Wasim Akram vs Dennis Lillee

[OverratedSanity]

Same team had Waqar who averaged 4.5 wpm
Imran 4.1
Even Saqlain averaged 4+Wpm
They didn’t change the fielders for each bowler
Poor fielding is a poor excuse

other fast bowlers have taken more wits at a better wpm avg
Not convinced by length of career either

Isn't WPI rather than probably a more accurate measure of wicket taking ability? Wasim actually has a higher WPI than bowlers like Ambrose. His WPM is lower presumably because he had a few injuries mid-match (for which you can mark him down I guess), or just didn't get to bowl for match situation reasons.

 

[Coronis]

Rod Marsh reckoned Lillee bowled too short to the tail.

Rod Marsh should help coach Australia’s current pacers clearly.

 

[subshakerz]

Just thought I'd re-post these wise words from 3 years ago (as nothing has changed)

What has changed is that I believe there are legitimate reasons for why Wasim's overall wicket tally is lower.

 

[subshakerz]

yup

It is not possible that the Pakistani fielders upped their standards when Akram and Waqar bowled together giving Akram good WPM numbers while playing in combo and started dropping catches when Akram played without Waqar making his wickets per test average drop significantly. And they could not have caught Imran's and Saqlain's catches in the beginning and end phases of Akram's career better than in Akram's bowling in those phased to kill Akram's WPM

Basically, blaming Pakistan's poor fielding as the reason for Akram's low WPM is downright stupid.

I dont need to look at other bowlers WPM to know that Pakistan had an extra horrible slip and fielding unit in the 90s which I saw myself, where you would expect at least a drop a game.

 

[Coronis]

Isn't WPI rather than probably a more accurate measure of wicket taking ability? Wasim actually has a higher WPI than bowlers like Ambrose. His WPM is lower presumably because he had a few injuries mid-match (for which you can mark him down I guess), or just didn't get to bowl for match situation reasons.

A stat that may or may not be relevant. Innings per match bowled.

McGrath 1.96
Roberts 1.91
Garner 1.91
Bumrah 1.91
Trueman 1.90
Lillee 1.89
Ashwin 1.89
Holding 1.88
Warne 1.88
Cummins 1.87
Pollock 1.87
Laker 1.87
Marshall 1.86
Davidson 1.86
Anderson 1.86
Lindwall 1.85
Barnes 1.85
Steyn 1.84
Rabada 1.83
Walsh 1.83
Ambrose 1.83
Verity 1.83
Grimmett 1.81
Donald 1.79
O’Reilly 1.78
Waqar 1.77
Hadlee 1.74
Wasim 1.74
Miller 1.73
Muralitharan 1.73
Tayfield 1.65
Imran 1.61

 

[Bolo.]

A stat that may or may not be relevant. Innings per match bowled.

McGrath 1.96
Roberts 1.91
Garner 1.91
Bumrah 1.91
Trueman 1.90
Lillee 1.89
Ashwin 1.89
Holding 1.88
Warne 1.88
Cummins 1.87
Pollock 1.87
Laker 1.87
Marshall 1.86
Davidson 1.86
Anderson 1.86
Lindwall 1.85
Barnes 1.85
Steyn 1.84
Rabada 1.83
Walsh 1.83
Ambrose 1.83
Verity 1.83
Grimmett 1.81
Donald 1.79
O’Reilly 1.78
Waqar 1.77
Hadlee 1.74
Wasim 1.74
Miller 1.73
Muralitharan 1.73
Tayfield 1.65
Imran 1.61

The top of the list is guys that had teams strong enough to have the opposition consistently batting twice. And they were either fit (Mcgrath most notably), or played for a team that rotated bowlers, which made them less likely to break down in the first innings.

Bottom is a mix of fitness concerns and teams that had trouble getting the opposition batting twice (team batting/bowling strength or batting conditions/era).

 

[subshakerz]

The top of the list is guys that had teams strong enough to have the opposition consistently batting twice. And they were either fit (Mcgrath most notably), or played for a team that rotated bowlers, which made them less likely to break down in the first innings.

Bottom is a mix of fitness concerns and teams that had trouble getting the opposition batting twice (team batting/bowling strength or batting conditions/era).

I don't recall Imran breaking down first innings like that. You are making them seem like Shoaib. Or Murali for that matter.

Why you said on team strength makes sense but that is hardly the fault of the bowlers nor should they be penalised if they literally don't get to bowl s often.

 

[Coronis]

I don't recall Imran breaking down first innings like that. You are making them seem like Shoaib. Or Murali for that matter.

Why you said on team strength makes sense but that is hardly the fault of the bowlers nor should they be penalised if they literally don't get to bowl s often.

