Ambrose vs Imran, who was better away from home?

[HouHsiaoHsien]

The pitches in '83 were prepared to nullify the west indies pacers and before then Marshall played in '78 as a wsc replacement well before he was ready and still ended with an average of 24 In India, take away that first series and see what he was capable of in India. And he averaged 21 as a visitor in Pakistan.... There's no contest there.

And Imran didn't have a great record in England, he had a good one. Marshall had a great record in England.

And yes, Imran had a good record in the WI, and that's the primary reason (also WSC) he's top 6 for me, but that's what it was very good, but not as good as what Ambrose did in Australia.

With regards to the last tour of Australia, he opened the bowling with the two W's in the team, as captain be opened the bowling with himself. And the last match was a simple rain out. Yes he had good performances in Australia, but he averaged 28 in Australia.

And again, if he did average 19 on the flat pitches of Pakistan, why didn't he approach that average anywhere else?

Nah Imran was great or at least v.good in Eng, ended with a sub 25 average despite playing his first series when he was a very raw cricketer. And the Aus point, the last series was played as a batter by him, so his record(at least for me is fantastic, not as good as Ambrose tho). And averages aren't everything. His WPM was much higher in WI, than Pat, for example, and as a bowler in Aus,(41 wickets in 8 wickets, before the last series). And I said Marshall is joint best with Imran in SC, I know how great he was. Imran was as good in WI and SL as in Pak. In Aus, he was fantastic like Steyn(not Ambrose level), at least very good in Eng( 42 wickets in 8 matches at sub 22, if you exclude his first series as a very very raw bowler), and good in NZ.

 

[kyear2]

Before I bow out of this thread, just know that basically what you two are trying to say is that yes Ambrose's numbers are good, but they not representative.

And oh, Imran's numbers are not that good, but here's why.

Every bowler ever had challenges, Imran had his injuries, so did Ambrose, he kept bowling and somehow "maintained" his numbers, but Imran's shouldn't count because.......

I also want to say I respect the hell out of Imran as a bowler, he's top 6 all time for me top 6, and yes he was very good in the Caribbean. The sole reason he's not top 5 for me is the performed better vs every single country at home by a distance than he did on the road. That's it, but the dude was immense.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Before I bow out of this thread, just know that basically what you two are trying to say is that yes Ambrose's numbers are good, but they not representative.

And oh, Imran's numbers are not that good, but here's why.

Every bowler ever had challenges, Imran had his injuries, so did Ambrose, he kept bowling and somehow "maintained" his numbers, but Imran's shouldn't count because.......

I also want to say I respect the hell out of Imran as a bowler, he's top 6 all time for me top 6, and yes he was very good in the Caribbean. The sole reason he's not top 5 for me is the performed better vs every single country at home by a distance than he did on the road. That's it, but the dude was immense.

Nah his performances vs WI and SL were as good away. And vs Aus and Eng were brilliant, especially the former in context. And just because he was that extra good in Pak, shouldn't take away from the fact that he was ATG in WI, great in SL, Aus, Eng, and outperformed someone like Richard Hadlee in NZ by far.

 

[kyear2]

Nah his performances vs WI and SL were as good away. And vs Aus and Eng were brilliant, especially the former in context. And just because he was that extra good in Pak, shouldn't take away from the fact that he was ATG in WI, great in SL, Aus, Eng, and outperformed someone like Richard Hadlee in NZ by far.

SL were minnows, WI was very good yes. Averaging 24 @ 62 in England isn't brilliant, averaging 28 @ 67 in Australia isn't brilliant, averaging 28 @ 61 in India isn't brilliant.

That the thing, he was an immense bowler, one of the greatest ever, there's no need to add the hyperbole and have revisionist history.

And I didn't say his performance in Pakistan takes away from anything. I'm asking if he averaged 19 on the flat pitches in Pakistan, and England, Australia and the WI were apparently so very helpful, why the large drop off? That's all?

