Wasim Akram vs Fred Trueman

[smash84]

while I am posting Wasim videos, might as well post this. Looked awesome when Wasim was upset, ha ha

 

[smash84]

and his peer rating was immense too

"Wasim Akram by a country mile..."

 

[h_hurricane]

Watching Wasim in the 90s, it is quite obvious that he suffered from the poor fielding unit around him. However, PFK is massively over-rating the impact if his average is adjusted by 3 runs. No bowler in modern era, not even Marshall has been good enough to average 18. Also, why just take his peak average of 21 ? Why ignore the other 8 years ?

Akram is a great bowler, arguably among the top 10 in history, unarguably in top 15, but he wasn't as good as Ambrose, Mcgrath, Hadlee, Marshall, Steyn and a few others.

 

[smash84]

Yeah, it's silly to drop his overall average down to 18 because of bad fielding

 

[nightprowler10]

Yeah while his average suffering due to fielding is a real thing, I would guess with great fielding his career average would've improved by maybe 1 run. No matter what, choosing to play with diabetes would've hurt his numbers. I remember looking it up once that he had taken 300+ wickets at 22.5ish before his diabetes diagnosis (I guessed timing based on when the news came out).

Obviously I love the guy and his career as is, and so many amazing moments came in those last few years, but imagine how CW would see him if he had good fielding support and he retired at the news of his diagnosis.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Yeah while his average suffering due to fielding is a real thing, I would guess with great fielding his career average would've improved by maybe 1 run.

If the difference between great fielding and bad fielding is 2 runs per innings.. Its negligible.. he shouldn't be complaining.

Just 18 more wickets, Akram's avg gets better by 1 run. And you can see in the above video,a single fielder missing 6 catches (+few runs).

 

[kyear2]

Trying to find moin khan dropping a dolly off the first ball of wasim, so yeah, wasim suffered quite a bit with terrible fielders

But why was that? Especially for the keepers, was there a greater priority placed on bating for the position?

I remember the days we had Courtney Browne and Junior Murry, we just had a serious pack of talent period.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Funny thing is, people blaming Akram for his less WPM, are usually Ambrose fans.

And they dont know Their Idol actually took less wicket per innings than Akram, despite far shorter career and better fielding support. Lol.

 

[ankitj]

@smash84 you have changed your position on Wasim Akram quite a bit. Recall back in the day you believed he gets overrated in tests (by fans outside CW at least)

 

[ankitj]

Yeah while his average suffering due to fielding is a real thing, I would guess with great fielding his career average would've improved by maybe 1 run. No matter what, choosing to play with diabetes would've hurt his numbers. I remember looking it up once that he had taken 300+ wickets at 22.5ish before his diabetes diagnosis (I guessed timing based on when the news came out).

Obviously I love the guy and his career as is, and so many amazing moments came in those last few years, but imagine how CW would see him if he had good fielding support and he retired at the news of his diagnosis.

More than his average, it's the fact that he picked 35% tailender wickets is what counts against him for mine. No one among the ATG pace bowlers have a bigger share of tail wickets and yet he averages nothing special among the elite pace bowlers.

 

[smash84]

But why was that? Especially for the keepers, was there a greater priority placed on bating for the position?

I remember the days we had Courtney Browne and Junior Murry, we just had a serious pack of talent period.

I think fielding standards in general dropped once Imran maybe because nobody was around to threaten them of dire consequences if they didn't perform up to par.

@smash84 you have changed your position on Wasim Akram quite a bit. Recall back in the day you believed he gets overrated in tests (by fans outside CW at least)

I still think he gets overrated by fans outside CW because they are thinking of his test and ODI exploits combined. That with the fact that he was a magician with the ball and gets stellar ratings by his peers (refer to Lara video above) clouds the fact that at the end of the day it's the output that matters (which is where he isn't up to the level of some of the other ATGs).

 

[ImpatientLime]

If the difference between great fielding and bad fielding is 2 runs per innings.. Its negligible.. he shouldn't be complaining.

Just 18 more wickets, Akram's avg gets better by 1 run. And you can see in the above video,a single fielder missing 6 catches (+few runs).

shall we apply this rhetoric to all bowlers in history? yeah pakistan's close catching wasn't great in wasim's time but he is not the only bowler to have a shed load of chances put down off his bowling.

