• 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 Dale Steyn

Who was the greater fast bowler?

  • Imran Khan

    Votes: 12 21.4%

  • Dale Steyn

    Votes: 44 78.6%
  • Total voters
    56
B

Bolo.

International Captain
Migara said:
Given Proctor's different action, it could be said it is Novelty that hasn't had chance to wear off.
Click to expand...
Pretty dubious contention. He wasnt a mystery spinner or anything, just a conventional quick with an an unusual action and a completely conventional spinner.

And the guys who he was playing against were not typically unfamiliar with him. He played a lot of games vs Aus (mostly as a spinner in WSC), and would have been playing county cricket with pretty much everyone else.
 
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
It’s very close between these two. Steyn has a superior WPM and SR. He also performed in an era of flat wickets. But that is neutralised by Imran’s amazing record on dead wickets at home. Imran has an amazing a home record as Steyn nearly, despite bowling on far less helpful wickets. Imran was also an ATG performer in WI, the best side of his era, whereas Steyn’s record in Aus isn’t that impressive. Overall Imran has a better home away record, since he was never as bad in any country as Steyn in Eng. Was mediocre in Aus and was decent to good in Ind and NZ, and magnificent in WI, Eng, SL(tho a minnow)and home. Steyn’s record is wanting in Eng, SL, UAE and was merely decent in Aus, NZ. So I chose Imran.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
In England, Imran and Steyn faced sides so far apart in quality and in such disparate conditions that any comparison on who was the better bowler in England is futile if you're just looking at their averages in England. Imran perhaps had greater control over the Dukes ball which Steyn struggled with at times but one guy bowled to the best English batting lineup in about 60 years and on roads whereas the other guy bowled to 2 decent batsmen and some nobodies on more normal English decks. Imran did contribute heavily to Pakistan's first series win in England with a 10fer in the only result on that tour which certainly adds to his legend but yeah, we're comparing one small apple to one small orange here. Samplesizelol.
 
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
trundler said:
In England, Imran and Steyn faced sides so far apart in quality and in such disparate conditions that any comparison on who was the better bowler in England is futile if you're just looking at their averages in England. Imran perhaps had greater control over the Dukes ball which Steyn struggled with at times but one guy bowled to the best English batting lineup in about 60 years and on roads whereas the other guy bowled to 2 decent batsmen and some nobodies on more normal English decks. Imran did contribute heavily to Pakistan's first series win in England with a 10fer in the only result on that tour which certainly adds to his legend but yeah, we're comparing one small apple to one small orange here. Samplesizelol.
Click to expand...
In that case, still Imran’s better home away record overall, and his performance vs the best side of his era makes him slightly better than Steyn for me. Also had the best short term peak for any bowler.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
HouHsiaoHsien said:
The truth Imran was at worst decent in all countries he played, whereas Steyn had one or two bogey countries.
Click to expand...
Imran usually played in longer series and so had more time to acclimatise. There's also just going to be more random variation in smaller samples. Steyn never played more than 7 tests in any one country. Imran played 8 or more virtually everywhere he played. It's not like Steyn did nothing in countries where he supposedly failed anyway. He still won his team matches just about everywhere he played. And he never looked out of sorts anywhere like Bumrah in NZ or Waqar in Australia. His worst average anywhere is 32. Just looks like you're looking at averages and going >30 = bad.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Imran:

- The greatest bowling peak ever
- Wonderful versus the greatest team of all time, WI, home and away
- Much more control than Steyn. Almost never got collared in his prime unlike Steyn who was often taken to the cleaners.
- More destructive than Steyn on his day, with two 8 fers and three 7 fers.
- Imran's record is even better when you discount those tests he played mainly as a bat.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
subshakerz said:
- Imran's record is even better when you discount those tests he played mainly as a bat.
Click to expand...
I've looked at this. Unfortunately he only has a few Tests with DNB towards the end of his career.

If he's bowling in a match, but mainly in the side as a batsman, how do you account for this? Seems utterly subjective.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
shortpitched713 said:
I've looked at this. Unfortunately he only has a few Tests with DNB towards the end of his career.

If he's bowling in a match, but mainly in the side as a batsman, how do you account for this? Seems utterly subjective.
Click to expand...
Yeah he also has a couple of tests mid career he played purely as a bat.

I agree it is hard to take into statistical account to what extent it impacted his bowling career by staying as a main bat except that it worsened his figures a bit and he would never have stayed as a bowler alone.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
trundler said:
Sounds a lot like discounting a middle order batsman's time spent opening. Why are you picking parts of his career to suit your agenda?
Click to expand...
To clarify, I am saying discount those tests where Imran didn't bowl and he played as a pure bat.

But to me, yes I don't really consider his bowling 1990 onwards as reflective of Imran the bowler since he would have 100 percent retired if he wasn't able to bat as he was well past his best. I don't begrudge those who use his overall figures though, that is fine, but I don't think it is controversial to say that when comparing a pure fast bowler with a fast bowler whose career was extended because of his batting, that some leeway can be given to the latter in evaluating his figures.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
But to me, yes I don't really consider his bowling 1990 onwards as reflective of Imran the bowler since he would have 100 percent retired if he wasn't able to bat as he was well past his best. I don't begrudge those who use his overall figures though, that is fine, but I don't think it is controversial to say that when comparing a pure fast bowler with a fast bowler whose career was extended because of his batting, that some leeway can be given to the latter in evaluating his figures.
Click to expand...
This makes perfect sense to me as he shouldn't be penalised for continuing to add value to his him as a batsman given he already had an ATG bowling career by then and he wouldn't have been a better bowler if he had retired in 1990 even though it affects his average but surely you see the contradiction between excepting Imran's batsmen years but judging everyone else on their overall average regardless of their career circumstances.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
trundler said:
This makes perfect sense to me as he shouldn't be penalised for continuing to add value to his him as a batsman given he already had an ATG bowling career by then and he wouldn't have been a better bowler if he had retired in 1990 even though it affects his average but surely you see the contradiction between excepting Imran's batsmen years but judging everyone else on their overall average regardless of their career circumstances.
Click to expand...
I think we are finding some common ground. I think looking are career circumstances is important.

However, for example, when Imran debuted in the early 70s, he wasn't really a full bat or bowler, he was nothing really, until he got stuck in county cricket and developed his game. But I think it is fair to count those figures of him and other cricketers as it is a formative stage in pretty much more player's careers. Same with a batsman who may start up the order like Laxman and then bat downward or the opposite like Steve Smith. Formative periods count.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top