Wasim Akram vs Dennis Lillee

[Migara]

The irony is that for all of @kyear2 incessant bitching about Imran the cheat, he will never tell you that Imran Khan was the first to actively lobby for neutral umpires.

Pakistan was robbed of a series win against WI because WI umpires cheated as hell.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Wasim also had quite a few matches vs weaker teams to help said average.
And again, not every single pitch in Australia was favorable for bowling.

But yes, Lillee did have a much better cordon, one id the best ever actually.

Lillee himself bashed NZ....

 

[subshakerz]

Pakistan was robbed of a series win against WI because WI umpires cheated as hell.

Lara in his Spirit of Cricket lecture says he was watching the deciding game and felt embarassed.

 

[kyear2]

Without getting into argument about which bowlers got more umpire support at home, we do know that all players played away without home umpire helping them. We can look at away record of all players in same time to see what they did away. Then we can keep biased home record separately and look into that with discussion about how much who benefitted by home umpires.

Pacers in equal footing without biased home umpires - Away record against non-minnows [ SL was minnow during IK's career ]

View attachment 44523



Home record of all pacers - Biased home umpiring may be a factor but can't be guaranteed.

View attachment 44524


This way we have two sets of data. One with biased umpiring helping bowlers and one without it. One is subject to arguments and other is mostly free from that because all visiting bowlers had to play against biased home umpires and they do have to play in different conditions.

That's why I feel rating Ik as high as 6th best pacers simply does not make any sense. Saying that 3 out of 6 best pacers in entire history played in the same 10 years seems unlikely given at IK was a clear 3rd in his generation and also has away avg of 26-27 with SR of 60. Yes, I am ware of all special argument made for IK. I just don't see 3 out of best 6 in history played at same time with that kind of record..

I do have Immy 6th, but also in the same tier as Lillee, Donald, Holding, Lindwall, Garner etc.

But it's tricky. Everyone who faced Imran and Lillee, rated Lillee higher. Than can be put down to one being dominant in the 70's and the other the 80's, but Viv played both during peaks but still rated Lillee higher, Gower, Crowe and others the same.

Donald I think is a little underrated, but Imran does have the bigger legacy with Donald failing the biggest test of his career. The Aus batting line up though was way better than the '88 batting lineup that Imran faced.

Holding could stay healthy, though Imran had his injury woes as well. Holding definely better in the 70's and early 80's. Imran did outlast him though.

Lindwall I really need to re-evaluate at some point, nor sure if it takes him above Imran though.

Garner was never the no. 1 per say, while Imran did have that responsibility.

So yeah, close, but Imran does have a good argument for 6th. Lillee and Donald does push him close.

 

[Randomfan]

This silly argument again?

I already told, you need to discount for Imran having extra long career tailends as a teen and late 30s bat.

IK played a grand total of 1 test in teens. I would think it will be silly to discuss including or excluding 1 test.

IK played he second test on Jul 1974.

I don't think we start making these adjustements for any player. But let's give that advanatge to IK.

---------------------------

IK Birth date: 5 oct 52

26 July 74 : 2-3 months short of 22 years age when he played 2nd test.

4 Oct 87 : Before IK tunerd 35 years old.

This is a cherry picked years.


Pacers away records against non-minnows {Cherry picked period for IK when he was not in teens and not in late 30s.}






I don't think a period should be cherry picked just for IK. But let's go with cherry picked period cited here. In a cherrypicked period, a pacer having an away avg of 26-27 & SR of 60 against non-minnows and far behind best pacers of that time. This data is not due to umpire support for any bowler. No home umpire supporting any bowler here. All pacers were on equal footings.

Now why should 3 spots out of 6 should go to bowlers from 80s when 3rd bowler has record like this in cherry picked period and much behind best pacers of that era?

Anyone else who have watched him live, I would love to hear why he makes a strong case for 6th spot in entire history with away performance like this. Away is the only performance not tainted by biased home umpiring for all pacers in that era. Let's not get into argument about who benefitted more due to biased umpiring. Others bowled away as well and we can see their outputs. I did not see him live so love to hear thoughts.

Either I am missing something which makes a strong case of IK getting 6th spot or his case is marginal. I am not looking for all names, just why IK has a strong case for 6th spot in history with 2 other gun pacers from 80s so far ahead of him. Hearing from people seen him live can add some context.

 

[Randomfan]

I do have Immy 6th, but also in the same tier as Lillee, Donald, Holding, Lindwall, Garner etc.

But it's tricky. Everyone who faced Imran and Lillee, rated Lillee higher. Than can be put down to one being dominant in the 70's and the other the 80's, but Viv played both during peaks but still rated Lillee higher, Gower, Crowe and others the same.

