Wasim Akram vs Dennis Lillee

[subshakerz]

Even though I opted for Wasim, I am still split between him and Lillee.

Wasim with more limited success but across more countries and conditions.

Lillee with more penetrative success but in familiar conditions.

Wasim better with the old ball, Lillee with the new ball. Wasim with more variety, Lillee with more tenacity.

You can make a case for both.

 

[Qlder]

Even though I opted for Wasim, I am still split between him and Lillee.

Wasim with more limited success but across more countries and conditions.

Lillee with more penetrative success but in familiar conditions.

Wasim better with the old ball, Lillee with the new ball. Wasim with more variety, Lillee with more tenacity.

You can make a case for both.

So vote Lillee like you did 3 years ago...it's the right thing to do

 

[subshakerz]

So vote Lillee like you did 3 years ago...it's the right thing to do

I'm not sure. I think I underestimated Akram then. I think it's far closer.

 

[Randomfan]

Lillee away against the top 5 teams during his career: Avg 24.3 & SR in 50s

Wasim away against the top 5 teams during his career: Avg 26.9 & SR in 60s





....




It was not some unsually tough time to bowl in Aus, Pak, SA, WI and Ind during Wasim's career to him have away avg 27 an SR in 60s.

His peers had away figures in same counties like,

Ambrose Avg 21 SR 51
Mcgrath avg 23 SR 55
Gillespie Avg 23 SR 53
Donald Avg 25 SR 54
Bishop Avg 24 SR 51
....
...
Wasim Avg 27 SR 61

Lillee was not outperformed by his peers by any significant margin in any metric.

Between these two, I will take Lillee. I have not seen Lillee but just going by output here.

 

[Randomfan]

I did notice that Lillee had not played much in Ind/Pak. So that counts against him. Having said that,

We can speculate that his peers would have outperformed Lillee by some margin if he had played in Asia. But for Wasim, we don't need to speculate. Wasim and his peers played in all kinds of conditions at the same time and many peers outperformed Wasim by some margin in den of top sides during his era.

I think it comes down to what you think about Lillee based on seeing him live. If you think Lillee would have averaged 30 in India and Pakistan then his output would have been similar to Wasim away against top sides. If Lillee would have averaged 35-40 in Ind/Pak with a large sample size then his output would have been lower than Wasim. I did not see Lillee so not have any views on that. For Wasim, we don't need to imagine. We have his results against his peer group.

Why did Lillee play so few games in Ind/Pak?

 

[Johan]

Why did Lillee play so few games in Ind/Pak?

He went to Pakistan once and the pitches were complete roads, like Pakistan genuinely said that they would use a specific pitch if Lillee was playing and a specific one if Lillee wasn't playing. Australia only went to India once during Lillee's career in 1977 and he was playing World Series Cricket at the time.

 

[subshakerz]

I switched back to Lillee.

 

[Randomfan]

He went to Pakistan once and the pitches were complete roads, like Pakistan genuinely said that they would use a specific pitch if Lillee was playing and a specific one if Lillee wasn't playing. Australia only went to India once during Lillee's career in 1977 and he was playing World Series Cricket at the time.

Oh, that's really bad to change pitch just to counter one pacer. Not to that extreme, but oppositions tried to do at times against Steyn.

PCB did have tailormade pitch to counter Aus pacers recently where Cummins did well. I think pitches in 89 series Ind-Pak was also super dead otherwise I can't imgine weak India drawing series with 4 tests in Pakistan when Pakistan had a few gun pacers. I guess, flatish is fine but on totally dead pitches it's unfair to judge anyone.

It would have been good to have Lillee in India/Pakistan on normal pitches and see what he could do. We can only speculate and it's a better specualtion coming from fans who saw Lillee live.

 

[Van_Sri]

Wasim Akram in Pakistan : vs Australia took 14 Wickets @30.14, vs South Africa took 6 Wickets @19, vs West Indies took 44 Wickets @16, vs India took 18 Wickets @30.61, vs England took 4 Wickets @56.25, vs New Zealand took 10 Wickets @16.2, vs Sri Lanka took 28 Wickets @23, vs Zimbabwe took 30 Wickets @18.23. Conclusion : Did not play much with Strong Teams of his Era at Home to come to a better conclusion.

 

[Van_Sri]

Dennis Lillee in Australia : vs England took 71 Wickets @21.59, vs West Indies took 55 Wickets @25.34, vs Pakistan took 68 Wickets @27.32, vs India took 21 Wickets @21.52, vs New Zealand took 16 Wickets @15.31. Dennis Lillee in England and New Zealand : 118 Wickets @20.92. Dennis Lillee in South Asia and West Indies : 6 Wickets @90.33. Conclusion : Dennis Lillee was Very Consistent in Conditions that suited his Bowling but it will remain a Question if he could have really adapted well in other conditions ?

 

[MartinB]

One of the reason for Wasim to have low Wicket per match compared to Lillee is that he used to wait for the ball to become old and used to take wickets once the ball was reverse swinging.

That's a bit like say he was a condition dependent bowler

Even though I opted for Wasim, I am still split between him and Lillee.

