Wasim Akram vs Fred Trueman

[h_hurricane]

1988-2000 Akram better

Now
1985-2000
Ambrose 98 tests, 179 innings, 405 wickets
20.99 avg, 2.3 ER, 54.5 SR
22 x 5, 3 x 10

Akram 98 tests, 171 innings, 407 wickets
22.98 avg, 2.59 ER, 53.1 SR

Still Akram more impressive.
2 wickets more in 8 innings less, despite bigger competition
More 10 wickets and five wicket hauls
Better SR
Longevity

Ambrose better in avg and ER, due to various reasons discussed already.

And if there is any ATG bowler to be blamed for low WPM its Ambrose.

Assuming you think Akram had better bowling support, you also agree that Ambrose's average needs to adjusted downwards(19,18,17 or even 15) because of worse bowling support ? Should work both ways isn't it ?

I also see that you have removed 6 tests from Akram in which he took only 7 wickets. Kudos for that.

Another factor which isn't discussed so far is Ambrose not having a world class spinner at the other end ? Whom did he have for support ? Hooper, Harper, Perry ? With Saqlain or Mushy at the other end, it is easier for the fast bowlers to get a breather. Makes life easy as far as spell management goes. Can't emphasize this more.

I would admit though, that I wouldn't have brought it up if not for your insistence in only bringing all the factors that disadvantaged Akram but none which disadvantaged Ambrose.

 

[Migara]

Comparing overall bowlers averages in those countries to show which of them are better for bowling is not the best metric. It is not because of better bowling conditions that produced Wasim, Waqar, Imran, and Shoaib in Pakistan and not in Sri Lanka. Rather, its the opposite, Pakistan had better bowlers who excelled in otherwise poor pace bowling conditions.

Wasim in Pakistan against SL 23.2
Waqar 25.6

Hadlee, Southee, Schultz co had much better conditions to bowl at. But Pakistan and Indian seamers found Lankan conditions much helpful for fast bowling than theirs.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[kyear2]

oh by the way isn't it weird that kyear downplays fielding in the context of Wasim and Pak but puts much emphasis on it for his AT XIs?

So do I put too much focus on it for the AT XI's?

I figure Marshall, McGrath and co should have some decent support so they wouldn't experience what Wasim did ??‍? Can't have the other team's Bradman being dropped on 10 and going on to score and double ton.

But seriously, I try to get at least 2 good slip fielders per team. The best catcher normally goes into 2nd slip and have an above average guy at 1st. If I can squeeze in a great option for third without sacrificing the batting, then where's the downside.
Considering how many persons are coming at me about this though, I should find more support for stronger cordons in Red's exercise going forward.

 

[h_hurricane]

On the ignored guy, some great Trueman wickets.

4:27, wtf was that ball ! Would have done his competitor in this thread proud.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Assuming you think Akram had better bowling support, you also agree that Ambrose's average needs to adjusted downwards(19,18,17 or even 15) because of worse bowling support ? Should work both ways isn't it ?

I also see that you have removed 6 tests from Akram in which he took only 7 wickets. Kudos for that.

Another factor which isn't discussed so far is Ambrose not having a world class spinner at the other end ? Whom did he have for support ? Hooper, Harper, Perry ? With Saqlain or Mushy at the other end, it is easier for the fast bowlers to get a breather. Makes life easy as far as spell management goes. Can't emphasize this more.

I would admit though, that I wouldn't have brought it up if not for your insistence in only bringing all the factors that disadvantaged Akram but none which disadvantaged Ambrose.

Those 6 tests happened after Ambrose retirement.

Forget about Akram, Ambrose's WPM is very low compared to any ATG. And there is no excuse for that.
Good support from Walsh
No big competition for wickets.
Medium length career.

Still, only 405 wickets from 179 innings.

 

[nightprowler10]

On the ignored guy, some great Trueman wickets.

4:27, wtf was that ball ! Would have done his competitor in this thread proud.