Donald I think is a little underrated, but Imran does have the bigger legacy with Donald failing the biggest test of his career. The Aus batting line up though was way better than the '88 batting lineup that Imran faced.

Holding could stay healthy, though Imran had his injury woes as well. Holding definely better in the 70's and early 80's. Imran did outlast him though.

Lindwall I really need to re-evaluate at some point, nor sure if it takes him above Imran though.

Garner was never the no. 1 per say, while Imran did have that responsibility.

So yeah, close, but Imran does have a good argument for 6th. Lillee and Donald does push him close.

Thanks for the context and stating why he has a good argument.

Ok, in my next post I was looking for answer like this. I took a cherrypicked period cited above and it's not cut and dry even in his cherry picked period.

If you have him in the same tier as Lillee/Donald with both pushing him close then it's fair enough. Case is marginal then. I always find it hard to rank anyone in exact order unless i have seen them live. I have to simply hear from folks who have seen players live and then make up my own mind unless data simply shows players vastly superior or inferior.

 

[Bolo.]

That is a misrepresentation of the method. I didn't compare Imran or Kallis to anyone initially. My motive was just to assign a value to 1 wicket in terms of runs by comparing top batters to top bowlers, not comparing both of them to bowlers.

And then what you did was to compare top batters bowling with top bowlers batting, which doesn't make any sense; as I have stated earlier, top batters batting is comparable to top bowlers bowling, but top bowler's batting is not comparable to top batter's bowling.

Let me ask you this, 1 wickets=how many runs in your opinion?

Oops, apologies. I reread your post. I misunderstood it and am completely misrepresenting what you were saying.

My counter comparison was irrelevant to the point you were making. And has no merit as a stand alone point (and basically no merit even if run in inverse concurrently- Kallis having a higher workload in relation to bats than Imran does in relation to bowlers doesn't say much about his workload in relation to Imran).

The numbers you generated seem totally fine for expressing a proportion of team workload for specialists in the discipline. Imran is closer to specialist in workload. This number boils down there being more bats than bowlers though. A bit more than 50% more, which is the difference between my batting average value of wickets and the 20 otherwise proposed.

Kallis bowls a higher propotion of team overs than Imran bats for. I guess the question is whether you prefer to judge their secondaries in relation to team or individual specialists.

 

[subshakerz]

IK played a grand total of 1 test in teens. I would think it will be silly to discuss including or excluding 1 test.

IK played he second test on Jul 1974.

I don't think we start making these adjustements for any player. But let's give that advanatge to IK.

---------------------------

IK Birth date: 5 oct 52

26 July 74 : 2-3 months short of 22 years age when he played 2nd test.

4 Oct 87 : Before IK tunerd 35 years old.

This is a cherry picked years.


Pacers away records against non-minnows {Cherry picked period for IK when he was not in teens and not in late 30s.}


View attachment 44528



I don't think a period should be cherry picked just for IK. But let's go with cherry picked period cited here. In a cherrypicked period, a pacer having an away avg of 26-27 & SR of 60 against non-minnows and far behind best pacers of that time. This data is not due to umpire support for any bowler. No home umpire supporting any bowler here. All pacers were on equal footings.

Now why should 3 spots out of 6 should go to bowlers from 80s when 3rd bowler has record like this in cherry picked period and much behind best pacers of that era?

Anyone else who have watched him live, I would love to hear why he makes a strong case for 6th spot in entire history with away performance like this. Away is the only performance not tainted by biased home umpiring for all pacers in that era. Let's not get into argument about who benefitted more due to biased umpiring. Others bowled away as well and we can see their outputs. I did not see him live so love to hear thoughts.

Either I am missing something which makes a strong case of IK getting 6th spot or his case is marginal. I am not looking for all names, just why IK has a strong case for 6th spot in history with 2 other gun pacers from 80s so far ahead of him. Hearing from people seen him live can add some context.

There isn't cherrypicking. I am using the entire period from 74 to 89 as his bowling prime.

Now please address the away numbers I presented. Don't dodge.

 

[sayon basak]

Oops, apologies. I reread your post. I misunderstood it and am completely misrepresenting what you were saying.

No need for apologies.

But putting aside output, Kallis' value of wickets is pretty high. Would be great to see how Imran does there, but I'm afraid it would not be possible with the available data.

 

[kyear2]

The irony is that for all of @kyear2 incessant bitching about Imran the cheat, he will never tell you that Imran Khan was the first to actively lobby for neutral umpires.

The first series he really used them by his own choice was against the WI at home in 1986.

He ended up taking 18 wickets@11 including some monster reverse swing spells. In other words, his best series at home by average wasn't even with Pak umpires.

I guarantee you that @kyear2 in all his 'research' never came across this detail, or if he did chose to keep mum about it.