Wasim with more limited success but across more countries and conditions.

Lillee with more penetrative success but in familiar conditions.

Wasim better with the old ball, Lillee with the new ball. Wasim with more variety, Lillee with more tenacity.

You can make a case for both.

Lillee is different to most fast in that he had multiple styles. An example I would give is the centenary Test against England in 1977 at Melbourne. The wicket in this match started off under prepared and very lively. The wicket got flatter and turned into a road.

In the first inning Lillee bowled 13 (8 ball overs) took 6 for 26, classic fast bowler.
In the second inning on the road, Lillee bowled off a Warne length run-up at no great pace, relying on Cutting (or spinning the Ball), changes of pace etc. He took 5 for 134 (34 8 ball overs). In the second innings, Lillee bowled more overs than the other two fast bowlers did between them.

In this match Lillee was Styne like in the first innings and Kumble/Warne like in the second innings. These different style's give Lillee a high WPM and over count at the expense of average and strike rate. He also won Australia quite a few games by doing this.

Bob Willis once described Lillee's Leg cutter as more of a fast leg-spinner than a true leg cutter, He used his wrist to impart spin on the ball.

Akram played in a 5 man bowling attack. On any given day in a 5 man attack, 4 bowlers do most of the bowling but it is a different 4 from day.
In 3 pacemen/1 spinner, you have bowler no matter whether conditions suite you or not.

Using a 5 man attack a bowler will get a bette

• should get a better average
• have a lower

 

[subshakerz]

Lillee is different to most fast in that he had multiple styles. An example I would give is the centenary Test against England in 1977 at Melbourne. The wicket in this match started off under prepared and very lively. The wicket got flatter and turned into a road.

In the first inning Lillee bowled 13 (8 ball overs) took 6 for 26, classic fast bowler.
In the second inning on the road, Lillee bowled off a Warne length run-up at no great pace, relying on Cutting (or spinning the Ball), changes of pace etc. He took 5 for 134 (34 8 ball overs). In the second innings, Lillee bowled more overs than the other two fast bowlers did between them.

In this match Lillee was Styne like in the first innings and Kumble/Warne like in the second innings. These different style's give Lillee a high WPM and over count at the expense of average and strike rate. He also won Australia quite a few games by doing this.

Bob Willis once described Lillee's Leg cutter as more of a fast leg-spinner than a true leg cutter, He used his wrist to impart spin on the ball.

Lillee no doubt had those attributes but he wasn't perfect. I believe even Ian Chappell said he struggled to dismiss the tail and lacked a good yorker, Akram however had all the tools though I would say Lillee had more determination.

Akram played in a 5 man bowling attack. On any given day in a 5 man attack, 4 bowlers do most of the bowling but it is a different 4 from day.
In 3 pacemen/1 spinner, you have bowler no matter whether conditions suite you or not.

Using a 5 man attack a bowler will get a bette

• should get a better average
• have a lower

I don't think Akram played in a 5 man attack regularly at all. It was usually four bowlers plus a part timer like all teams. Which five bowlers are you talking about? And it's not like Lillee had poor bowling support.

 

[Van_Sri]

Dennis Lillee 355 Test Cricket Victims at Each Batting Position : 1st - 45, 2nd - 42, 3rd - 42, 4th - 38, 5th - 27, 6th - 31, 7th - 33, 8th - 36, 9th - 24, 10th - 25, 11th - 12. Dennis Lillee took 129 Wickets of Openers and No 3 Batsmen Combined. 96 Wickets of No 4,5,6 Batsmen. 45+42+42+38+27+31+33+36+24+25+12=355

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Lillee away against the top 5 teams during his career: Avg 24.3 & SR in 50s

Wasim away against the top 5 teams during his career: Avg 26.9 & SR in 60s


View attachment 44471


....


View attachment 44473

It was not some unsually tough time to bowl in Aus, Pak, SA, WI and Ind during Wasim's career to him have away avg 27 an SR in 60s.

His peers had away figures in same counties like,

Ambrose Avg 21 SR 51
Mcgrath avg 23 SR 55
Gillespie Avg 23 SR 53
Donald Avg 25 SR 54
Bishop Avg 24 SR 51
....
...
Wasim Avg 27 SR 61

Lillee was not outperformed by his peers by any significant margin in any metric.

Between these two, I will take Lillee. I have not seen Lillee but just going by output here.

Lillee played in 6 countries
Averaged less than 25 in 3
Australia 24, England 21, NZ 23

Then Srilanka 36, Pakistan 101, WI - infinity

Akram Played in 10 countries, averaged less than 25 in 5

Australia 24 , NZ 17, Pakistan 22, Srilanka 20, BAN 17
Everywhere else less than 29 except SA where he averaged 39.

He could have averaged less than 25 everywhere ( except SA) with proper fielding support. Also he played 5 years more than Lillee.

 

[kyear2]

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.

Really dude?

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

You really don't see the hypocrisy or lack of self awareness in that statement do you.

 

[subshakerz]

Really dude?



You really don't see the hypocrisy or lack of self awareness in that statement do you.

Why don't you spell it out.

 

[ankitj]

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

Murali at close to bottom on the list yet took 6wpm over 133 tests!

