• 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.

Ambrose vs Imran, who was better away from home?

Who was the better bowler away from home?


  • Total voters
    22

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
@HouHsiaoHsien You say "We can’t directly compare Imran and Ambrose country by country, but that doesn’t mean Imran gets an advantage for having a valid record across more countries." and that is a valid point. Outside Australia and England, Ambrose only had 12 away Tests while Imran's 25 Tests in those countries is only half of his away record. We both agree these are two top bowlers we are looking at and it would be wrong to denigrate either to make a point.
I congratulate you, as a relative newcomer, for your balanced and rational approach and the fact that, unlike some, you don't resort to personal insults in an attempt to 'win' a debate.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
I'll address your highlighted question first.
We are comparing two bowlers and their away from home records. Because of scheduling, Ambrose never played in India where Imran played 10 Tests. We are left with the fact that, apart from England and Australia, there are no common away countries that both have played any significant number of Tests in to make a valid comparison based on facts.
I grant you that Imran performed well on Ambrose's home turf while Ambrose's performances in Pakistan, although similar in raw average, is inferior in terms of WPM and overall effectiveness.
Of the other common countries played in (SL and NZ) the tests played by each in both countries are too few for a valid comparison. Ambrose played 1 and 2 Tests in these countries while Imran play 3 and 4.
Back to your question, Tests against England and Australia (34 by Ambrose and 25 by Imran) provide the only significant common ground for a valid comparison.
Great, thanks for addressing the question.

Here is the thing: lack of performance in certain countries doesn't mean we focus on only common countries, it means we favor those with more diversified performances.

This is the same reason we favor bowlers over Lillee who may have or may not have performed better in India/WI/Pakistan if given more more chances. We don't just focus on England/NZ where he performed. Applies equally to Ambrose.

Otherwise, please tell me why Lillee is docked but Ambrose is not.

You accuse me of having to 'resort to raw averages without looking into countries'. Well, I have looked into countries and have a better grasp of cricket stats than you could ever appreciate. I don't make my judgements purely on stats unless I haven't witnessed players in action and I have watched both over many years.
You say, "This argument is too dumb to address." Well at least I have taken the time and courtesy to address your argument even though I could dismiss it as "Irrelevant" as you so bluntly dismissed one of my factual points.
Raw averages is too blunt an argument. I am holding you to higher standards. But I apologize for offending you earlier.
 
Last edited:

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
Great, thanks for addressing the question.

Here is the thing: lack of performance in certain countries doesn't mean we focus on only common countries, it means we favor those with more diversified performances.

This is the same reason we favor bowlers over Lillee who may have or may not have performed better in India/WI/Pakistan if given more more chances. We don't just focus on England/NZ where he performed. Applies equally to Ambrose.

Otherwise, please tell me why Lillee is docked but Ambrose is not.


Raw averages is too blunt an argument. I am holding you to higher standards. But I apologize for offending you earlier.
Personally I don't downgrade either Lillee or Ambrose. Both are fine bowlers and their lack of games in certain countries shouldn't detract from their performances.
I am flattered that you expect high standards from me and accept your kind apology.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Personally I don't downgrade either Lillee or Ambrose. Both are fine bowlers and their lack of games in certain countries shouldn't detract from their performances.
I am flattered that you expect high standards from me and accept your kind apology.
Downgrade is only relative to other ATGs. If Lillee had success in India/Pakistan, he would have been a lock in the top five pacers for most posters here, not talking relative to yourself.

At least admit the same argument against Lillee can/should conceivably be applied to Ambrose.
 

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
Downgrade is only relative to other ATGs. If Lillee had success in India/Pakistan, he would have been a lock in the top five pacers for most posters here, not talking relative to yourself.

