Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Top 4
4. Barnes
3. Marshall
2. Hadlee
1. Jamieson
4. Barnes
3. Marshall
2. Hadlee
1. Jamieson
More devastating than Wasim’s peak of his peak of his peak?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.
Actually, Marshall's average is 20.94 not 20.97...Been having a debate with a bunch of people on this video
Do you agree with this list? Personally I thought McGrath the greatest of all time...
Yes, but as pointed out, largely against weaker sides and mostly 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.
Agree with this x1000. He was a great bowler but so overrated by this forumWasim Akram is ridiculously overrated on here to the point of comedy. He was left handed, so what
Lol what. Most people rank him pretty low here with very few exceptions.Wasim Akram is ridiculously overrated on here to the point of comedy. He was left handed, so what
He is the most underrated cricketer in CW.Wasim Akram is ridiculously overrated on here to the point of comedy. He was left handed, so what
When he gets his average lower and stops picking on tailenders I might consider him. Until then no.He is the most underrated cricketer in CW.
Let's see...Brian Lara, Allan Donald, McGrath, Ambrose, Darren Lehman, Michael Atherton, Justin Langer, Kumara Sangakara, Kallis, Jimmy Adams, Ponting, Azharuddin and many others all considered Wasim the best pacer they faced. Are they also overrating him?Wasim Akram is ridiculously overrated on here to the point of comedy. He was left handed, so what
When I first starting posting here, there were people comparing him to Gillespie. It's gotten much much better over the years.He is the most underrated cricketer in CW.
mind at least a decade ago we were voting him top-25 cricketers of all timeWhen I first starting posting here, there were people comparing him to Gillespie. It's gotten much much better over the years.
So that you can rate bowlers with shorter career (with better fielding support ) higher.When he gets his average lower and stops picking on tailenders I might consider him. Until then no.
Thats a myth.Yes, statistically overall he doesnt match up to the top tier which is why it is fair to put him a bit behind, but he definitely in my view belongs in the top 10.
Now post Akram's stats without cherry pickingAmbrose played 13 years
98 tests, 179 innings,
405 wkts, 20.99 avg
54.58 SR, 20 x 5wkts , 3 x 10 wkts
First 13 years of Akram
77 tests, 134 innings, 334 wkts, 22.34 avg
51.9 SR, 21 x 5 wkts, 4 x 10 wkts
Akram Stats adjusted to 179 innings
446 wickets, 22.34 avg,
51.9 SR, 28 x 5wkts, 5 x 10wkts
LBW + Bowled
Ambrose - 33.3%
Akram - 53.9%
You mean Ambrose peak 13 years vs Akram's Whole career?Now post Akram's stats without cherry picking
if we are going down this road, there is also the famous Pak home umpiring that gave his LBW counts a double booster shot.he managed to achive that without a proper fielding support.