smash84
The Tiger King
welcome back, haven't seen you around for a while.
-
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.
Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose
- Thread starter Migara
- Start date
shortpitched713
International Captain
Looking at the poll results, I guess we weren't supposed to be taking their batting into consideration?
sayon basak
International Captain
Ambrose is the better batter. Imran is the better slip catcher. Overall it's Binny.
Coronis
International Coach
This literally means nothing.
Coronis
International Coach
DrWolverine
State Captain
kyear2
International Coach
Skinny Curtly before he changed his action was a menace, he was legit fast and was taking wickets everywhere. He refined his technique and approach on the fly and became a clinical assassin.
After the surgery he lacked that pace but never his accuracy and you still couldn't score off him.
Sir Curtly easily here for me.
After the surgery he lacked that pace but never his accuracy and you still couldn't score off him.
Sir Curtly easily here for me.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Ambrose has the same issues as Lillee of gaps in his record with small samples elsewhere.
Imran was simply a more rounded bowler across conditions than Ambrose. Basically I don't think Ambrose could have succeeded in the SC and his away record is pretty much only Eng and Aus. Wasn't particularly great at home either.
Imran was simply a more rounded bowler across conditions than Ambrose. Basically I don't think Ambrose could have succeeded in the SC and his away record is pretty much only Eng and Aus. Wasn't particularly great at home either.
Why do you think so?
Mid 80s to mid 00s [ 20 years period, sub 25 avg and 100 plus wickets at home - bowlers lists against non-minnows in entire career ]
184 wickets - Avg 21.9 - SR in mid 50s - 10 5-fers.
Seems like a great record at home just looking at absolute numbers and also looking at relative to others.
If this is not a great output at home then we should apply the same criterion for home and away buckets for all pacers. I am not sure many will have great record home and away with the same criterion.
Ambrose being unproven in Ind, that's a negative against Ambrose, but where ever he has played with a good sample size, he has a very very good record.
Attachments
smash84
The Tiger King
Actually it doesn't look very good looking at the raw numbers. I am surprised he didn't even have 4 wpm at home
We can look at how he did against others - where ever he played with a good sample size and smaller sample size.
He played a lot in Aus and Eng. So we can see his quality versus others. he did not play too many in Pak and SA but 4-5 tests are not too little as well. He has a good record.
Ambrose in Aus versus others:
Ambrose in Eng versus others:
He had 4-5 tests each in Pak and SA. We can see it together,
Ambrose in SA + Pak versus others:
Ambrose played only 2 tests in NZ with avg of 22. So I will take it as not a large enough sample size but not really poor in those 2 tests. SL was minnow for more than half of his career so it hardly matters him playing or not playing against SL. India was a genuine miss and we can say that he was unproven in India.
Given away record of Ambrose is 200 plus wickets at avg of 20-21, he could have played 5-7 tests in India with 35-40 avg and still his away avg would have been 21-22. Even with failure like avg of 50-60 in India, still he would have averaged sub 25 away. He was that good in places he played.
We can surely see India factor for Ambrose, but we can also see how much better he was against others where he played heavily. Record SA+Pak+NZ is also a good one.
He played a lot in Aus and Eng. So we can see his quality versus others. he did not play too many in Pak and SA but 4-5 tests are not too little as well. He has a good record.
Ambrose in Aus versus others:
Ambrose in Eng versus others:
He had 4-5 tests each in Pak and SA. We can see it together,
Ambrose in SA + Pak versus others:
Ambrose played only 2 tests in NZ with avg of 22. So I will take it as not a large enough sample size but not really poor in those 2 tests. SL was minnow for more than half of his career so it hardly matters him playing or not playing against SL. India was a genuine miss and we can say that he was unproven in India.
Given away record of Ambrose is 200 plus wickets at avg of 20-21, he could have played 5-7 tests in India with 35-40 avg and still his away avg would have been 21-22. Even with failure like avg of 50-60 in India, still he would have averaged sub 25 away. He was that good in places he played.
