Top 10 Greatest Fast Bowlers of All Time in Tests?

[Lillian Thomson]

So what we're saying is that Akram is the most underrated of all the overrated bowlers on CW.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Nah. Really not a fan of WPM, and if anything WPI would be even more prone to things like tactical variation and team composition.

And those 'adjusted' figures mean nothing. I know it's acceptable to statistically massage data to fit agendas the days, but it doesn't make it any less dishonest.

That said I've been round this rodeo before with that poster and I ain't doing it again. None of his slicing and dicing has a shred of validity.

I adjusted Akram stats to 179 innings, because it made comparison easier and more understandable
Since you dont like it, here is the actual data.

Ambrose
98 tests, 179 inn, 405 wkts, 20.99 avg,
54.5 SR, 22 x 5wkts, 3 x 10 wkts

Akram
77 tests, 134 inn, 334 wkts, 22.34 avg
51.9 SR, 21 x 5 wkts, 4 x 10 wkts

WPM
Ambrose - 4.13
Akram - 4.34

WPI
Ambrose - 2.26
Akram - 2.49

5fers
Ambrose - once in every 8.14 innings
Akram - once in every 6.38 innings

10fers
Ambrose - once in every 59.67 innings
Akram - once in every 33.5 innings

Wickets of 1-5 Batsmen
Ambrose - 1.27 wkts per innings
Akram - 1.22 wkts per innings

Wickets of 6-7
Ambrose - 0.37 WPI
Akram - 0.37 WPI

Wickets 8-11
Ambrose - 0.63 WPI
Akram - 0.9 WPI

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

First 13 years
Akram Better
Next 5 years
Akram Better ( he actually played tests)

But when you combine these 2 phases Ambrose emerges as winner. Great logic.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Wasim was a great, great bowler. Amazing.
Probably the best left armer in the era between Davidson and Wagner.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

No it's not, because you "adjusted to 179 innings" whatever that means. Unless Wasim took wickets at a significantly better average than Ambrose in that period then all it demonstrates is he got worse batsmen out on average than Ambrose. It would indicate the opposite of what you want it to

Still it is different from "Akram lacks top order wicket taking ability "

 

[Gob]

Top 10 Greatest Fast Blowers of All Time in Tests?

 

[Bolo.]

Forget the rest of what PFK has stated, but I think there might be something to using WPI instead of WPM. Yeah/Nah?

I think WPI creates a different version of the same problem. Bowling once in an innings loss for example is an instance where WPI would clearly be a better measure. But comparing this match to a 10 wicket loss would give an example of WPM being a better measure.

I suspect WPI is a better measure on the whole, but it could work (for example) against players in teams strong enough to typically make the opposition bat twice, but not typically strong enough to bowl them out twice.... if the opponents are succesfully chasing or declaring only a few down a bowler is going to end up with a low WPI.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I think WPI creates a different version of the same problem. Bowling once in an innings loss for example is an instance where WPI would clearly be a better measure. But comparing this match to a 10 wicket loss would give an example of WPM being a better measure.

I suspect WPI is a better measure on the whole, but it could work (for example) against players in teams strong enough to typically make the opposition bat twice, but not typically strong enough to bowl them out twice.... if the opponents are succesfully chasing or declaring only a few down a bowler is going to end up with a low WPI.

Dont make it complicated. WPI is the real thing.

 

[Victor Ian]

I only thought so far as 'Wickets-per-Match would be easier for teams that get to bowl twice more often'.
Then pews reminded me of strike rate, so no need to explore this any further.

Wickets/Run per match are interesting, but I think the regular stats tell the most reliable story.

 

[Victor Ian]

Dont make it complicated. WPI is the real thing.

nup.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

nup.

Strike Rate then.

 

[Engle]

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

View attachment 28337

Peak Ambrose
vs
Akram

 

[Coronis]

Curtly fear no Wasim. Though actually, Wasim got Ambrose out 8 times whilst Ambrose only got Wasim out 3 times. Clearly Wasim is better.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Curtly fear no Wasim. Though actually, Wasim got Ambrose out 8 times whilst Ambrose only got Wasim out 3 times. Clearly Wasim is better.

Simply more fuel for the 'Wasim feasts on tailenders' narrative. More points for Ambrose.

 

[Jack1]

Actually.. He lost more LBWs to Umpire's Misjudgment than most bowlers.

Funny

 

[srbhkshk]

Given Waqar and Wasim were both feasting on tail-ender wickets and Imran was gone, I am not actually sure how Pakistan were getting to the tail. There's clearly some great bowler who is being massively underrated here.

 

[honestbharani]

Given Waqar and Wasim were both feasting on tail-ender wickets and Imran was gone, I am not actually sure how Pakistan were getting to the tail. There's clearly some great bowler who is being massively underrated here.

I always knew Aaqib Javed was awesome.

 

[StephenZA]

Given Waqar and Wasim were both feasting on tail-ender wickets and Imran was gone, I am not actually sure how Pakistan were getting to the tail. There's clearly some great bowler who is being massively underrated here.

Pakistan fielding running them out?

 

[Jack1]

Pakistan fielding running them out?

The top order were retiring out