Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

[subshakerz]

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.

Ambrose did not have a poor start in tests. After his debut series he rocked it in England and Australia. You skipped those two series in between and went back to his failed series against India at home in 89-90. But if you look at his record, he has countless low WPM series at home somewhat randomly in the 90s in the middle of more productive series. For example in 97 against India, he took 10 wickets in 5 tests. So this was a constant problem.

Record SA+Pak+NZ is also a good one.

Comments like this reveal why Ambrose gets a tad overrated based on blind average reading.

His record in those countries is not good. It's not anything really.

6 wickets in 2 tests in NZ doesn't really show anything in that sample.

In Pakistan, 15 wickets in 5 games basically is from one good series on lively tracks and one horrible series where he was spanked around.

In SA, he took 13 wickets in 4 tests but had only one spell of substance and was unpenetrative aside from that.

Worth noting that in all three series, 95 NZ, 97 Pak and 98 SA, he was completely outbowled by Walsh on the same wickets.

Folks on CW really give Ambrose a pass for his post-94 career.

 

[DrWolverine]

Curtly Ambrose
1st 48 Tests. 219 wkts @ 21.08 & SR of 53. 11 5-Fers
Last 50 Tests. 186 wkts @ 20.89 & SR of 55. 11 5-Fers

 

[kyear2]

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.

Averaged:

28 in Australia

24 in England

28 in India

26 in NZ

25 in WI

Not averaging less than 24 in any country except.

18 SL (minnow)
19 Pakistan

But Pakistan was supposed to be the toughest place to bowl.

Ambrose wouldn't have succeeded in India, did Imran?

 

[kyear2]

Ambrose did not have a poor start in tests. After his debut series he rocked it in England and Australia. You skipped those two series in between and went back to his failed series against India at home in 89-90. But if you look at his record, he has countless low WPM series at home somewhat randomly in the 90s in the middle of more productive series. For example in 97 against India, he took 10 wickets in 5 tests. So this was a constant problem.


Comments like this reveal why Ambrose gets a tad overrated based on blind average reading.

His record in those countries is not good. It's not anything really.

6 wickets in 2 tests in NZ doesn't really show anything in that sample.

In Pakistan, 15 wickets in 5 games basically is from one good series on lively tracks and one horrible series where he was spanked around.

In SA, he took 13 wickets in 4 tests but had only one spell of substance and was unpenetrative aside from that.

Worth noting that in all three series, 95 NZ, 97 Pak and 98 SA, he was completely outbowled by Walsh on the same wickets.

Folks on CW really give Ambrose a pass for his post-94 career.

Do we also give Imran a pass for his '70's career? Post '89 career?

Post '94 despite not having the velocity post surgery he maintained his average and overall s/r. He had shoulder surgery and his workload was reduced but he kept going even after he initially wanted to retire.

And I feel like I have to reiterate.. He had shoulder surgery.

 

[kyear2]

After injuries we normally see bowlers numbers fall apart, while his workload may have decreased, he maintained his line and didn't cost the team while maintaining a stellar average.

From the descent of other players, we shouldn't have to figure out just now difficult that is.

Ambrose won matches home and away for the WI, and in the toughest place of all, Australia... And vs the old enemy.

And for all the talk of lack of penetration, his career strike rate is the same as Imran's.

In any event, the vote here seems pretty definitive.

 

[Prince EWS]

After injuries we normally see bowlers numbers fall apart, while his workload may have decreased, he maintained his line and didn't cost the team while maintaining a stellar average.

From the descent of other players, we shouldn't have to figure out just now difficult that is.

Ambrose won matches home and away for the WI, and in the toughest place of all, Australia... And vs the old enemy.

And for all the talk of lack of penetration, his career strike rate is the same as Imran's.

In any event, the vote here seems pretty definitive.

I couldn't resist voting for Binny and I think Imran as a cricketer might be as close to Bradman as to Sobers, but yeah I'd have voted for Ambrose here if I had to pick as well.

I think both were better than Steyn there which is where I disagree with you.