I seem to recall Imran not bowling much in the tail end of his career. Pretty obvious imo that’s why his is low.

 

[Bolo.]

I don't recall Imran breaking down first innings like that. You are making them seem like Shoaib. Or Murali for that matter.

This list is the elite. Shoaib misses it because of his injury concerns. There's a scale in how heavy injury concerns were above him. And ya, Imran is pretty obvious. Not sure what you mean with Murali, but he and a couple of others are very much in the team had problems making the opposition bat twice category.

Why you said on team strength makes sense but that is hardly the fault of the bowlers nor should they be penalised if they literally don't get to bowl s often.

Cough cough. Kallis .

No, players shouldn't really be penalised for not getting to bowl as often in one sense. WPI innings might be a better measure than WPM. Workload is cumulative to a degree though. A guy taking 5 wickets in the only innings he bowls is doing less work than a guy who takes 2*4. We should expect the latter to be taking more strain, and his performance should be judged as such. There's also the problem of small innings counting, like bowing at a team that is only chasing a few.

Injuries also need to count against a bowler in this calculation. You generally do more damage by being unable to bowl than by bowling badly. I don't know how notable the impact of this is, but a number of the bottom guys are ones I associate more with injuries.

 

[Coronis]

Fun fact: If you pick both Kallis and Imran for the same amount of matches, Kallis will show up and bowl more often than Imran will, as would Sobers.

 

[subshakerz]

I seem to recall Imran not bowling much in the tail end of his career. Pretty obvious imo that’s why his is low.

Fair point.

This list is the elite. Shoaib misses it because of his injury concerns. There's a scale in how heavy injury concerns were above him. And ya, Imran is pretty obvious. Not sure what you mean with Murali, but he and a couple of others are very much in the team had problems making the opposition bat twice category.

Was that a problem for Murali?

Cough cough. Kallis .

Kallis bowled regularly enough though but less as his career progressed to save his batting.

Injuries also need to count against a bowler in this calculation. You generally do more damage by being unable to bowl than by bowling badly. I don't know how notable the impact of this is, but a number of the bottom guys are ones I associate more with injuries.

Sure just saying Imran didn't break down with injuries per se often.

 

[subshakerz]

Fun fact: If you pick both Kallis and Imran for the same amount of matches, Kallis will show up and bowl more often than Imran will, as would Sobers.

Sure based on Imran not bowling as much late career when Wasim and Waqar were there and playing as a pure bat.

 

[Coronis]

Sure based on Imran not bowling as much late career when Wasim and Waqar were there and playing as a pure bat.

Interesting how Kallis could still bowl effectively at the peak of his batting tho. Unlike Imran.

 

[subshakerz]

Interesting how Kallis could still bowl effectively at the peak of his batting tho. Unlike Imran.

Um, Imran averaged 44 with that bat in his bowling peak in the 80s and scored 5 of his 6 tons.

 

[Coronis]

Um, Imran averaged 44 with that bat in his bowling peak in the 80s and scored 5 of his 6 tons.

Oh so now its all of the 80’s. Okay. Unsurprisingly the 2 years in the 80’s he bowled poorly were his best years as a bat.

 

[subshakerz]

Oh so now its all of the 80’s. Okay. Unsurprisingly the 2 years in the 80’s he bowled poorly were his best years as a bat.

Well he averaged 19 in the entire decade with the ball.

Yes just conveniently ignore his batting in 82 and 83 when he was at his zenith as bowler.

The problem is you arent going to be this nitpicky for Kallis.

 

[Bolo.]

Fair point.



Was that a problem for Murali?


Kallis bowled regularly enough though but less as his career progressed to save his batting.


Sure just saying Imran didn't break down with injuries per se often.

What's the Murali question? I'd rate him above his WPM. Cos penalising players for lack of opportunity doesn't work. But below WPI. Cos being potentially good enough to do something isn't as good as actually doing it.

 

[Van_Sri]

Still better than that FRAUD Bumrah.

Hasn’t even taken a 7’fer yet.

Bumrah is better than Lillee as a Visitor : Bumrah took 158 Wickets @19.47 outside India and Lillee took 124 Wickets @24.28 outside Australia

 

[Van_Sri]

What has changed is that I believe there are legitimate reasons for why Wasim's overall wicket tally is lower.

I saw some matches discontinued because of Rain so Wickets per Innings is a better criteria to judge these players.

 

[sayon basak]

Bumrah is better than Lillee as a Visitor : Bumrah took 158 Wickets @19.47 outside India and Lillee took 124 Wickets @24.28 outside Australia.

What about Garner? I bet he's a better batsman away from home.