At least admit the same argument against Lillee can/should conceivably be applied to Ambrose.
I can't apply an argument when I don't agree with it. However, if posters have downgraded Lillee along those lines, they shouldn't overlook Ambrose's record when debating this topic.
 

kyear2

International Coach
It is unfair to Imran that the only grounds for comparison are in the counties where Ambrose did well. The fact Ambrose doesn’t have an away record worth considering outside Aus and Eng in any single country, is to his detriment, even if through no fault of his own. I’ll grant Ambrose is a better thab Imran in Aus and Eng, but the fact that Imran bowled enough in other countries as well is an advantage to him, and one of the things that builds an extensive record. So this is to Imran’s advantage and Curtly’s detriment. Curtly’s away record is lease than Imran’s away record cause Curtly rarely bowled in away countries outside Aus and Eng. Imran should get an advantage for having bowled in more countries away, atleast to have a more extensive record. And Imran has 18 wickets in 3 wickets in SL, that indicates a brilliant performance in a limited of tests. Ditto Nz, where his stats aren’t as great, but where he outperformed Richard Hadlee by a significant margin. The latter is enough for me to rate him as good in NZ. Ambrose’s record in certain countries is really empty, 5 wickets in 2 matches, 3 wickets in one. So I’ll sum it up as:
Imran: ATG in WI, brilliant(not great) in Aus and Eng, SL, good in Ind and Nz
Ambrose: ATG in Aus, great in Eng, good in SA(to some extent, but debatable, since for a small record, his WPM is too low to merit consideration unlike say Immy in SL)
So by virtue of Imran having had more of an extensive away record than the concentrated brilliance of Ambrose, I think he is better away. Ambrose is still a top 6 bowler of all time for me. We can’t directly compare Imran and Ambrose country by country, but that doesn’t mean Imran gets an advantage for having a valid record across more countries

I have 3 responses, so one at a time. First of all no one called you a fraud, period.

You do know not everyone has to agree with you, it's an aspect of Subz posting that isn't something you want to mimic, you can't bully everyone to see things from your perspective. You present your argument and if we choose to disagree, so be it.

The way I see it is this, of neither played tests at home and their entire career was based on their overseas record, Ambrose is still a top 10 ATG just like Lillee is (more on that later), but Imran doesn't. Look at the guys we have in our top 10's and tell me how many of them had an average over 25, none, regardless of their wpm, means they weren't efficient.
His record vs the WI considering, was very good. He went for runs, but he took wickets. Despite it apparently being much more helpful than Pakistan pitches and conditions, it still didn't approach his record against us at home, but that is something repeated in literally all of his performances away from home. He gets credit for this record but, considering the opposition, it should be the outlier. It isn't.
Before I go on, the adjectives I'm using are in relation to other ATGs not to average players. His record in England is good, similar to Hadlee's... doesn't come close to Marshall's, McGrath's or Ambrose's. And no, the team wasn't considerably worse nor that far apart in those 3 eras. You said anyone could have duplicated Ambrose's record in England, but none of the other top 10 ATGs from his era did. Give the man his due.
His record in India is poor, period. Yes the pitches were flat, they were no more flat than when Marshall and co visited. Again, ATG context. If we want to expand beyond such context, it was average to slightly above. Similar to Australia. If any bowler's average was 28, regardless of WPM, they don't get a mention in the top 10, far less among the top tier ATGs, that's a fact. There wasn't small smaller size or context, he had good performances, but he didn't perform well there. Even one of his best performances there, I believe 4 / 26 was vs the WSC depleted team, but I don't take that away because he pretty much didn't do much the remainder of the matches in that series.
We do not give credit for SL, they were the equivalent of Zim / Bang for Murali and Warne. He averaged 18 in SL and 14 vs them overall, Hadlee averaged 12 vs them. NZ is below the sample size we normally look at, so wouldn't go there.

So yes, Imran played in more countries, but out side of a very good performance vs the WI, in their pomp btw, for which he does receive credit (and the reason he's in my top 6 all time), none of them were great. He was good vs England, but that's it.

With regards to Ambrose, he played where we toured, yes he missed the tour to India, but he wasn't dodging, he was injured. South Africa, yes, below the 5 test threshold, but they were literally readmitted at that time, again, no dodging. But two points, no he wasn't as penetrative in his second half, but the man somehow managed to maintain that average, that's even more difficult to accomplish. He wanted to retire earlier, but Courtney etc requested that he continue on as long as possible, yes, dangling the 400 as his carrot. And no, that's not an excuse or an explanation, maintaining that average speaks for itself, that's not just miserly. And yes, he had a tendency to drag back the length, but that's why he fifth and not among the "big three", his strike rate wasn't the best, but in his day he was destructive. Second, we toured where they believed mattered and was marque. England was always the old enemy, and Australia was who was next, the one who would eventually dominate after us, it wasn't to protect him from anywhere or factored in how nerds in the internet would view his record 30 years later. He played who was in front of him and dominated them all away from home.

