Players who went up or down in your judgement after going through their records

[The Sean]

But didn't most of the Aussies averages drop over that period? Think someone showed similar for Harvey? Could be wrong

Harvey's average didn't really start to decline significantly until the second half of the 1950s. In the first half of the decade he was up and down against England but had three massive series against South Africa and West Indies, and was averaging over 61 coming into the 1956 Ashes tour. He declined consistently from that point forward.

 

[Coronis]

Harvey's average didn't really start to decline significantly until the second half of the 1950s. In the first half of the decade he was up and down against England but had three massive series against South Africa and West Indies, and was averaging over 61 coming into the 1956 Ashes tour. He declined consistently from that point forward.

Will say of course that Harvey was much younger than Morris - 5 or 6 years if I recall. Not debating about who was better but its natural Morris would decline sooner.

 

[shortpitched713]

But a relatively less high peak than Imran and Waqar.

Yes, obviously, but combined with his extra longevity I put him on exactly square footing with Imran. Waqar behind both.

 

[AndrewB]

On the bowlers to never take a ten wicket match haul, I mentioned that I thought Bob Willis was underrated. I think Botham gets more affection amongst the English/British public, but Willis was a better bowler for longer in his career. The only team that Willis didn't perform so well against was the Windies, but a) they were so good and b) he never actually played so many tests against them and got truly battered by Sir Viv in his final test, when he promptly retired when his knees had long since given up. Very good bowler generally and not just in England.

It was Holding who battered Willis in his final Test (hit him for 5 sixes), though the other West Indians joined in - one over to Haynes and Gomes went for 15, another to Gomes (13) and Richards (9) went for 22; he took 2-123 in 18 overs. But that was the only over he bowled to Richards in the match.

The Test in which Richards battered Willis was 4 years earlier, at Old Trafford: Richards hit him for 12 fours, and he ended up with figures of 14-1-99-1 (in an total of 260ao).

 

[subshakerz]

Yes, obviously, but combined with his extra longevity I put him on exactly square footing with Imran. Waqar behind both.

This is Wasim's career breakdown

Period	Tests	Wickets	Average		5WI/ 10WM
Till Dec 1989	29	94	28.18		5/ 1
Jan 1990 to Dec 1997	48	240	20.05		16/ 3
Jan 1998 onwards	27	80	28.96		4/ 1
Career	104	414	23.62		25/ 5

This is Imran's career breakdown

Period	Tests				Wickets	Average	5WI/ 10WM
Till Dec 1979	25				98	31.88	5/ 1
Jan 1980 to Dec 1988	48				236	17.77	18/ 5
Jan 1989 onwards	15				28	33.53	0/ 0
Overall	88				362	22.81	23/ 6

Both Wasim and Imran had comparable early career phases. Imran's peak was significantly better than Wasim especially as he played a few tests injured as a bowler. Wasim had a longer post-peak phase than Imran, and while much better as Imran was basically in his pure batting phase, was still below worldclass level.

So it goes down to what you rank a bowler superior over. Imran was better in his prime, more destructive, and has slightly better overall stats. He also has a higher portion of his career as a worldclass bowler than Wasim. I choose that over who did better late career.

For comparison, Waqar took 190 wickets @19 in 33 tests in his peak and 183@28 in 54 tests post-peak, so Waqar's had a much longer phase as below worldclass class level than both Wasim and Imran.

 

[shortpitched713]

Sure he wasn't world class anymore, but still very good. You underestimate the importance of having very good bowlers, especially pace bowlers, who tend to struggle with fitness and longevity. I rank that extra time served at a very good level to be equal to the better peak of Imran.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Did he already lose a poll to Fred recently? (curious since I wouldn’t be voting that way)

Wasim Akram vs Fred Trueman

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...

www.cricketweb.net

 

[subshakerz]

Sure he wasn't world class anymore, but still very good. You underestimate the importance of having very good bowlers, especially pace bowlers, who tend to struggle with fitness and longevity. I rank that extra time served at a very good level to be equal to the better peak of Imran.

That is a pretty curious position, peak phase is where you make the most impact of your career. Wasim's diabetes I believe started his late career dip earlier and he was still good 98 onwards, but lost his consistency and penetration.

But I don't think a dozen extra tests of Wasim in his late career makes him a better bowler overall than Imran, especially since a) until 1988 with his main bowling career, Imran was clearly superior on almost all fronts and b) Imran clearly stretched his career based on his batting ability.

 

[Chin Music]

It was Holding who battered Willis in his final Test (hit him for 5 sixes), though the other West Indians joined in - one over to Haynes and Gomes went for 15, another to Gomes (13) and Richards (9) went for 22; he took 2-123 in 18 overs. But that was the only over he bowled to Richards in the match.