We can surely see India factor for Ambrose, but we can also see how much better he was against others where he played heavily. Record SA+Pak+NZ is also a good one.
smash84
The Tiger King
Why are his wickets per match so low in SA+. Pakistan?
IK, who we are comparing with,
IK has 31 tests at home with 132 wickets. 4.25 wickets per match.
After taking out rookie 2 series for Ambrose, you get
Ambrose 41 tests with 172 wikets. 4.19 wickets per match. Larger number of tests with similar output as IK.
I think Ambrose home record is a good one. First 2 series brings his wickets per match down. Many posters have been removing intial years and later years for Ik and yet his away avg does not come below 25. Here Ambrose avg becomes sub 20 at home after removing his first 2 series.
I am trying to illustrate that if Ambrose home record is not good then what do we say about IK away record, horrible?
I don't think IK's away record is horrible and I also don't think that Ambrose home record is not a good one.
A stretch of 41 tests at home with sub 20 avg - That's a great stretch given his comparison is with some one who has 31 home tests.
It will be fair to say that Ambrose was not good at home in his first 7 tests.
Because his SR is 59 on those venues. He wasn't that effective in picking wickets quickly in SA + Pakistan. This is his worse SR for two venues in entire career. It's fine to point out weakness for Ambrose, but you got to see in comparison with IK.
You think Ambrose not having 4 wickets per match is not good. That's due to his poor start in tests. After first 7 tests he has 4.2 wickets per match. You think that Ambose is not picking wickets in 2 away venues quickly. I agree, but let's see what IK did in his best period away. Not just in 2 worst venues but all venues combined and that too after removing start and end years.
IK's against non-minnows after removing start and late years:
Ambrose away records is so much better than IK that it's meaningless to look at why his SR in two venues is 59. At home, he has stretch of 41 tests with sub 20 avg which is 10 tests higher than IK's entire career against same oppositions.
In context of this thread, we are comparing Ambrose with IK and not Marshall. Ambrose does have weakness but IK has a far bigger weakness in his outputs.
Home and Away combined, I don't see an argument for Ambrose producing less than IK. Only thing I would say that Ambrose was unproven in India. Now if you think he would have averaged 80-90 in India after playing lots of tests then his away avg may have become higher than 25. I won't assume that.
smash84
The Tiger King
Why are you combining venue though?
It would just be simpler to do separate countries. I mean what's the point of combining SA+Pakistan? What are the similarities between the two? Just do simple country wise comparisons. Much simpler. Ambrose might be better or not, but your analysis doesn't make a lot of sense in combining countries that seem to have no similarities.
Look at IK's record away vs best side of his era.
8 matches 48 wkts Avg 25
6 WPM is phenomenal but that average is nothing special.
Only reason I am combining to eliminate noise due to low sample size at different venues. When you play 4 tests in one venue and 5 tests in other then you can get plenty of noise one direction or another. That's why I kept Aus and Eng as one but tried to combine too low sample sizes. In fact, to eliminate sample size noise, it's best to simply see total away performance for players taken together. Some may have played less in one venue and some may have played more in another. Less chance of noise when to see all of them taken together.
Away record of Ambrose against non-minnows: Around 200 test wickets at avg of 20-21.
Away record of IK is in range of 26 and far behind best bowlers of his generation. I don't think there is any need to start looking at break up. But if you want to see break up then you have to make sure to get a larger sample size like Ambrose has in Aus and Eng otherwise you may get noise. Ambrose outperforms IK in larger sample sizes for both players( Aus, Eng & over all ).
smash84
The Tiger King
Dude, I don't want any combinations of different countries. Small sample size or no small sample size.
It's perfectly fine if Ambrose is better. This random combination of countries doesn't make any sense at all. Away from home as a whole makes sense. Pak+ SA don't. Thats all I am saying.