Oh, and btw..... His overseas record and schedule isn't too different, sorry, practically identical to Hadlee's. Are we docking him as well, removing him from his perch in the top 3 /7? Actually his may be a tad even worse because NZ was undoubtedly the most helpful of home conditions / pitches in his era.
Double digit tests in only 3 countries, including NZ (just like Ambrose) and below the threshold in WI and Pak ( just like SL & SA for Ambrose) and just 6 in India (Pakistan tests equivalent). Was his record also not well rounded enough?

Ambrose was better away from home than Imran was, that's not up for argument imho.
 
Last edited:

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
The way I see it is this, of neither played tests at home and their entire career was based on their overseas record, Ambrose is still a top 10 ATG just like Lillee is (more on that later), but Imran doen't. Look at the guys we have in our top 10's and tell me how many of them had an average over 25, regardless of their wom, means they weren't efficient.
Raw averages, bad argument.

His record in India is poor, period. Yes the pitches were flat, they were no more flat than when Marshall and co visited. Again, ATG context. If we want to expand beyond such context, it was average to slightly above. Similar to Australia. If any bowler's average was 28, regardless of WPM, they don't get a mention in the top 10, far less among the top tier ATGs, that's a fact. There wasn't small smaller size or context, he had good performances, but he didn't perform well there.
Why is Imran's India record poor and Ambrose's Pakistan record not?

Would you consider Steyn 'good' in Australia? And why do you give a pass to Steyns high averages in Australia but not Imran? Double standards?

We know. Because acknowledging Imran has a good record in Australia means by default he has a more wellrounded record overall, so you don't want to do that.

But two points, no he wasn't as penetrative in his second half, but the man somehow managed to maintain that average, that's even more difficult to accomplish. He wanted to retire earlier, but Courtney etc requested that he continue on as long as possible, yes, dangling the 400 as his carrot. And no, that's not an excuse or an explanation, maintaining that average speaks for itself, that's not just miserly. And yes, he had a tendency to drag back the length, but that's why he fifth and not among the "big three", his strike rate wasn't the best, but in his day he was destructive.
Again, dodging the argument. Why should a low average give a pass to less penetration, especially half a career? You never addressed that.

He played who was in front of him and dominated them all away from home.
In England and Australia only.

Oh, and btw..... His overseas record and schedule isn't too different, sorry, practically identical to Hadlee's.
Hadlee was much more penetrative though in India than Ambrose was in Pakistan.

Ambrose was better away from home than Imran was, that's not up for argument imho.
It's close and you are disingenuous for not admitting that.
 
Last edited:

kyear2

International Coach
Actually the reason these guys are salty is because their conventional wisdom has been exposed. When it's pointed out to them they can't use blind averages and look at actual wicket tallies, they either double down or reply with strawmans.

I take their non-answer as a sign of defeat.
After you brain rot / dumb / lazy and other comments it wasn't worth responding to you, because again, especially once Imran is concerned you revert to ad hominem attacks and start to badger, sorry bully persons to see things from your perspective. It's not an endearing trait. You've done this with Kallis and now Ambrose and I assume it's to one singular purpose, but I digress.
And also, just because someone doesn't respond in the way you want them to, didn't mean they didn't respond.

This entire argument started in another thread because I said that I would rate Ambrose ahead of Warne because ai rate my top 5 ahead of both spinners, to which you initially inquired then eventually took offence, that Imran wasn't also included. I did respond, but again, not to your liking and it devolved into this. I even said that with Ambrose it was shaky at best, and with Imran it was dependent on the day not set in stone, but even that wasn't good enough.

I rate Imran extremely high, top 6 actually, right below my top tier and likely above the next (Lillee, Donald, Garner, Wasim, Lindwall etc....), but even though that's my opinion, that's not enough for you because everyone should see Imran with the top 5.