 

[subshakerz]

To me the fielding is the hand you are dealt.

 

[kyear2]

Was was such a poor catcher allowed to stay on the field, far less in the slips

 

[trundler]

shall we apply this rhetoric to all bowlers in history? yeah pakistan's close catching wasn't great in wasim's time but he is not the only bowler to have a shed load of chances put down off his bowling.

I mean you can make poor fielding into an academic objection but this is what we're talking about here with Pakistan in the 90s:

 

[kyear2]

So I may be wrong, but this is my take on the situation.

PFK bemoans the fact that Akram didn't have great fielding support, but in other discussions, downplays the importance of it. It's stated that other countries had much better catching overall, and slip fielding specifically. But this doesn't occur in a vacuum and can be that other countries made catching, and again specifically slip catching a greater priority.
In the W.I, S.A and Australia etc it's a priority, or in the case of the W.I used to be, where an emphasis is placed on it. The cordon shouldn't me made up of the senior players or best batters, it's a specialist position, just as much as batting or bowling and should be paid as much as much attention and time to as the former disciplines.
You can't not place a priority in the area and then wonder why it was poor.
This may again be a over generalisation, but even among a fair amount of our SC posters, it's not a consideration when we are picking our "fantasy" teams, and that can be it isn't factored into the selection of your actual teams either. Mark Waugh and Hooper stuck around as much for their catching as much as for their batting potential. Make absolutely no sense creating all of those chances if they will hit the ground.

With regard to Akram's average, why should we adjust his average? Do we adjust Lillee's or Hadlee's average because they had helpful home pitches, should we adjust Sobers average up because he had a far greater bowling load than any other batsman in history? Tendulkar's for playing at home in India or Steyn for bowling In SA? This is all part of the hand dealt and every great player had their own challenges. Lillee and his back, Holding and multiple injuries, Donald's late start and could go on. Why should be adjust for it, especially since his team apparently never did?

Just my thoughts on the matter.

 

[subshakerz]

So I may be wrong, but this is my take on the situation.

PFK bemoans the fact that Akram didn't have great fielding support, but in other discussions, downplays the importance of it. It's stated that other countries had much better catching overall, and slip fielding specifically. But this doesn't occur in a vacuum and can be that other countries made catching, and again specifically slip catching a greater priority.
In the W.I, S.A and Australia etc it's a priority, or in the case of the W.I used to be, where an emphasis is placed on it. The cordon shouldn't me made up of the senior players or best batters, it's a specialist position, just as much as batting or bowling and should be paid as much as much attention and time to as the former disciplines.
You can't not place a priority in the area and then wonder why it was poor.
This may again be a over generalisation, but even among a fair amount of our SC posters, it's not a consideration when we are picking our "fantasy" teams, and that can be it isn't factored into the selection of your actual teams either. Mark Waugh and Hooper stuck around as much for their catching as much as for their batting potential. Make absolutely no sense creating all of those chances if they will hit the ground.

With regard to Akram's average, why should we adjust his average? Do we adjust Lillee's or Hadlee's average because they had helpful home pitches, should we adjust Sobers average up because he had a far greater bowling load than any other batsman in history? Tendulkar's for playing at home in India or Steyn for bowling In SA? This is all part of the hand dealt and every great player had their own challenges. Lillee and his back, Holding and multiple injuries, Donald's late start and could go on. Why should be adjust for it, especially since his team apparently never did?

Just my thoughts on the matter.

I agree, you judge the bowler based on what happened not hypotheticals. Personally, I do think if Wasim was playing for SA or England, he would have much better figures overall and not just due to fielding. But I cant say for certain, so Wasim should be judged as his record stands, which is still very good.

 

[honestbharani]

Ambrose > Wasim for me. I dont understand how the Windies I watched were actually better fielding support than Pak since mid 90s. I mean Windies keepers sucked balls, Kamran Akmal level balls till Jacobs was a regular.

Remember how Courtney Browne cost them a WC?

 

[Arachnodouche]

Decent in the field though. Lara, RR, ppl like Williams, Campbell, Arthurton, Adams, etc all athletic and reliable enough. Stats simply can't put a definitive number on runs leaked through slack fielding, let alone batsmen piling on the misery after a dropped catch.