Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

[Slifer]

Good analogy for this might be Warne. Australia is hard for spinners, and Warne was so much more effective there than virtually any visiting spinners. Therefore he must be so much better than any other spinners ever? Not necessarily just based on that stat because clearly his bowling was suited to Australian conditions. Whether nor not it was hard for visiting spinners is irrelevant.

I don't know but maybe something similar applies to Imran in Pakistan. Others have talked about ball-tampering and biased umpiring but I don't know anything about that, very well could just be speculation and sour grapes.

Warne did better away than at home....

 

[ankitj]

Warne must get credit for being good at home. Absolutely.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Warne did better away than at home....

Not compared to other spinners, didn't you read what I said?

Warne must get credit for being good at home. Absolutely.

I never said he shouldn't. Just that you wouldn't use it to imply that he was better than any of those visiting spinners that weren't as good.

 

[Slifer]

Not compared to other spinners, didn't you read what I said?

I never said he shouldn't. Just that you wouldn't use it to imply that he was better than any of those visiting spinners that weren't as good.

Yeah I read what you wrote but I just also wanted to point out that in addition to doing better at home (in Australia) than most other spinners, he also did better away than most other spinners. That's because Warne is an amazing player. Horrible human being however.

If we want to compare this to Imran then they don't really compare. Why, because other fast bowlers also did well in Pakistan: Marshall, Walsh, Garner, etc.

 

[Slifer]

Again, I dont mind those ranking Ambrose ahead. But Ambrose doesnt have as complete record as say Marshall.

So for me the gap between him and Imran is small. Ambrose was more consistent his whole career and across countries but if you had to pick a bowler to ball on a flat wicket, my sense is Imran would be a better pick. Hence the gap is small.

I recall Ambrose bowling in Pakistan in 1997 and he simply went into autopilot mode as the wickets didnt offer him anything, whereas Walsh and Wasim did much better in the same series as they had the variety to adapt to the low bounce wickets. He was so ineffective he dropped out of the last test once the series was lost. He did well early in his career in Pakistan in 1990, but that was a rare low scoring series where the wickets were sporting and every pacer did well from both sides.

Yes, just one series, but that was basically Ambrose MO his career, keep it at a particular length in the corridor and wait for the batsman to bite. I personally dont think he would have done as well as Walsh had he played in the subcontinent as often.

I prefer bowlers with more tricks who can adapt.

I've heard people say the same about McGrath ie he'd put the ball in one spot and wait. That simply isn't true. As a matter of fact it's insulting. Generally. Ambrose was back of the length, but on wickets with more bounce and carry, he'd pitch it up eg Perth 1993. He also had as effective a Yorker as any one else. He mostly used it earlier in his career.

 

[Jayro]

How is it circular reasoning? Do you really think that bowling in Pakistan was harder for Imran than anywhere else? And if so why the difference in averages?

I remember during my early years of watching cricket in late eighties and early ninties how people use to say that they field thirteen players including the umpires who were never prudent about it either with the kind of decisions they used to dole out add with it the 'ART' they developed.

 

[subshakerz]

I've heard people say the same about McGrath ie he'd put the ball in one spot and wait. That simply isn't true. As a matter of fact it's insulting. Generally. Ambrose was back of the length, but on wickets with more bounce and carry, he'd pitch it up eg Perth 1993. He also had as effective a Yorker as any one else. He mostly used it earlier in his career.

Ambrose was faster and taller but nowhere near as crafty as McGrath as a bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose was a pretty one dimensional bowler compared to other ATGs, it is just that that dimension was spectacularly effective.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Ambrose was a pretty one dimensional bowler compared to other ATGs, it is just that that dimension was spectacularly effective.

Ambrose wanted to play basketball but his mom forced him to play cricket.
Reluctantly, he decided to bowl in a one dimensional manner in an effort to show his mom how much he hated cricket.

 

[Aritro]

Ambrose wanted to play basketball but his mom forced him to play cricket.
Reluctantly, he decided to bowl in a one dimensional manner in an effort to show his mom how much he hated cricket.

I passive-aggressively became an ATG basketball player to show my mum I'd rather play cricket, so I totally relate

 

[Slifer]

Ambrose wanted to play basketball but his mom forced him to play cricket.
Reluctantly, he decided to bowl in a one dimensional manner in an effort to show his mom how much he hated cricket.