As I've said before, I don't rank Imran in my top 5 because quite frankly his overseas record doesn't jive with his home one. Regardless of how flat (graveyard the exact term Smali uses) the home pitches supposedly were, even in much more helpful away conditions, his record vs every single team, is worse, even SL. That's isn't punishing him for being successful at home, far from it, I just exact than in more helpful conditions vs the same opponents he would at least match those performances. Not be a min of 6 points worse everywhere. Again, he had good performances away as well, the overall performance just wasn't there.

None of the other top bowlers have a home / away disparity of that amount, and while Steyn comes closest, we know why.

Not I have my (above board) explanations as to possibly why, but that doesn't take away from the fact that away from Pakistan, he just wasn't top tier ATG great, an average of 25 just sn't comparable to the other guys up there.

Now I'll get attacked and say I've been trying to drag down Imran for a decade, that's not remotely true, you constantly ask why, and I'm giving you my reasons. Those are just facts. And unlike you, who openly said that now that you've discovered what all of us have missed for years about Ambrose, that he no longer deserves to be among the top tier elite, and should be summarily demoted, I hold no such opinions with regards to Imran and acknowledge that he deserves his rating, which most persons have on the forum btw, that he's a top 6 to 8 (6th for me) bowler of all time and an absolute champion.
 

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
I have 3 responses, so one at a time. First of all no one called you a fraud, period.

You do know not everyone has to agree with you, it's an aspect of Subz posting that isn't something you want to mimic, you can't bully everyone to see things from your perspective. You present your argument and if we choose to disagree, so be it.

The way I see it is this, of neither played tests at home and their entire career was based on their overseas record, Ambrose is still a top 10 ATG just like Lillee is (more on that later), but Imran doen't. Look at the guys we have in our top 10's and tell me how many of them had an average over 25, regardless of their wom, means they weren't efficient.
His record vs the WI considering, was very good. He went for runs, but he took wickets. Despite it apparently being much more helpful than Pakistan pitches and conditions, it still didn't approach his record against us at home, but that is something repeated in literally all of his performances away from home. He gets credit for this record but, considering the opposition, it should be the outlier. It isn't.
Before I go on, the adjectives I'm using are in relation to other ATGs not to average players. His record in England is good, similar to Hadlee's... doesn't come close to Marshall's, McGrath's or Ambrose's. And no, the team wasn't considerably worse or far apart in those 3 eras. You said anyone could have duplicated Ambrose's record in England, none of the other top 10 ATGs from his era did. Give the man his due.
His record in India is poor, period. Yes the pitches were flat, they were no more flat than when Marshall and co visited. Again, ATG context. If we want to expand beyond such context, it was average to slightly above. Similar to Australia. If any bowler's average was 28, regardless of WPM, they don't get a mention in the top 10, far less among the top tier ATGs, that's a fact. There wasn't small smaller size or context, he had good performances, but he didn't perform well there. Even one of his best performances there, I believe 4 / 26 was vs the WSC depleted team, but I don't take that away because he pretty much didn't do much the remainder of the matches in that series.
We do not give credit for SL, they were the equivalent of Zim / Bang for Murali and Warne. He averaged 18 in SL and 14 vs them overall, Hadlee averaged 12 vs them. NZ is below the sample size we normally look at, so wouldn't go there.

So yes, Imran played in more countries, out side of a very good performance vs the WI, in their pomp btw, for which he does receive credit (and the reason he's in my top 6 all time), none of them were great. He was good vs England, but that's it.

With regards to Ambrose, he played where we toured, yes he missed the tour to India, but he wasn't dodging, he was injured. South Africa, yes, below the 5 test threshold, but they were literally readmitted at that time, again, no dodging. But two points, no he wasn't as penetrative in his second half, but the man somehow managed to maintain that average, that's even more difficult to accomplish. He wanted to retire earlier, but Courtney etc requested that he continue on as long as possible, yes, dangling the 400 as his carrot. And no, that's not an excuse or an explanation, maintaining that average speaks for itself, that's not just miserly. And yes, he had a tendency to drag back the length, but that's why he fifth and not among the "big three", his strike rate wasn't the best, but in his day he was destructive. Second, we toured where they believed mattered and was marque. England was always the old enemy, and Australia was who was next, the one who would eventually dominate after us, it wasn't to protect him from anywhere or factored in how nerds in the internet would view his record 30 years later. He played who was in front of him and dominated them all away from home.

