Ambrose vs Imran, who was better away from home?

[h_hurricane]

Ambrose the better test bowler as well as comfortably the better bowler away from home.

 

[OverratedSanity]

NZ - Too small

#NZsoSmall

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I don't have a problem with posters choosing Ambrose over Imran in away record, but to suggest it's not close it's ridiculous.

Once you factor in both average AND wicket tallies and series context, their records look like below:

Ambrose:
England - Great
Australia - Great
Pakistan - Okay
SA - Okay (single series)
India - N/A
NZ - Too small

Imran:
WI - Great
England - Good
Australia - Good
SL - Good (single series)
India - Okay
NZ - Okay

It's closer than people want to acknowledge.

I’d say records in both Aus and Eng(given context), are both between good-great, and I wouldn’t club Ambrose in Eng and Imran in WI in the same bracket, but overall I agree with the bigger picture you’re trying to set up here

 

[subshakerz]

I’d say records in both Aus and Eng(given context), are both between good-great, and I wouldn’t club Ambrose in Eng and Imran in WI in the same bracket, but overall I agree with the bigger picture you’re trying to set up here

I agree. Imran had some mighty performances especially in England, etc. But I wanted to give a bit of leeway to them

 

[Bolo.]

I’d say records in both Aus and Eng(given context), are both between good-great, and I wouldn’t club Ambrose in Eng and Imran in WI in the same bracket, but overall I agree with the bigger picture you’re trying to set up here

Think you might be overrating the performances in Aus. After 77, the batting lineups were pretty weak, and the decks were generally quick, with some of them cracking AFAIK.

 

[subshakerz]

Think you might be overrating the performances in Aus. After 77, the batting lineups were pretty weak, and the decks were generally quick, with some of them cracking AFAIK.

In 76 when he performed they had Walters and the Chappell bros, and in 81, it had Hughes, Chappell and Border.

 

[kyear2]

Think you might be overrating the performances in Aus. After 77, the batting lineups were pretty weak, and the decks were generally quick, with some of them cracking AFAIK.

In my mind he lost all credibility on this argument by consistently claiming that an average of 27 vs Australia was "brilliant" while simultaneously down playing Ambrose's performances vs England, and especially by saying that Pakistan doesn't count for Ambrose because basically, the pitches weren't flat enough. Tf.

 

[subshakerz]

In my mind he lost all credibility on this argument by consistently claiming that an average of 27 vs Australia was "brilliant" while simultaneously down playing Ambrose's performances vs England, and especially by saying that Pakistan doesn't count for Ambrose because basically, the pitches weren't flat enough. Tf.

Again, irrelevant to the actual main argument we are putting forward which you don't address.

 

[Bolo.]

In 76 when he performed they had Walters and the Chappell bros, and in 81, it had Hughes, Chappell and Border.

I'm not saying the batting was terrible (WSC series aside). But if you are picking guys like Ian Chappell (who I don't think actually played) and Hughes as the highlights of a bunch of series over a long time, it means there were some real rubbish bats.

It's not like modern Aus where their bats dominate at home. Border is the only top class bat who played most of Imran's series, and Imran has basically the same home batting average as him.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm not saying the batting was terrible (WSC series aside). But if you are picking guys like Ian Chappell (who I don't think actually played) and Hughes as the highlights of a bunch of series over a long time, it means there were some real rubbish bats.

It's not like modern Aus where their bats dominate at home. Border is the only top class bat who played most of Imran's series, and Imran has basically the same home batting average as him.

Greg Chappell? Doug Walters? I mean it wasn't a Packer-depleted lineup he did well against both times.

 

[Bolo.]

Greg Chappell? Doug Walters? I mean it wasn't a Packer-depleted lineup he did well against both times.

They were obviously quality, but who was he bowling at most of the time when they weren't playing? There were a ton of spuds who had little business in test teams, and not just at Packer times.