Not a single dropped catch.

 

[honestbharani]

Not a single dropped catch.

Coz they cared.

 

[kyear2]

The level of petty ?

 

[kyear2]

Trueman seems to have won this by a somewhat healthy margin.

Strictly ranked in a vacuum, I believe Trueman is better, but from a wider perspective Wasim brings more to the table. The left arm variety, reverse swing and handy lower order batting all add to which ever team is fortunate enough to count him among their ranks.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

On the ignored guy, some great Trueman wickets.

4:27, wtf was that ball ! Would have done his competitor in this thread proud.

??

Greatest bowler after
Barnes, Akram, Hadlee, Marshall
Murali, Lillee, Steyn, Mcgrath and Warne.

 

[subshakerz]

Thus far from what I gather from Cricketweb

Marshall > McGrath
McGrath > Hadlee
Hadlee > Steyn
Steyn and Ambrose > Imran
Imran > Lillee
Lillee and Trueman > Wasim

Almost gives you a sense of who the top ten is.

 

[kyear2]

Basically yeah.

Only names missing are Donald, Garner, Holding etc. But yeah.

I find it hard to rate 5 to 10 as they are quite close in my mind.
But probably Lillee, Trueman, Imran, Donald, Garner / Wasim.

And Davidson, Holding, Lindwall, Waqar just missing out.

 

[subshakerz]

Basically yeah.

Only names missing are Donald, Garner, Holding etc. But yeah.

I find it hard to rate 5 to 10 as they are quite close in my mind.
But probably Lillee, Trueman, Imran, Donald, Garner / Wasim.

And Davidson, Holding, Lindwall, Waqar just missing out.

Has Donald vs Wasim been done? I think Donald came ahead of Garner, yes?

 

[Kirkut]

Except it was a 13 year career…

Ambrose was so good that his entire career was basically a peak

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ambrose was so good that his entire career was basically a peak

Just For us.

For the vast Majority,
Ambrose career = Akram peak

It looks like most of CW members hate Ambrose.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Thus far from what I gather from Cricketweb

Marshall > McGrath
McGrath > Hadlee
Hadlee > Steyn
Steyn and Ambrose > Imran
Imran > Lillee
Lillee and Trueman > Wasim

Almost gives you a sense of who the top ten is.

What if they make comebacks and ruin career stats? ( except Marshall and Trueman )

 

[Kirkut]

Assuming you think Akram had better bowling support, you also agree that Ambrose's average needs to adjusted downwards(19,18,17 or even 15) because of worse bowling support ? Should work both ways isn't it ?

I also see that you have removed 6 tests from Akram in which he took only 7 wickets. Kudos for that.

Another factor which isn't discussed so far is Ambrose not having a world class spinner at the other end ? Whom did he have for support ? Hooper, Harper, Perry ? With Saqlain or Mushy at the other end, it is easier for the fast bowlers to get a breather. Makes life easy as far as spell management goes. Can't emphasize this more.

I would admit though, that I wouldn't have brought it up if not for your insistence in only bringing all the factors that disadvantaged Akram but none which disadvantaged Ambrose.

Let's ignore all the analysis for a while and pay attention to their bowling as we watched it. Akram like Steyn got hammered for fours on a bad day because of him being a swing bowler and pitching it up, Ambrose on a bad day went wicketless but he gave so little room outside off stump that rotating the strike itself was hard.

 

[subshakerz]

Let's ignore all the analysis for a while and pay attention to their bowling as we watched it. Akram like Steyn got hammered for fours on a bad day because of him being a swing bowler and pitching it up, Ambrose on a bad day went wicketless but he gave so little room outside off stump that rotating the strike itself was hard.

Every bowler could be hammered on a bad day. But Wasim was relatively tight. Steyn was more like Waqar.

 

[akilana]

Akram and Waqar played in the 90s.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Akram and Waqar played in the 90s.

Scoop..!