Oh, and btw..... His overseas record and schedule isn't too different, sorry, practically identical to Hadlee's. Are we docking him as well, removing him from his perch in the top 3 /7? Actually his may be a tad even worse because NZ was undoubtedly the most helpful of home conditions / pitches in his era.
Double digit tests in only 3 countries, including NZ (just like Ambrose) and below the threshold in WI and Pak ( just like SL & SA for Ambrose) and just 6 in India (Pakistan tests equivalent). Was his record also not well rounded enough?

Ambrose was better away from home than Imran was, that's not up for argument imho.
Imran played an ATG lineup vs WI, and was a lone bowler in his first series. His WPM and SR are fantastic, it’s not only very good, it’s downright ATG.
 

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
An average of 28 on flat pitches is not poor, especially considering his first series there was very good. Overall it’s a good record. No one said Marshall=Imran in India.
 

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
I would say he was between good and great in Eng and Aus, given context. But you can choose to disagree. Ambrose’ lack of a proper record outside Eng and Aus is the biggest concern, and his record in the 1990 series vs Pak was like a record on SENA pitches. In SL he played one match. Overall his record in Pak is average.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
Imran played an ATG lineup vs WI, and was a lone bowler in his first series. His WPM and SR are fantastic, it’s not only very good, it’s downright ATG.
I don't have a problem with Imran Khan's WI record being ATG; but I can't see why you and Subs just can't comprehend that, maybe just maybe his record in Australia, England and India weren't that special. They were above average for sure, but really not spectacularly outstanding.....
 
Last edited:

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Imran played an ATG lineup vs WI, and was a lone bowler in his first series. His WPM and SR are fantastic, it’s not only very good, it’s downright ATG.
His game is clear:
- Downgrade Imran's WI record from clearly ATG to great
- Downgrade Imran's Australia record from good/very good to average
- Downgrade Imran's India record from average to poor
- Ignore Ambrose's less impactful small hauls in places like NZ and SA
- Ignore Ambrose's less impactful Pakistan record
- Having done that, just pretend it's a battle between Ambrose's in Aus/Eng and Imran with just WI
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
I don't have a problem with Imran Khan's WI record being ATG; but I can't see why you and Subs just can't comprehend that, maybe just maybe his record in Australia, England and India weren't that special. They were above sure, but really not spectacularly outstanding.....
I call Australia and England good records and India average. Am I wrong?
 

Slifer

International Captain
Downgrade is only relative to other ATGs. If Lillee had success in India/Pakistan, he would have been a lock in the top five pacers for most posters here, not talking relative to yourself.

At least admit the same argument against Lillee can/should conceivably be applied to Ambrose.
See, this is where you veer into irrational/assinine territory. Of their total tests, Ambrose played about 50% of his tests away vs 37% for Dennis. Most importantly, of the best teams of their times (Australia and WI respectively) Ambrose played 14 tests vs 1 away. In Asia, Lillee suffers from not just a limited sample size but very poor returns in that limited sample size. Ambrose on the other hand, even including the '97 horror show did much much better. Lol even if Ambrose played the one series in India in '94 (he missed through injury) you lot would still complain....
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
See, this is where you veer into irrational/assinine territory. Of their total tests, Ambrose played about 50% of his tests away vs 37% for Dennis. Most importantly, of the best teams of their times (Australia and WI respectively) Ambrose played 14 tests vs 1 away. In Asia, Lillee suffers from not just a limited sample size but very poor returns in that limited sample size. Ambrose on the other hand, even including the '97 horror show did much much better. Lol even if Ambrose played the one series in India in '94 (he missed through injury) you lot would still complain....
Is your argument that small series samples in countries for Ambrose and Lillee should be counted? Or like Kyear2 suggests they should be ignored if below 5 tests?
 

Top