Zaheer, Shami or Srinath

[Starfighter]

When I saw the thread title I was looking forward to seeing arguments as to how a bowler who averages 33 is equal to or better than one who averages 27. Wasn't disappointed.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Op be like :
Zaheer averages 100
Shami averages 10
But yeah their numbers are too close too call.

Lol, a difference of 5+ in bowling average isn't marginal, it is huge.

Zaheer was absolutely dreadful for half his career, Shami was always a good bowler.

Product of their time, though? Many people think Kumble and Ashwin aren't *THAT* far apart but Ashwin's numbers **** all over Kumble. And separately, the former two having to be the main man while Shami is part of an attack (another reason why Indians perhaps rate Murali, and Hadlee, that highly).

Srinath was talented and had some fantastic series/spells - but ultimately, his body and/or the system he was in didn't allow for him to progress beyond what he showed us. Maybe in another time, in another universe etc.

Zak was great for a few years and pretty crap for the rest of his time, but also bowled on some seriously flat pitches.

Shami has been brilliant, but also has been part of a proper attack that is absolutely relentless both home and away.

 

[cnerd123]

When I saw the thread title I was looking forward to seeing arguments as to how a bowler who averages 33 is equal to or better than one who averages 27. Wasn't disappointed.

do you rate Lohmann above Murali?

 

[Daemon]

Imagine if Shami has his off days and there’s no Ashwin, Bumrah, Ishant, Yadav etc to help keep the opposition in check.

Then imagine if we had no 5th bowling option like Jadeja to cover him.

All this on the flattest wickets.

It’s close and not as clear cut as stats suggest.

 

[honestbharani]

Imagine if Shami has his off days and there’s no Ashwin, Bumrah, Ishant, Yadav etc to help keep the opposition in check.

Then imagine if we had no 5th bowling option like Jadeja to cover him.

All this on the flattest wickets.

It’s close and not as clear cut as stats suggest.

Its almost as if cricket is a team game, isn't it? And bowling even more so in that, than batting.

 

[harsh.ag]

Srinath the best bowler of the three but achieved the least due to factors outside his control. However, one feels he didn't maximize the factors in his control either.

Shami has had the better career than Zaheer by a wide margin and I don't think Zaheer's peak makes up for it.

Srinath (barely)> Shami > Zaheer

 

[CodeOfWisden]

Shami has been brilliant, but also has been part of a proper attack that is absolutely relentless both home and away.

The problem with this argument is that Shami was also averaging below 30 even before Bumrah came in and this attack started shaping up.

Also he bowled on some of the flattest pattas in the tour of aus when our pace attack was as strong as teletubbies (according to Botham) and averaged 35, for perspective Ryan Harris averaged 34 that series.

Shami was good even before he was part of this pace attack actually he had lesser support than Zaheer did (before Bumrah came in).

 

[Starfighter]

do you rate Lohmann above Murali?

The difference between Zaheer's and Shami's eras and conditions is minuscule compared to that between Lohmann's and Murali's.

 

[vicleggie]

Srinath
Zaheer
Shami

 

[cnerd123]

The difference between Zaheer's and Shami's eras and conditions is minuscule compared to that between Lohmann's and Murali's.

Nah disagree. The team Shami came into is miles ahead than the one Zaheer came into w/regards to managing quick bowlers.

Zak's career turnaround only came when he played County Cricket and learnt from there how to manage his body and get the most out of skills.

Plus it's not Zak's fault that he kept getting picked while not being good enough due to the lack of options available. Shami has sat out of several Tests when not bowling well or when the conditions don't suit him. Because India has the depth Shami is not stuck toiling away and getting his figures ruined.

 

[subshakerz]

When I saw the thread title I was looking forward to seeing arguments as to how a bowler who averages 33 is equal to or better than one who averages 27. Wasn't disappointed.

Shamis record is actually more impressive than I would have assumed. Terrific at home and fairly consistent overseas. He is comfortably better at this point than Srinath. However, I still think he needs to play a few more years to solidly overtake Zaheer, since we all know that bowlers can drop off in their latter years. You would assume that if he is in the same conversation as Zaheer now that it makes sense to wait until his career is near over before making a final judgment.

I think for some of us posters it may seem disrespectful in a way to put Shami, who is not even the first or second best bowler in this lineup, over the best Indian pacers of the past. But it shows how India has progressed. In fact, even Inshant wouldnt make a horrible comparison since he has been worldclass the last few years.

 

[Migara]

Hmm Flintoff was edging 93 mph at his peak. Not sure Srinath was ever that pacey. 145 kph was about as fast as I saw him get, which is/was still obviously a rate of knots for any bowler let alone an Indian from the time.

Quicker than Donald at his pomp. Clocked at 154k.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The problem with this argument is that Shami was also averaging below 30 even before Bumrah came in and this attack started shaping up.

Also he bowled on some of the flattest pattas in the tour of aus when our pace attack was as strong as teletubbies (according to Botham) and averaged 35, for perspective Ryan Harris averaged 34 that series.

Shami was good even before he was part of this pace attack actually he had lesser support than Zaheer did (before Bumrah came in).

You're overall kinda right, but Shami was utterly dreadful on that Australia tour. Got a lot of lame declaration gift wickets iirc. Several jammy ones after conceding at 4rpo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Quicker than Donald at his pomp.

yeah I donot believe you

 

[subshakerz]

Nah disagree. The team Shami came into is miles ahead than the one Zaheer came into w/regards to managing quick bowlers.

Zak's career turnaround only came when he played County Cricket and learnt from there how to manage his body and get the most out of skills.

Plus it's not Zak's fault that he kept getting picked while not being good enough due to the lack of options available. Shami has sat out of several Tests when not bowling well or when the conditions don't suit him. Because India has the depth Shami is not stuck toiling away and getting his figures ruined.

I think you have a point that Shami has certain advantages. But it always gets tricky when playing the 'if' game with different era unless there is some clear factor you can point to for affecting their records.

 

[subshakerz]

Quicker than Donald at his pomp. Clocked at 154k.

Even Waqar after his back injury could occasionally crank it up to 90mph. But its not reflective of his average spell.

Srinath was like Wasim in the late 90s, generally fast medium but capable of taking it up in pace in short bursts.

 

[Migara]

yeah I donot believe you

You are insecure.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Damn. Brown Lightning

 

[subshakerz]

 

[Migara]

Even Waqar after his back injury could occasionally crank it up to 90mph. But its not reflective of his average spell.

Srinath was like Wasim in the late 90s, generally fast medium but capable of taking it up in pace in short bursts.

The spell he took 6/21 against SAF was proper serious express bowling. And he was the quickest in the game which had a certain Allan Donal playing, that too on a dust bowl.