Lol. Pretty much. Interesting how a one dimensional player ended up being more effective than his near contemporaries who had all the tricks up their sleeves (Wasim for example).

 

[Slifer]

Again, I dont mind those ranking Ambrose ahead. But Ambrose doesnt have as complete record as say Marshall.

So for me the gap between him and Imran is small. Ambrose was more consistent his whole career and across countries but if you had to pick a bowler to ball on a flat wicket, my sense is Imran would be a better pick. Hence the gap is small.

I recall Ambrose bowling in Pakistan in 1997 and he simply went into autopilot mode as the wickets didnt offer him anything, whereas Walsh and Wasim did much better in the same series as they had the variety to adapt to the low bounce wickets. He was so ineffective he dropped out of the last test once the series was lost. He did well early in his career in Pakistan in 1990, but that was a rare low scoring series where the wickets were sporting and every pacer did well from both sides.

Yes, just one series, but that was basically Ambrose MO his career, keep it at a particular length in the corridor and wait for the batsman to bite. I personally dont think he would have done as well as Walsh had he played in the subcontinent as often.

I prefer bowlers with more tricks who can adapt.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. He was effective vs a better Pakistan team in 1990 but that was due to more sporting wickets (in PAKISTAN) but somehow the wickets in 1997 changed and he was less effective because he was one dimensional?? You seriously can't make this stuff up...

Fwiw:

"his performance in taking one wicket in the two Test matches he played - he missed the third match with injury - urged Fazeer Mohammed, writing in Wisden , to describe Ambrose as "a shadow of his former self". Any danger that Ambrose might have retired after that series was thwarted when Brian Lara was appointed Caribbean captain and immediately spoke to Ambrose and Walsh to ask them to continue on the team."

 

[Gob]

Again, I dont mind those ranking Ambrose ahead. But Ambrose doesnt have as complete record as say Marshall.

So for me the gap between him and Imran is small. Ambrose was more consistent his whole career and across countries but if you had to pick a bowler to ball on a flat wicket, my sense is Imran would be a better pick. Hence the gap is small.

I recall Ambrose bowling in Pakistan in 1997 and he simply went into autopilot mode as the wickets didnt offer him anything, whereas Walsh and Wasim did much better in the same series as they had the variety to adapt to the low bounce wickets. He was so ineffective he dropped out of the last test once the series was lost. He did well early in his career in Pakistan in 1990, but that was a rare low scoring series where the wickets were sporting and every pacer did well from both sides.

Yes, just one series, but that was basically Ambrose MO his career, keep it at a particular length in the corridor and wait for the batsman to bite. I personally dont think he would have done as well as Walsh had he played in the subcontinent as often.

I prefer bowlers with more tricks who can adapt.

Other than Stuart Broad perhaps, not many fast bowlers have as many math winning performances in the fourth innings as Ambrose so he was anything but the bolded bit. He bowled fuller and targeted the stumps when the wicket went up and down and got a lot of lbs and bowled dismissals. Only glaring omission from Curtley's skill set was reverse swing from memory. In fact i can seldom recall him getting conventional swing

 

[h_hurricane]

I will gladly take a one dimensional bowler in my team averaging under 21. He also happens to be arguably the best quick I saw and my favorite bowler ever.

 

[trundler]

I will gladly take a one dimensional bowler in my team averaging under 21. He also happens to be arguably the best quick I saw and my favorite bowler ever.

I refuse to believe people who actively follow cricket and have done so for decades genuinely believe in some the arguments put forth in this thread.

 

[honestbharani]

I refuse to believe people who actively follow cricket and have done so for decades genuinely believe in some the arguments put forth in this thread.

You can post this on any thread in CC here at CW though.

 

[Slifer]

I refuse to believe people who actively follow cricket and have done so for decades genuinely believe in some the arguments put forth in this thread.

Agreed.

 

[trundler]

I refuse to believe people who actively follow cricket and have done so for decades genuinely believe in some the arguments put forth in this thread.

Says the bloke who once argued Walcott > Gilchrist out of boredom.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Ambrose didn’t have the subtle variation of some fast bowlers, but I’m a little surprised to see him described as as a line and length corridor bowler relying on batsman making mistakes.

 

[stephen]

Yeah Ambrose was vicious. He didn't wait for batsmen to make mistakes. He forced them to.