 

[kyear2]

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

You keep speaking of production and not just averages when it comes to Kallis. For the entire duration of of the 80's while Imran was averaging 44 with the bat, he contributed 2430 runs from 54 matches.

So yeah, let's take a look at his production during the 80's.

Imran Khan: 53 matches, 2430 runs @ 44.18 with 5 hundreds. He contributed 45 runs per game.

You keep saying that Kallis's production and workload wasn't on par with 3rd and 4th bowlers. So let's look at some contemporaries for Imran and his batting.

Let's start with his teammate.

Javed Miandad: 76 matches, 5642 runs @ 54.77 with 16 hundreds. He contributed 74 runs per game.

Ok Javed was a great batsman at home, let's lower the comp a bit.

Mohammad Azharuddin: 27 matches, 1799 runs @ 48.62 with 6 hundreds. He contributed 66 runs per game.

So in half the games that Imran played, he had almost the same amount of runs and the same amount of hundreds.

Ok, but as Immy was a 44 avg level batsman, let compare him with Azhar during Azhar's overlap in the 80's.

Imran: 29 matches, 1254 runs @ 43.00 with 3 hundreds. He contributed 43 runs per match.

Ok, even Azhar is too high a target, David Gower. I mean they averaged about the same in the 80's so one would expect them to be about the same quality as batsmen right? Imran actually averaged even more than him during the decade.

Gower: 89 matches 6196 runs @ 42.43 with 12 hundreds. He contributed 69 runs per match.

You consistently pick at Kallis's production while saying Imran was practically a middle order batsman. He was not.

Imran Khan's secondary skill production was analogous and very comparable to that of Kallis's. For the decade of the 80's Imran Khan was the 28th leading run scorer. For the decade of the 2000's Kallis was the 17th leading wicket taker. This doesn't even factor in Kallis's high quality value of wicket. So yeah, Imran is a little ahead in primary skill, but they were very similar in terms of secondary.

And for the actual love of God, stop saying Imran and his output was comparable to Sobers. When Sobers retired he was the leading run scorer in test cricket, I believe a top 7 wicket taker and top 3 in catches. The output of secondary discipline isn't remotely close.

 

[subshakerz]

You keep speaking of production and not just averages when it comes to Kallis. For the entire duration of of the 80's while Imran was averaging 44 with the bat, he contributed 2430 runs from 54 matches.

So yeah, let's take a look at his production during the 80's.

Imran Khan: 53 matches, 2430 runs @ 44.18 with 5 hundreds. He contributed 45 runs per game.

So now you switch to RPM. Why not RPI?

Javed Miandad: 76 matches, 5642 runs @ 54.77 with 16 hundreds. He contributed 74 runs per game.

Ok Javed was a great batsman at home, let's lower the comp a bit.

Mohammad Azharuddin: 27 matches, 1799 runs @ 48.62 with 6 hundreds. He contributed 66 runs per game.

So in half the games that Imran played, he had almost the same amount of runs and the same amount of hundreds.

Ok, but as Immy was a 44 avg level batsman, let compare him with Azhar during Azhar's overlap in the 80's.

Imran: 29 matches, 1254 runs @ 43.00 with 3 hundreds. He contributed 43 runs per match.

Ok, even Azhar is too high a target, David Gower. I mean they averaged about the same in the 80's so one would expect them to be about the same quality as batsmen right? Imran actually averaged even more than him during the decade.

Gower: 89 matches 6196 runs @ 42.43 with 12 hundreds. He contributed 69 runs per match.

You are comparing a 6/7 lower bat with among the best middle order bats of the decade and are expecting their RPM to be the same?

You consistently pick at Kallis's production while saying Imran was practically a middle order batsman. He was not.

Dude you don't have to lie. I never said he was a middle order bat. I said bare minimum specialist level 6/7 lower order bat.

Imran Khan's secondary skill production was analogous and very comparable to that of Kallis's. For the decade of the 80's Imran Khan was the 28th leading run scorer. For the decade of the 2000's Kallis was the 17th leading wicket taker. This doesn't even factor in Kallis's high quality value of wicket. So yeah, Imran is a little ahead in primary skill, but they were very similar in terms of secondary.

No they aren't. Looks like you ignored the entire RPI to wicket conversion chat we had in the other thread. Kallis didn't come close to Imran.

And for the actual love of God, stop saying Imran and his output was comparable to Sobers. When Sobers retired he was the leading run scorer in test cricket, I believe a top 7 wicket taker and top 3 in catches. The output of secondary discipline isn't remotely close.

I'm sorry you are so hurt by Imran being seen as the natural next to Sobers by many.

 

[Bolo.]

No they aren't. Looks like you ignored the entire RPI to wicket conversion chat we had in the other thread. Kallis didn't come close to Imran.

You have ignored it. There were 4 proposed methods that didn't involve thumb sucking.

Comparing wickets to batting average- Kallis wins.
Comparing % of wickets to runs- Kallis wins
Comparing to contributions in secondary from top bats and top bowlers. Imran wins one and Kallis crushes one.

Oddly enough, you focus on one of these.