 

[Coronis]

I couldn't resist voting for Binny and I think Imran as a cricketer might be as close to Bradman as to Sobers, but yeah I'd have voted for Ambrose here if I had to pick as well.

I think both were better than Steyn there which is where I disagree with you.

Do they beat Steyn on standardised average? iirc he retired right before it went on break

 

[Prince EWS]

Do they beat Steyn on standardised average? iirc he retired right before it went on break

Ambrose does. Imran doesn't but was ranked higher than him because of longevity.



My personal ranking is McGrath-Marshall-Hadlee-Ambrose-Imran-Steyn.

 

[Randomfan]

6 wickets in 2 tests in NZ doesn't really show anything in that sample.

In Pakistan, 15 wickets in 5 games basically is from one good series on lively tracks and one horrible series where he was spanked around.

In SA, he took 13 wickets in 4 tests but had only one spell of substance and was unpenetrative aside from that.

Worth noting that in all three series, 95 NZ, 97 Pak and 98 SA, he was completely outbowled by Walsh on the same wickets.

Folks on CW really give Ambrose a pass for his post-94 career.

NZ - No one will say that it's a great sample size.

13/15 wickets in Pak/SA - You are saying that he was good in this test and not so good in that test. Well, with 4-5 tests sample size, you are going to have that. Good and bad everything is captured there. We shouldn't be saying that let's take out his best tests and see what he did in others when we have only 4-5 tests.

I think we start dealing with noise then due to small sample size. Large sample size without noise for all bowlers during those days was in Eng, Aus and over all. Ambrose was very good in all those and outperformed.

Pass for post career 94?? Not sure about it. He has one of the balanced career without a big decline like many other pacers. If we don't keep any consistency when comparing, we are applying different criterion based on whatever works in favour of one vs another.

First half and second half, I think no need to do all that when comparing test career of players. If a player has long stretch of 60-70 tests where output is great then we can take that and ignore 5-7 tests in early part due to being new and 5-7 tests in later part due to decline, but outside of that it's best to see what player did in entire career. That's most fair way to compare players.

 

[kyear2]

I couldn't resist voting for Binny and I think Imran as a cricketer might be as close to Bradman as to Sobers, but yeah I'd have voted for Ambrose here if I had to pick as well.

I think both were better than Steyn there which is where I disagree with you.

Interested as to why you think they are better than Steyn.

 

[Coronis]

NZ - No one will say that it's a great sample size.

13/15 wickets in Pak/SA - You are saying that he was good in this test and not so good in that test. Well, with 4-5 tests sample size, you are going to have that. Good and bad everything is captured there. We shouldn't be saying that let's take out his best tests and see what he did in others when we have only 4-5 tests.

I think we start dealing with noise then due to small sample size. Large sample size without noise for all bowlers during those days was in Eng, Aus and over all. Ambrose was very good in all those and outperformed.

Pass for post career 94?? Not sure about it. He has one of the balanced career without a big decline like many other pacers. If we don't keep any consistency when comparing, we are applying different criterion based on whatever works in favour of one vs another.

First half and second half, I think no need to do all that when comparing test career of players. If a player has long stretch of 60-70 tests where output is great then we can take that and ignore 5-7 tests in early part due to being new and 5-7 tests in later part due to decline, but outside of that it's best to see what player did in entire career. That's most fair way to compare players.

Nah probs not. But now the idea is in my head. (I’ve tried to split it by series rather than exact test match, since I think that’s a better indicator of form)

Marshall (78-85)
40 matches 188 @ 22.11 SR 47.1 13 5’fers 2 10’fers
Marshall (86-91)
41 matches 188 @ 19.78 SR 46.3 9 5’fers 2 10’fers

McGrath (93-00)
62 matches 288 @ 22.42 SR 51.6 17 5’fers 2 10’fers
McGrath (00-07)
62 matches 275 @ 20.82 SR 52.3 12 5’fers 1 10’fer