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I have explained context. Imran's average in WI is higher only cause of over-bowling him in his initial tour. Otherwise his performance there is as good as his in Pak, and by anyone anywhere(consider quality faced). I have explained the context pf Aus and Eng. Eng he averages sub 25, despite the 4 matches initially played as a very very raw bowler. And the Aus last series. You are looking at stats without context. And Ind is goodish, not great

 

[kyear2]

I have explained context. Imran's average in WI is higher only cause of over-bowling him in his initial tour. Otherwise his performance there is as good as his in Pak, and by anyone anywhere(consider quality faced). I have explained the context pf Aus and Eng. Eng he averages sub 25, despite the 4 matches initially played as a very very raw bowler. And the Aus last series. You are looking at stats without context. And Ind is goodish, not great

Being over bowled in one tour isn't grounds for correction, that happens to every bowler, plus as I said it was very good.

there is no context for Australia, his average before that last tour was 27.2. Three matches doesn't effect ones average that much when you've played 13 in a country.

ANd playing as a raw bowler is something that every single bowler and batsman has dealt with to start their careers. Should we go through every cricketers resume and take away the first few and last few matches they played.
That last tour in Australia he opened the bowling every innings but one and even bowled the most overs among the pacers in a couple. He just wasn't at his peak, happened to every bowler ever, but again, even without it he averaged 27. Again, not brilliant.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Being over bowled in one tour isn't grounds for correction, that happens to every bowler, plus as I said it was very good.

there is no context for Australia, his average before that last tour was 27.2. Three matches doesn't effect ones average that much when you've played 13 in a country.

ANd playing as a raw bowler is something that every single bowler and batsman has dealt with to start their careers. Should we go through every cricketers resume and take away the first few and last few matches they played.
That last tour in Australia he opened the bowling every innings but one and even bowled the most overs among the pacers in a couple. He just wasn't at his peak, happened to every bowler ever, but again, even without it he averaged 27. Again, not brilliant.

Average of 27, WPM of 5+, and add to that WSC, further reduction. So great record. Average is not the only criteria. And his record in WI, has a great average considering opposition faced, and an insane WPM and SR. It’s not merely very good, just as good as Ambrose in Aus. Imran nearly won Pak a series in 1987, against a rampaging Viv. And the truth is more than other bowlers, the over-bowling thing applies to Imran specifically. Also Imran was a very inexperienced bowler in his 1974/5 in Eng and in the words of Kapil, not even a club level bowler. Post that he got 42 wickets in 8 tests@ an average of 22 odd, including first series win for Pak there. So great record in WI, Aus and Eng, although Ambrose in better in Aus and Eng

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

For Imran, he wasn’t merely poor in the sense of being a debutant, but unusually bad. You can check what Kapil said about him

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Whatever you say, Ambrose has lack of a good record in SC(I have expanded upon this million times by now).

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Imran for me, is v.great at home and in WI(averaging 25 doesn’t mean he’s any less), great in Aus, SL and Eng, good in NZ and decent in Ind. Ambrose is v.great in Aus, at home, great(greater than Imran I’ll grant) in Eng. his records in SL, SA ans NZ are too small to extrapolate anything, and just praise them cause of low averages.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

All this context applies with special force to Imran’s case

 

[subshakerz]

SL were minnows, WI was very good yes. Averaging 24 @ 62 in England isn't brilliant, averaging 28 @ 67 in Australia isn't brilliant, averaging 28 @ 61 in India isn't brilliant.

Within context, those are actually good figures

Ambrose has little returns to show in Pak, NZ, SL and SA. Never played in India. His entire career is based on friendly away pitches in Australia, England and then slower ones at home, where he wasn't even that penetrative.

And I didn't say his performance in Pakistan takes away from anything. I'm asking if he averaged 19 on the flat pitches in Pakistan, and England, Australia and the WI were apparently so very helpful, why the large drop off? That's all?

My God, you're still repeating this debunked point. Major SC pacers from Waqar, Kapil, Srinath to Vaas tend to do much better at home because they adapted their skills there.

Just want to point out that you never bothered to actually address my point about Ambrose's low WPM in so many countries and series across his career.

 

[subshakerz]

Whatever you say, Ambrose has lack of a good record in SC(I have expanded upon this million times by now).

