Curtly Ambrose vs Wasim Akram

[PlayerComparisons]

Two best fast bowlers of the 90s. Who do you rate higher

 

[Zinzan]

Love them both, but Ambrose is my no. 3 pacer of all-time, with Akram no 6.

My order;

Marshall
Hadlee
Ambrose
McGrath
Steyn
Akram

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Akram is no.6 in my list with Ambrose 10.So,him.

Barnes
Marshall
Steyn
McGrath
Hadlee
Akram
Trueman
Khan
Lillee
Ambrose

Lindwall for #11.

 

[subshakerz]

At their peak, Wasim.

Overall, Ambrose.

 

[ankitj]

At their peak, Wasim.

Overall, Ambrose.

Peak ICC rating points as test bowlers:

Ambrose: 912
Akram: 830

 

[Coronis]

Love Wasim, and he might fit an ATG team better with his variation, but Curtly no question.

 

[trundler]

Going for the guy with less votes here just because I think it's close. The top 8ish fast bowlers are basically about as good as good as each other when all things are considered.

 

[Ali TT]

Loved watching both of them as a kid, especially Wasim in county cricket on TV. However, it was the Windies fast bowlers, Ambrose in particular, that first got me excited about the game so he edges it.

They'd both make my lifetime XI though

 

[smash84]

If it was a road, I would take Akram, but if any sort of bounce, Ambrose would run through any batting line up.

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

Ambrose because he was the best at bowling that good length outside off , gave you nothing

 

[honestbharani]

I think big Curt is the best fast bowler I have seen, so...

 

[a massive zebra]

At their peak, Wasim.

Overall, Ambrose.

At his peak, Ambrose would run through any top order and decimate the opposition (see his 7-1 vs Australia or 8/45 vs England), Wasim would not.

 

[CricAddict]

But unfair on Akram to get only 3 out of 23 votes. There is no such big gap between them.

 

[_00_deathscar]

But unfair on Akram to get only 3 out of 23 votes. There is no such big gap between them.

It doesn’t indicate there is a big gap though. It could just indicate that 23 people think Ambrose is ever so slightly (but clearly) better.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

23 people think Ambrose is ever so slightly (but clearly) better.

I think this is probably about right. Personally I think even 'clearly better' is pushing it. (I.e. I think they're essentially equal, but if either of them is ahead at all then yeah, I guess it'd probably be Ambrose?)

 

[smash84]

Yeah, it's not like it's a huge gap between them but ambrose slightly ahead

 

[subshakerz]

At his peak, Ambrose would run through any top order and decimate the opposition (see his 7-1 vs Australia or 8/45 vs England), Wasim would not.

That is true, Wasim never ran through a side.

 

[Coronis]

I wouldn’t say its a huge gap but definitely noticeable for me. Curtly has a much more well rounded record, and I think we’ve all seen that lower order stat regarding Wasim.

 

[trundler]

Wasim had a much longer career career, much worse fielding support and much tougher home decks so the statistical gap between them is pretty much entirely down to those things. Wasim was picked as a teen and had to learn on the job, something people consider for Tendulkar but not him. And still put in some epic performances against that ATG WI team. Akram played for 5 more years than Ambrose which is pretty substantial.

 

[Sunil1z]

Ambrose might have won this comprehensively (I also voted for him) , but if we have to select ATXI then most people would prefer Akram over Ambrose because they would expect McGrath to do the Ambrose role .