Hadlee (73-83)
44 matches 200 @ 25.82 SR 56.7 15 5’fers 3 10’fers
Hadlee (84-90)
42 matches 231 @ 19.25 SR 45.7 21 5’fers 6 10’fers

Steyn (04-11)
46 matches 238 @ 23.21 SR 39.9 16 5’fers 4 10’fers
Steyn (11-19)
47 matches 201 @ 22.64 SR 45.2 10 5’fers 1 10’fer

Imran (71-82)
43 matches 192 @ 24.78 SR 58.3 12 5’fers 2 10’fers
45 matches 170 @ 20.58 SR 48.5 11 5’fers 3 10’fers

With the exception of Imran who remained steady, all of their economies decrased like Ambrose’s in the 2nd half of their career. Which makes sense.

Since McGrath and Steyn had more conventional beginnings to their career… their second half stats also show similarity to Ambrose. Decrease in big hauls, decrease in WPM, decrease in SR but improved economy.

 

[kyear2]

Ambrose does. Imran doesn't but was ranked higher than him because of longevity.

View attachment 44582

My personal ranking is McGrath-Marshall-Hadlee-Ambrose-Imran-Steyn.

Wondering about the Imran longevity score, since he played one match in '71, didn't play for 3 years then and 3 in '74 and then missed another 2 years till '76 and missed so many matches in the 80's

 

[subshakerz]

Averaged:

28 in Australia

24 in England

28 in India

26 in NZ

25 in WI

Not averaging less than 24 in any country except.

18 SL (minnow)
19 Pakistan

But Pakistan was supposed to be the toughest place to bowl.

Ambrose wouldn't have succeeded in India, did Imran?

I'm done having to explain the context with you. At this point you are just deliberately being obtuse and ignoring any point I bring to your attention.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Wondering about the Imran longevity score, since he played one match in '71, didn't play for 3 years then and 3 in '74 and then missed another 2 years till '76 and missed so many matches in the 80's

That’s why his longevity score is only 13.24 years even though his career spanned 21 years

 

[kyear2]

I'm done having to explain the context with you. At this point you are just deliberately being obtuse and ignoring any point I bring to your attention.

Oh, context only applies to Imran?

Ever thought that if context is required to "explain" away his record in every country that there's a bigger issue?

The point is that he for his "all round record" it seems he thrived only at home, England and the minnows.

 

[subshakerz]

And for all the talk of lack of penetration, his career strike rate is the same as Imran's.

It's not. Another lie.

 

[subshakerz]

Oh, context only applies to Imran?

Ever thought that if context is required to "explain" away his record in every country that there's a bigger issue?

The point is that he for his "all round record" it seems he thrived only at home, England and the minnows.

No the point is in some posts you will acknowledge you view Imran's bowling career from 74 to 88/89. Then you will post again ignoring it entirely and stick to his raw averages knowing it's misleading. Hence why I described you as dishonest. Just stick with one standard.

 

[Prince EWS]

Interested as to why you think they are better than Steyn.

Well they played longer and still averaged less. Simple measure but it's a starting position I usually need to be budged from with extra context and I don't think there's much to do that here. Steyn played in a more batting-friendly era but that didn't really apply in South Africa where he got to play 56% of his games. All very close though.

 

[subshakerz]

NZ - No one will say that it's a great sample size.

13/15 wickets in Pak/SA - You are saying that he was good in this test and not so good in that test. Well, with 4-5 tests sample size, you are going to have that. Good and bad everything is captured there. We shouldn't be saying that let's take out his best tests and see what he did in others when we have only 4-5 tests.

You described Ambrose overall as good in these samples despite a high SR and low WPM. Your problem is you look at average and nothing else in the context of these performances.

 

[subshakerz]

Well they played longer and still averaged less. Simple measure but it's a starting position I usually need to be budged from with extra context and I don't think there's much to do that here. Steyn played in a more batting-friendly era but that didn't really apply in South Africa where he got to play 56% of his games. All very close though.

Interesting since I recently decided to rate Steyn slightly ahead of Imran, and my primary reason is he maintained worldclass standards as a bowler for much longer.