Anyway, I don't actually have a bone to pick with your assessment. I agree he was good in AUS. I just don't like calling him great. You have to be bowling with some level of combination of excellent homelineup and properly unfavorable conditions to get to great at that kind of average, and he didn't have either. His WPM makes him distinctly better than his average suggests in my eyes, but not by this much.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

They were obviously quality, but who was he bowling at most of the time when they weren't playing? There were a ton of spuds who had little business in test teams, and not just at Packer times.

Anyway, I don't actually have a bone to pick with your assessment. I agree he was good in AUS. I just don't like calling him great. You have to be bowling with some level of combination of excellent homelineup and properly unfavorable conditions to get to great at that kind of average, and he didn't have either. His WPM makes him distinctly better than his average suggests in my eyes, but not by this much.

He wasn’t great. He was between good and great, dude to a very good WPM at a reasonable average(better when you consider the context) and add to it the WSC performances, it is clear why it is more than good.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

In my mind he lost all credibility on this argument by consistently claiming that an average of 27 vs Australia was "brilliant" while simultaneously down playing Ambrose's performances vs England, and especially by saying that Pakistan doesn't count for Ambrose because basically, the pitches weren't flat enough. Tf.

It’s become quite clear that you want to wishfully think in a one dimensional manner here. How do Ambrose’ performances in Pak prove his record on SC like pitches, when the pitches in 1990 series weren’t merely not flat, but actively bowler friendly. Many posters have made this point prior to me. And average isn’t everything. An average of 27 is not brilliant. It is brilliant when accompanied with a WPM of 5+ and additional brilliant performance in WSC, all against good lineups. At his peak, he didn’t play there, when batting was at an all time low in mid 80s Aus. These are facts and context. It is reasonable if the context along with the averages isn’t personally enough for you and I can respect that for anyone. But that is no reason to attack my credibility, just because I don’t share the subjective view-point. The purpose on CW is explore issues and post our reasonings, and to change our view points when proved wrong(like I did regarding Steyn in Aus), or in close issues like this to simply move on and respect the view point of the other). Just cause you don’t like the facts and they don’t assemble in the same manner in your mind’s eye, like they do in mine, doesn’t mean I’m a fraud or something. I’m done with this sort of thinking and CW. Goodbye.

 

[subshakerz]

I’m done with this sort of thinking and CW. Goodbye.

Dang bro, don't go. Stick around please, you're one of the reasonable ones.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

It’s become quite clear that you want to wishfully think in a one dimensional manner here. How do Ambrose’ performances in Pak prove his record on SC like pitches, when the pitches in 1990 series weren’t merely not flat, but actively bowler friendly. Many posters have made this point prior to me. And average isn’t everything. An average of 27 is not brilliant. It is brilliant when accompanied with a WPM of 5+ and additional brilliant performance in WSC, all against good lineups. At his peak, he didn’t play there, when batting was at an all time low in mid 80s Aus. These are facts and context. It is reasonable if the context along with the averages isn’t personally enough for you and I can respect that for anyone. But that is no reason to attack my credibility, just because I don’t share the subjective view-point. The purpose on CW is explore issues and post our reasonings, and to change our view points when proved wrong(like I did regarding Steyn in Aus), or in close issues like this to simply move on and respect the view point of the other). Just cause you don’t like the facts and they don’t assemble in the same manner in your mind’s eye, like they do in mine, doesn’t mean I’m a fraud or something. I’m done with this sort of thinking and CW. Goodbye.

Nah don’t leave. You need to keep exposing Ambrose

 

[honestbharani]

It’s become quite clear that you want to wishfully think in a one dimensional manner here. How do Ambrose’ performances in Pak prove his record on SC like pitches, when the pitches in 1990 series weren’t merely not flat, but actively bowler friendly. Many posters have made this point prior to me. And average isn’t everything. An average of 27 is not brilliant. It is brilliant when accompanied with a WPM of 5+ and additional brilliant performance in WSC, all against good lineups. At his peak, he didn’t play there, when batting was at an all time low in mid 80s Aus. These are facts and context. It is reasonable if the context along with the averages isn’t personally enough for you and I can respect that for anyone. But that is no reason to attack my credibility, just because I don’t share the subjective view-point. The purpose on CW is explore issues and post our reasonings, and to change our view points when proved wrong(like I did regarding Steyn in Aus), or in close issues like this to simply move on and respect the view point of the other). Just cause you don’t like the facts and they don’t assemble in the same manner in your mind’s eye, like they do in mine, doesn’t mean I’m a fraud or something. I’m done with this sort of thinking and CW. Goodbye.

copy pasta?