He doesn't want to address an obvious fact. Instead, he will either pretend it is a good record or suggest SC is not important.

 

[Slifer]

I don't see where there is even a debate, Ambrose has a stellar record outside the WI by whatever measure you want to make up and Imran's is decidedly behind. Who cares if he doesn't have an extensive cv in Asia, the end all and be all team of his time was Australia and he excelled there and everywhere else he played; much more so than Imran did.

 

[Slifer]

Again Imran's performance in WI is better than Ambrose anywhere except him in Aus. Imran's average there is marginally pulled down because of being over-bowled in his first series. Also he has a WPM go 6 there, and strikes at 45. Also despite Imran averaging 28 in Australia, it is pulled down by his last series, where he was playing as a batter more(otherwise 40 wickets in 8 matches + WSC record). Plus Imran also averages under 25 in Eng. Also Imran's average is good for NZ. He outperformed Hadlee by far in those tests. Ambrose' performance in Pak is nowhere close to Imran in Wi. Looking at pure averages is very misleading.

Outside their respective home countries Ambrose has a much better average, SR ,wpm and econ than Imran. So it's not just averages. As a matter of fact, Ambrose's away record is up there with any fast bowler who's taken over 200 wkts.

 

[peterhrt]

Imran attended school and university in England and played most of his cricket there. It was as much his home as Pakistan.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Outside their respective home countries Ambrose has a much better average, SR ,wpm and econ than Imran. So it's not just averages. As a matter of fact, Ambrose's away record is up there with any fast bowler who's taken over 200 wkts.

But Ambrose barely bowled at all in SC conditions(I have explained about the 1990 series in Pak) and his record in NZ and SA are based on 3 or 2 matches where he has a good average and very poor WPM. We can’t conclude anything from the latter. Hence his record isn’t as complete,. Imran was ATG in WI, brilliant in Eng, brilliant in Aus, SL, good in NZ and decent in Ind. Ambrose was ATG in Aus, brilliant in Eng(more than Imran), but more than that where does he have a great record.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I don't see where there is even a debate, Ambrose has a stellar record outside the WI by whatever measure you want to make up and Imran's is decidedly behind. Who cares if he doesn't have an extensive cv in Asia, the end all and be all team of his time was Australia and he excelled there and everywhere else he played; much more so than Imran did.

Just read my breakdown. Outside of Aus and Eng, Ambrose has tiny records of 5 wickets in 2 matches or 3 wickets in one match at good averages in away countries. Can we really conclude anything from that. And his average of 25.2 in Pak is mediocre given that majority of his wickets were in the 1990 series playing on fast bowler favouring pitches. Imran on the other hand, was ATG in WI, brilliant in Aus, Eng, goodish in Ind, NZ(only 4 matches, but he outperformed Hadlee by a lot). So Ambrose’s away record is incomplete

 

[subshakerz]

Just read my breakdown. Outside of Aus and Eng, Ambrose has tiny records of 5 wickets in 2 matches or 3 wickets in one match at good averages in away countries. Can we really conclude anything from that. And his average of 25.2 in Pak is mediocre given that majority of his wickets were in the 1990 series playing on fast bowler favouring pitches. Imran on the other hand, was ATG in WI, brilliant in Aus, Eng, goodish in Ind, NZ(only 4 matches, but he outperformed Hadlee by a lot). So Ambrose’s away record is incomplete

Don't bother. These posters have already made their mind and won't look at the actual wicket tallies.

 

[subshakerz]

Outside their respective home countries Ambrose has a much better average, SR ,wpm and econ than Imran. So it's not just averages. As a matter of fact, Ambrose's away record is up there with any fast bowler who's taken over 200 wkts.

Except he doesn't have a record or sample worth speaking of outside of Aus/Eng.

I don't see where there is even a debate, Ambrose has a stellar record outside the WI by whatever measure you want to make up and Imran's is decidedly behind. Who cares if he doesn't have an extensive cv in Asia, the end all and be all team of his time was Australia and he excelled there and everywhere else he played; much more so than Imran did.

He didn't really. His record outside Aus/Eng is incomplete and just 36 wickets in 12 games.