oz, of all places, lol.

The one I wished to see and I dont think ever happened was Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Saqlain, Mushy. Mushy was off his best by the time Shoaib came along but it would have been fun to see that attack play. Or even juz the Ws and the Mushtaqs with any of the other Pak FAST™ bowlers there as the 3rd seamer, or even one of their allrounders.

 

[Starfighter]

Think it happened in Oz, of all places, lol.

Yeah, at Hobart when we chased 369 thanks partly due to a gigantic edge not being given. Obviously didn't see it considering I was only two the time, but I've heard that Shoaib seemed more interested in the speedgun than taking wickets.

 

[subshakerz]

It's Wasim who has the disproportionately higher amount of tail-end wickets though. I suppose you're forgetting those matches when he was captain where he wouldn't bowl Waqar at the tail so he could keep the wickets for himself.

Not sure about over their careers, my statement was that in Waqar's peak from 90 to 94, most of his wickets were against lesser quality opposition and he was not really that great with the new ball.

To highlight the former, of the 180 wickets in 28 tests he took in that period, 113 were against NZ, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe. Yes, he still did well against WI and England, but compared to other peaks like Marshall and Imran, his was disproportionately more against weak batting lineups. You could try to argue the same about Wasim, but Wasim did really well against Australia in 1990 and 1995, and Waqar failed both times though it was outside his peak,

Regarding the latter, this was my own observation of Waqar in the 90s, that he only really mastered the new ball towards the latter half of the decade and earlier on would splay it about. Regardless if Wasim took more tail wickets, he was much more of threat with the new ball, which anyone who observed them at the time would notice.

 

[Starfighter]

If we literally take the period '90-'94 I wouldn't say there's much to split them except Wasim was better aginst Australia, which was probably Waqar's main career failing. They both did well against SL, NZ, Zim, Waqar a little better but he had the better overall average and was better against WI OTOH.

Observations can be deceiving and Waqar took more wickets per match while taking a significantly larger proportion of top and middle-order wickets. As I've said before, if you went purely by visual observation many people would rate Wasim over McGrath, but it's what's on the scorecard that counts at the end of the day and not the fanciness of one's skills.

 

[subshakerz]

If we literally take the period '90-'94 I wouldn't say there's much to split them except Wasim was better aginst Australia, which was probably Waqar's main career failing. They both did well against SL, NZ, Zim, Waqar a little better but he had the better overall average and was better against WI OTOH.

Observations can be deceiving and Waqar took more wickets per match while taking a significantly larger proportion of top and middle-order wickets. As I've said before, if you went purely by visual observation many people would rate Wasim over McGrath, but it's what's on the scorecard that counts at the end of the day and not the fanciness of one's skills.

Firstly, I am not sure that was the case during Waqar's peak, perhaps overall career though.

And I wouldn't disregard observation skills. Having watched both Waqar and Wasim ball in tandem, Wasim with his variations, control and bounce was simply a superior new ball bowler. Batsmen treated him with more respect which is something the stats don't capture. If anything, Waqar benefited more from the pressure Wasim built, since batsmen were willing to take chances off his bowling as he splayed it about while more concerned with seeing off Wasim. If you don't believe me, please name me one batsman from the 90s who rates Waqar ahead of Wasim. I can't think of any.

There is a bit of myth concerning early 90s Waqar that he somehow was Barnes level or something. There are better bowling peaks IMO.

 

[Starfighter]

It ain't up to me to prove your assertion. The 'ask the batsmen test' would probably lead to Lillee being rated over Marshall, so don't put too much stock in it.

 

[honestbharani]

I feel like a lot of the cricket debates will tone down if we started using the word "rating players' records" than actual skills. I think it is clear that the basic cricket stats do not capture the context of anything well enough so given that, and the fact that we do not watch every game (none of us do, not even @robelinda ) we can just a step back and state that we are rating players' records and careers based on that, in which case we can see why both subshakerz and Starfighter can be true here.

 

[subshakerz]

It ain't up to me to prove your assertion. The 'ask the batsmen test' would probably lead to Lillee being rated over Marshall, so don't put too much stock in it.

Well, if Lillee didn't have any holes in his record, then yeah he would likely be rated ahead of Marshall even if he was slightly behind in average and strikerate.

Statistics are useful up to a point but they are not the only criteria in assessing the quality of a bowler. Record + peer recognition are the two important criteria is such assessments.

Until Donald retired, Pollock had a fairly better average but nobody suggested that Pollock was even equal as a bowler, for example.

 

[AndrewB]

also the late 90s/early 00s scorecards conspicuously have either Wasim or Waqar in the team, so the fabled attack of Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib/Saqlain pretty much never happened

Only twice in Tests; the Hobart match mentioned above, and a rain-ruined Test against Zimbabwe in Lahore.

 

[Slifer]

Think it happened in Oz, of all places, lol.

The one I wished to see and I dont think ever happened was Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Saqlain, Mushy. Mushy was off his best by the time Shoaib came along but it would have been fun to see that attack play. Or even juz the Ws and the Mushtaqs with any of the other Pak FAST™ bowlers there as the 3rd seamer, or even one of their allrounders.

PAK vs WI Cricket Scorecard, 3rd ODI at Multan, November 13, 1990

Get cricket scorecard of 3rd ODI, PAK vs WI, West Indies tour of Pakistan 1990/91 at Ibn-e-Qasim Bagh Stadium, Multan dated November 13, 1990.

www.espncricinfo.com

I think there's a test where wi fielded Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop. Vs Pakistan: Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Qadir or Mushy. Greatest collection of bowling in a series ever. Though admittedly by this point, Imran hardly bowled.

 

[Zinzan]

Nah. Akram's peak from 90 - 97 coincided with Waqar's from 90- 94, but even at their peaks, Akram was widely considered the better bowler.

Waqar's peak is a tad overrated. Definitely he was a demon, but took a lot of cheap wickets against low quality batting lineups, and was often thrashed in his new ball spells only to clean up the tail with the old ball.

Can't be arsed checking the numbers, but I recall Waqar's peak of his peak was around 1989-1991, and in that period he was even more devastating than Wasim.