 

[Slifer]

It’s become quite clear that you want to wishfully think in a one dimensional manner here. How do Ambrose’ performances in Pak prove his record on SC like pitches, when the pitches in 1990 series weren’t merely not flat, but actively bowler friendly. Many posters have made this point prior to me. And average isn’t everything. An average of 27 is not brilliant. It is brilliant when accompanied with a WPM of 5+ and additional brilliant performance in WSC, all against good lineups. At his peak, he didn’t play there, when batting was at an all time low in mid 80s Aus. These are facts and context. It is reasonable if the context along with the averages isn’t personally enough for you and I can respect that for anyone. But that is no reason to attack my credibility, just because I don’t share the subjective view-point. The purpose on CW is explore issues and post our reasonings, and to change our view points when proved wrong(like I did regarding Steyn in Aus), or in close issues like this to simply move on and respect the view point of the other). Just cause you don’t like the facts and they don’t assemble in the same manner in your mind’s eye, like they do in mine, doesn’t mean I’m a fraud or something. I’m done with this sort of thinking and CW. Goodbye.

Happy riddance. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Give Ambrose a bigger sample size in NZ and RSA and my money is on him demolishing both those teams. People are acting like he skipped series. No, he had literally one opportunity to tour both those places. Ditto Pakistan/Asia. People say Curtley lacked penetration later in his career; fair enough I won't cry over that but factually speaking, Imran was not better overall away than Ambrose on any metric: av, sr, wpm, econ.

 

[smash84]

Again, irrelevant to the actual main argument we are putting forward which you don't address.

Of course, nothing has changed in the 10 years since kyear2 joined. He will never address the main point you ask to be addressed.

@kyear2 , can you please, for once, address the point that is being argued?

 

[subshakerz]

Happy riddance. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Give Ambrose a bigger sample size in NZ and RSA and my money is on him demolishing both those teams. People are acting like he skipped series. No, he had literally one opportunity to tour both those places. Ditto Pakistan/Asia. People say Curtley lacked penetration later in his career; fair enough I won't cry over that but factually speaking, Imran was not better overall away than Ambrose on any metric: av, sr, wpm, econ.

Same cliches we heard for Lillee. 'Oh yeah, Lillee would have wrecked India'. You're judged by what you did, mate.

And no, he didnt lack penetration late in his career, it was half way through his career. And his small series haul samples are from that era.

And you are literally giving our point: he didn't have enough of a complete sample away from home to make his case.

You're whole argument is 'Look how great he did in Australia, I bet he would have done the same everywhere else.'

 

[kyear2]

Of course, nothing has changed in the 10 years since kyear2 joined. He will never address the main point you ask to be addressed.

@kyear2 , can you please, for once, address the point that is being argued?

Yes, first the insult then asked to answer the question.

Smali, the question was literally who performed better away from home, it wasn't who performed better in the SC, or on dead pitches in Pakistan.

Ambrose's record away from the Caribbean was better than Imran's, that's objectively true. Ambrose's record down under is among the best of anyone's anywhere and he destroyed England like no one else of the era. He didn't make the schedule, nor did he skip tours, where he played he dominated. The greatest challenge of his day was to beat Australia in Australia and he managed that and more. He played 5 matches in Pakistan, but according to some that wouldn't count, because the pitches were more helpful than usual. If that isn't moving the goal posts I don't know what is.
He didn't play in India, let's assume the worst case scenario and he failed, that's the only such country in which he did. Where's the issue?