Why did Imran lobby for neutral umpires?

Two reasons, it was beginning to be a national embarrassment and they were whispers of teams starting to balk at playing in Pakistan.

Why do you think it was his choice?

What you also failed to do was to challenge any of what I actually said. First LBW for Javed at home was in 1985.

What you also failed to mention was that in series vs the WI in 86, the first match, the only one Pakistan won btw, didn't have neutral umpires and Imran had 5 / 62 and they were 4 (key top order) lbw's to go along with bowling Walsh.

The rest of the series, especially the match where he won motm, he basically went tail hunting. The innings he got 6 for 46, he took the last 5 wickets. Like literally the last 5 batsmen. There were reasons he wants the man of the series.

But what you consistently omit is that I rank Imran 6th all time, you would believe that I have him 15th like how Coronis and PEWS have Viv. ****ing 6th, all time 10th. The way you tell it I don't have him as an ATG.

What you want is for myself and everyone to ignore that even in his prime he averaged 6 more away than he did at home, that he averaged 28 in India and Australia etc etc. He was an ATG bowler and cricketer, but you don't believe he is above critique and that everyone should take your word for it.

Yes he benefitted from home umpiring and a ridiculous level of ball tampering. Yes he was one of the top 10 bowlers who ever lived, both can be true and exist in the ether.

In any event, for those who wonder what Maco would have done without his cohorts, in a series without Holding or Garner, he was the man of the series.

 

[kyear2]

They are but I am consistent how I use them like you.

What would Wasim average with elite slips btw?

This is where you go idiotic.

But you tell me.

And btw if you did think they were important, you wouldn't have made the posts and voted the way you did in another thread, but I'll deal with that separately.

Carry on.

 

[kyear2]

Pakistan was robbed of a series win against WI because WI umpires cheated as hell.

This is like Trump saying there were good people on both sides. False equivalency.

One match vs a decade of horrendous umpiring, but somehow it's seen as equivalent by a handful of you. It's honestly hilarious.

All of our batsmen and bowlers performed equally well home and away for that entire era.

 

[kyear2]

Lara in his Spirit of Cricket lecture says he was watching the deciding game and felt embarassed.

One game vs a decade.

Are you serious with this bullshit? How many LBW decisions against Javed and co were declined?

How many LBW decisions for Imran given that weren't?

But carry on.

 

[subshakerz]

Why did Imran lobby for neutral umpires?

Two reasons, it was beginning to be a national embarrassment and they were whispers of teams starting to balk at playing in Pakistan.

I swear, only someone totally twisted would take an objective good thing (neutral umpires) and try and spin this into a negative for Imran.

The fact is he introduced it at a time every team was complaining about home umpires and deserves credit.

Why do you think it was his choice?

Imran pushed the administrators to do after making it public.

What you also failed to mention was that in series vs the WI in 86, the first match, the only one Pakistan won btw, didn't have neutral umpires and Imran had 5 / 62 and they were 4 (key top order) lbw's to go along with bowling Walsh.

The rest of the series, especially the match where he won motm, he basically went tail hunting. The innings he got 6 for 46, he took the last 5 wickets. Like literally the last 5 batsmen. There were reasons he wants the man of the series.

Did you see all those lbws or are you just assuming they were all umpires cheats by reading the scoreboard because it's Imran?

Again utter pettiness. Zero credit for beyond worldclass figures and reverse swing spells against the best side in the world. All this nitpicking.

 

[subshakerz]

One game vs a decade.

Are you serious with this bullshit? How many LBW decisions against Javed and co were declined?

How many LBW decisions for Imran given that weren't?

But carry on.

It's not just any game. That game would have meant Pakistan would have become the first team to beat the mighty WI in the 80s in their own home. Literally the most important game of the decade perhaps.

Of course you always want to ignore that Pakistan outplayed WI at home (yes with Marshall and Viv in two out of three tests) and deserved to win, which effectively would have been an even bigger crowning glory for Imran than even the WC.

 

[kyear2]

IK played a grand total of 1 test in teens. I would think it will be silly to discuss including or excluding 1 test.

IK played he second test on Jul 1974.

I don't think we start making these adjustements for any player. But let's give that advanatge to IK.

---------------------------

IK Birth date: 5 oct 52

26 July 74 : 2-3 months short of 22 years age when he played 2nd test.

4 Oct 87 : Before IK tunerd 35 years old.

This is a cherry picked years.


Pacers away records against non-minnows {Cherry picked period for IK when he was not in teens and not in late 30s.}


View attachment 44528



I don't think a period should be cherry picked just for IK. But let's go with cherry picked period cited here. In a cherrypicked period, a pacer having an away avg of 26-27 & SR of 60 against non-minnows and far behind best pacers of that time. This data is not due to umpire support for any bowler. No home umpire supporting any bowler here. All pacers were on equal footings.

