• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

Imran or Ambrose (Test)?


  • Total voters
    54

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
I rate Ambrose extremely highly ... especially after the West Indies 92/93 tour down under.

"Ambrose according to Tony Cozier writing in Wisden, was often unlucky when he bowled, although he took five for 66 in the first Test. In the final two Tests, he took 19 wickets. In the fourth he took ten wickets, including six for 74 in the first innings; in the second innings, he took three wickets in 19 deliveries and the West Indies won the match by one run. According to Cozier, the captains of both teams, Richie Richardson and Allan Border, "paid tribute to the man who made the result possible: Ambrose consolidated his reputation as the world's leading bowler". On the first day of the decisive final Test, Ambrose took seven wickets at the cost of one run from 32 deliveries and finished with figures of seven for 25. Cozier described it as "one of Test cricket's most devastating spells". West Indies won by an innings and Ambrose was named man of the series, having taken 33 wickets to equal the record in an Australia-West Indies Test series. He topped the West Indian bowling averages with an average of 16.42. Cozier described Ambrose's performance as "instrumental in winning [the series]" and his bowling as "flawless".

In the one-day tournament, Ambrose took 18 wickets at 13.38. He took eight wickets in the two-match final—both games were won by the West Indies. In the first final, he took five for 32, driven to bowl with more hostility when the Australian batsman Dean Jones asked him to remove his white wristbands while bowling. He followed up with three for 26 in the second match to be named player of the finals."



I fully agree with Cozier's comments and I can't recall any fast bowler having such a devastating impact over an extended tour that included both Tests and ODI's.
 
Last edited:

Kirkut

International Regular
Imran and Ambrose were roughly the same pace. In the case of Imran it was late swing that did batsmen, and the control he had over swing. Just like Ambrose who had mastery on line and length, and movement off the wicket.

And having said than Imran was not a midget and used to bowl some searing short stuff as well.
I wasn't calling Imran short, he's definitely more skiddy compared to Ambrose, while Marshall was even more skiddy than Imran.

Ambrose was not about all out pace while Imran at his peak was as quick as Holding.
 

Gob

International Coach
Imran and Ambrose were roughly the same pace. In the case of Imran it was late swing that did batsmen, and the control he had over swing. Just like Ambrose who had mastery on line and length, and movement off the wicket.

And having said than Imran was not a midget and used to bowl some searing short stuff as well.
Heard Imran was line and length medium pacer early on but started swinging after moving to UK. Right call too as Pakistan is not the place for genuine swingers
 

bagapath

International Captain
At their respective peaks, Imran (81/82) was, perhaps, a tad faster than Ambrose (91/92), Lillee (75/76) and Garner (82/83) and was closer to the Holding (76/77), Marshall (84/85) and Roberts (75/76) league; this is purely in terms of pace.
 

Migara

International Coach
At their respective peaks, Imran (81/82) was, perhaps, a tad faster than Ambrose (91/92), Lillee (75/76) and Garner (82/83) and was closer to the Holding (76/77), Marshall (84/85) and Roberts (75/76) league; this is purely in terms of pace.
In terms of performance others are not even comparable to that of Imran and Marshall at their peaks.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
See there in is the problem, you're using one series to make a point which imo isn't really valid. Why? Because that wasn't the only series he played in Pakistan (as you already pointed out). He was outstanding in the 1990 series where the wickets were just as unhelpful and he was fully fit. Even Mervyn Dillon did better than Amby in the '97 series. That's because Amby was not fully fit in 1997. You tried to make the point that the wickets in 1990 were more helpful, sorry I don't buy that.

Additionally, idk where people get this notion that Ambrose struggled on flat wickets. Throughout his career the WI traditionally played tests at 5 main grounds. Of those the ARG and Bourda were by far the flattest. Below is Ambrose's record at those grounds:

You might pick Imran on flat wickets but for me, I'm picking Ambrose for anywhere in the world that isn't Pakistan (even there his record is still very very good).
Is there any evidence he wasn't fit for the two tests he played?
 

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
In terms of performance others are not even comparable to that of Imran and Marshall at their peaks.
Can't entirely agree. It depends how you define a 'peak'. I posted a piece about Ambrose at his best and could do something similar with a number of great quicks. I'll concede Marshall was in a class of his own but others have matched Imran when at the top of their game.
 

CricAddict

Cricketer Of The Year
While Ambrose is slightly the better bowler, in a battle of almost equals, if the player is much better in another discipline, we will have to rate that person higher. So Imran>Ambrose.

It is easier to practice and perfect one discipline in the nets compared to two.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Peak Ambrose > Peak McGrath, but overall McGrath was a more canny and versatile bowler.
McGrath didn't really deviate in quality at all during his career, outside of maybe the first few years that I didn't see I guess. He was still just as good in 2007 as he was in 1999.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
While Ambrose is slightly the better bowler, in a battle of almost equals, if the player is much better in another discipline, we will have to rate that person higher. So Imran>Ambrose.

It is easier to practice and perfect one discipline in the nets compared to two.
True but I thought OP was only referring to the bowling comparison in which case Ambrose > Imran for me.
 

CricAddict

Cricketer Of The Year
True but I thought OP was only referring to the bowling comparison in which case Ambrose > Imran for me.
I am referring to bowling too. I agree it is a big if but what I am saying is, if Imran didn't have to focus on excelling in another discipline as well, he could have even more perfected his bowling in the nets and would have been a better bowler than Ambrose by a slight margin.

I agree it is all ifs and buts but this is my take.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I am referring to bowling too. I agree it is a big if but what I am saying is, if Imran didn't have to focus on excelling in another discipline as well, he could have even more perfected his bowling in the nets and would have been a better bowler than Ambrose by a slight margin.

I agree it is all ifs and buts but this is my take.
Fair enough opinion but I feel it is always intellectually dishonest to rate ifs and buts. I have tended to come around to just rating careers and as pure bowlers alone, I feel Ambrose had the better career and achievements. Talent, quality and others subjectives can sometimes cloud the judgement too much.
 

Migara

International Coach
Can't entirely agree. It depends how you define a 'peak'. I posted a piece about Ambrose at his best and could do something similar with a number of great quicks. I'll concede Marshall was in a class of his own but others have matched Imran when at the top of their game.
Imran at his peak (that is about 35+ test matches), averaged sub 18. 1982 took 62 wickets at 13.3 as well. That is a proper peak I suppose.
 

Top