Well done and I want to respond, not counter mind you... But it's 1 am and I want to to think through it properly.
I do believe there was the home ball tampering / umpiring, I also accept the point that it didn't help his teammates to the extent. But two points, how good would have he have been without them and his team mates, and quite frankly very few ever, were as good as him.
The reason I look so hard at his away record is because I'm not sure how much of his home record can be trusted.
As you also referenced, over 70% of the forum, including one of Imran's most fervent defenders, do believe Steyn was the better bowler. In such a contest or for such a prestigious honor, should't the better bowler get the benefit of the doubt? Especially in a team with literally the best batsmen, and best keepers batsman ever.
Yes the batting matters, nor even disputing that, but if you're facing the best of the best, shouldn't you go with your best bowlers if there's a clear distinction?
Of the three candidates for the spot.
If we're rating them by batting
Imran
Hadlee
Steyn
By bowling though
Hadlee
Steyn
Imran
No disrespect, no hate. Don't think the take is that behind the pale either.
_______________
I wanted to reply properly, while quoting my previous response.
I take it that you believe that Imran was the better bowler, a sentiment that is shared by
@Victor Ian and I believe
@subshakerz.
A large premise of the argument was longevity, but while he started his career quite early, it's not generally factored in when discussing his career, with emphasis primarily placed on the '80's when he emerged. So don't think that can be a contributing factor to rating him above Steyn. But that's subjective.
Peak, with the massive home / away disparity being mirrored even during his peak, it raises questions that I haven't been able to answer. Subz likes to reference that he was disadvantaged by having to bowl in such home conditions, but he was never as good, far less better in more helpful ones. So that basically takes that argument off the table.
I looked at the possibility that as he was so dependent on bowled and lbw dismissals, that in more bounce friendly conditions that the ball would carry over, but that would only apply for Australia and not even all of the pitches there, and that still leaves India and the WI. Not to mention the inability to adjust? He literally didn't average under 25 in any country besides England for which he also gets a pass for his first tour.
The ball tampering allegations were circulating even during the era, and the home umpiring ones (which even impacts on Miandad's legacy) were seen as contributing factors to his greatness there. I don't come up with it. I do conceded that as someone mentioned earlier, that his colleagues didn't benefit in the same way, and I acknowledge that it would have taken skill to take advantage of the ball, but it would appear that it did factor heavily as evidence by the disparity even during said peak.
Speaking of the WI,
@subshakerz and others reference the '88 tour. It excludes that Richards and Marshall both missed the first match, and that Richards (who was well past his best) and Marshall won the subsequent man of the match awards and that quite frankly, Richards apart the batting lineup was not the ATG juggernaut that it's being brought up to be. It's not what it was even in '83 / '84 and definely not from the last 70's to early '80's and not close to what Australia would shortly build. Viv was, as stated above, well past his best, Greenidge had dropped off the cliff and was the recipient of blind jokes, Haynes was good at best and the new alpha was Richardson, who at his best was a very good test batsman. The others were Hooper and Logie, so the first match it was basically Richardson (not an ATG by any means and co) Just because it was the WI, doesn't mean it was what they previously were. Yes it was a great performance, but in context it wasn't what some make it out to be. The overall record of 25 isn't quite comparable to other away records like Ambrose in Australia for example.
Now the initial purpose was for you and
@Victor Ian to tell me where I'm wrong and why he's better than Steyn.
The batting part of it doesn't feature for me if the bowling difference exists as it is, but yeah. I want to construct what for me is the perfect team, and squad and that's literally the only place in question. Well possibly Hammond v Lara for the reserve spot (extra bowling and perfect option for 1st), but think Lara was the better bat and his left handedness may prove beneficial in a top order of all righties. But I digress.
I want to be intellectually honest and say that I selected the best team possible, so yeah. Why am I wrong and Imran the better bowler over Steyn?