Now why should 3 spots out of 6 should go to bowlers from 80s when 3rd bowler has record like this in cherry picked period and much behind best pacers of that era?

Anyone else who have watched him live, I would love to hear why he makes a strong case for 6th spot in entire history with away performance like this. Away is the only performance not tainted by biased home umpiring for all pacers in that era. Let's not get into argument about who benefitted more due to biased umpiring. Others bowled away as well and we can see their outputs. I did not see him live so love to hear thoughts.

Either I am missing something which makes a strong case of IK getting 6th spot or his case is marginal. I am not looking for all names, just why IK has a strong case for 6th spot in history with 2 other gun pacers from 80s so far ahead of him. Hearing from people seen him live can add some context.

Yeah, he's full of **** and half truths, with intentionally misleading statements.

He played one match in 71 that no one holds against him, 3 in '74 that I don't hold against him, then didn't play again for 2 years. All of said matches were in England.

He also played all of 3 matches in 91 and 92, and has no issue using the batting from those years or the WC victory that inflated his reputation as a captain.

The stupid part of all of this is that he still then wants to give him the credit for said longevity.

And even beyond that, no other cricketer has anyone cutting off time from their careers to alter stats. Sobers started his career as a finger spinning teenager, but he wasn't dropped and it took him 4 years teaching himself how to bat before he made his first hundred. Has anyone ever calculated what his average would have been, if he play those first few years? His test and county bowling loads broke him the last couple years, no one tries to remove those years from his record either. Sachin the same on both extremes, regardless of motive. I have no idea what Maco's average was in India without the '78 series.

But we near about Imran's unique career a d it needs special accommodation.

Headley and Hammond, even Lindwall I can understand the parsing of numbers, there was an entire war and no cricket for years and they shouldn't have come back. Lindwall missed his prime. I struggle to think of others who actually deserve the parsing that Imran is privy to.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, he's full of **** and half truths, with intentionally misleading statements.

Interesting because you earlier in the Cummins thread agreed with me about using the same 74 to 89 timeline, nor did you dispute the away numbers I presented.

Now you are backtracking or lying again it seems to curry favor with anyone who can agree with you.

 

[kyear2]

IK played a grand total of 1 test in teens. I would think it will be silly to discuss including or excluding 1 test.

IK played he second test on Jul 1974.

I don't think we start making these adjustements for any player. But let's give that advanatge to IK.

---------------------------

IK Birth date: 5 oct 52

26 July 74 : 2-3 months short of 22 years age when he played 2nd test.

4 Oct 87 : Before IK tunerd 35 years old.

This is a cherry picked years.


Pacers away records against non-minnows {Cherry picked period for IK when he was not in teens and not in late 30s.}


View attachment 44528



I don't think a period should be cherry picked just for IK. But let's go with cherry picked period cited here. In a cherrypicked period, a pacer having an away avg of 26-27 & SR of 60 against non-minnows and far behind best pacers of that time. This data is not due to umpire support for any bowler. No home umpire supporting any bowler here. All pacers were on equal footings.

Now why should 3 spots out of 6 should go to bowlers from 80s when 3rd bowler has record like this in cherry picked period and much behind best pacers of that era?

Anyone else who have watched him live, I would love to hear why he makes a strong case for 6th spot in entire history with away performance like this. Away is the only performance not tainted by biased home umpiring for all pacers in that era. Let's not get into argument about who benefitted more due to biased umpiring. Others bowled away as well and we can see their outputs. I did not see him live so love to hear thoughts.

Either I am missing something which makes a strong case of IK getting 6th spot or his case is marginal. I am not looking for all names, just why IK has a strong case for 6th spot in history with 2 other gun pacers from 80s so far ahead of him. Hearing from people seen him live can add some context.

I gave reasons earlier in the thread why I have him 6th. He was still arguably better than Donald, better numbers and played in more countries than Lillee, outlasted Holding, and carried an attack, something Garner never did. Lindwall I'll have to look at again.

 

[subshakerz]

I gave reasons earlier in the thread why I have him 6th. He was still arguably better than Donald, better numbers and played in more countries than Lillee, outlasted Holding, and carried an attack, something Garner never did. Lindwall I'll have to look at again.

You forgot to mention tier, bro

 

[kyear2]

No need for apologies.

But putting aside output, Kallis' value of wickets is pretty high. Would be great to see how Imran does there, but I'm afraid it would not be possible with the available data.

Kallis had a high value if wickets. Imran often (not always) scored his hundreds in down hill conditions, 3rd or 4th hundreds in innings etc.