The Test in which Richards battered Willis was 4 years earlier, at Old Trafford: Richards hit him for 12 fours, and he ended up with figures of 14-1-99-1 (in an total of 260ao).

Thanks for the clarification. I was going by my admittedly fading memory of 84. I can't say I remember the 1980 series, just a little too young to do so.

 

[shortpitched713]

That is a pretty curious position, peak phase is where you make the most impact of your career. Wasim's diabetes I believe started his late career dip earlier and he was still good 98 onwards, but lost his consistency and penetration.

But I don't think a dozen extra tests of Wasim in his late career makes him a better bowler overall than Imran, especially since a) until 1988 with his main bowling career, Imran was clearly superior on almost all fronts and b) Imran clearly stretched his career based on his batting ability.

I value longevity more for bowlers, and especially pace bowlers than I do for batsmen. It's a rare and more sought after skill. Sometimes your country just needs quality, hell even decent arms. Wasim was good throughout his career, and it was longer. I'm ceding that Imran's peak was better, but by how much is debatable.

On point b: What the hell's that got to do with who's a greater bowler?

 

[subshakerz]

I value longevity more for bowlers, and especially pace bowlers than I do for batsmen. It's a rare and more sought after skill. Sometimes your country just needs quality, hell even decent arms. Wasim was good throughout his career, and it was longer. I'm ceding that Imran's peak was better, but by how much is debatable.

On point b: What the hell's that got to do with who's a greater bowler?

I value longevity if you can maintain the same worldclass standards for longer, not if you fall below that and continue to play.

Imran and Wasim had pretty much similar career lengths, in fact Imran's was longer, but Wasim played a dozen more tests after his peak relative to Imran and was decent in them, I just don't see how that translates into a better bowler overall but it's your criteria so I will respect that.

Imran arguably had the greatest bowling peak ever. Wasim's peak wasn't nearly as destructive or consistent as Waqar's or Imran's though he was still great then and rated the best bowler in the world along with Ambrose.

As for point b), it was just to emphasize that Imran's poorer bowling returns in his late career were the product of him deciding to continue to stretch his career as a bat and part-time bowler.

 

[honestbharani]

FWIW, I tend to pick Wasim over Imran in my ATG XI coz with Sobers Gilchrist Warne batting 6,7,8, I feel I can go for the variety that Wasim brings over the slightly better bowling that Imran brings in.

 

[kyear2]

FWIW, I tend to pick Wasim over Imran in my ATG XI coz with Sobers Gilchrist Warne batting 6,7,8, I feel I can go for the variety that Wasim brings over the slightly better bowling that Imran brings in.

What is your bowling attack? I recall Ambrose in there, so Curtly, Shane, Wasim and?

 

[Silver Silva]

David Warner in white ball cricket went up by a big way .

Don't think he gets the plaudits he deserves..

Big game player , big match temperament..
Only Ponting has more ODI hundreds for Australia..

ODI World Cup winner and averages 62 in ODI World Cups

In the T20 WC that Australia won he averaged 48 at a SR of 146

 

[honestbharani]

What is your bowling attack? I recall Ambrose in there, so Curtly, Shane, Wasim and?

Steyn

 

[TheJediBrah]

David Warner in white ball cricket went up by a big way .

Don't think he gets the plaudits he deserves..

Big game player , big match temperament..
Only Ponting has more ODI hundreds for Australia..

ODI World Cup winner and averages 62 in ODI World Cups

In the T20 WC that Australia won he averaged 48 at a SR of 146

Big beneficiary of modern ODI bat-athons though. ODI openers averaging mid 40s aren't that rare these days.

I would still take a Gilchrist, M Waugh, Jayasuriya, Sachin (obviously) or Saeed Anwar over any of the modern technique-less flat-pitch bullies like Warner, Finch, Rohit, Bairstow, de Kock etc

 

[Silver Silva]

Big beneficiary of modern ODI bat-athons though. ODI openers averaging mid 40s aren't that rare these days.

I would still take a Gilchrist, M Waugh, Jayasuriya, Sachin (obviously) or Saeed Anwar over any of the modern technique-less flat-pitch bullies like Warner, Finch, Rohit, Bairstow, de Kock etc

Good for you brother

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Wasim is in that weird spot where he's overrated by the general public but underrated on CW. This is probably the only place on the internet he'd lose a poll to Fred Trueman.

Wasim v Hoggard would be interesting

 

[Fuller Pilch]

What is your bowling attack? I recall Ambrose in there, so Curtly, Shane, Wasim and?

Steyn

plus Sobers, Faulkner, Miller, Shakib,Watson, and Katich.

 

[honestbharani]

plus Sobers, Faulkner, Miller, Shakib,Watson, and Katich.

Yep.. unbeatable, really. Add Lara and Gilly in there as well. Maybe not Faulkner.