Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

[subshakerz]

iirc the forum changes its consensus about players quite often.

I think a few of the polls that conducted in 2022 and then bumped recently would be different if done today.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

26.4 with a strike rate of 60 outside of Pakistan?

That's a little outside of the scope of elite ATG quality or tier. Especially considering how much more, according to Subz, the pitches were outside of Pakistan.

Well the thing is, Subz picks and chooses when and what he wants to highlight. I'll give an example. There was a Imran vs Donald comparison not too long ago, and Donald played extensively all over and was great. But that wasn't good enough for Subz because Donald didn't do well against the atg team of his time Australia and especially so in Australia. Many of us pointed out that Donald's numbers got messed up due to his tests while on his last legs and especially so in Australia but Subz didnt care. But in other arguments, Donald being old is an issue (lara vs Rsa at home 2000). And according to Subz, Donald didnt have an "impactful series". Notice all of a sudden wickets and doing well vs Australia is a big deal.

Anyway 26 away (ignoring minnows) for me is very good not great and on par with Brian who averaged 48 outside the WI. If we are going to penalize Lara for that, then we must be consistent and penalize Imran accordingly.

 

[kyear2]

Ok show me where you would like to contextualise Ambrose? For example I can ignore him in NZ.


Less than 4WPM and a SR of 57. Kind of ordinary for someone at home.


Not true. He has a better SR and had Wasim and Qadir to compete with.


No. The record I showed you is convincingly well rounded with worldclass returns for Imran whereas Ambrose is just concentrated success in three countries.

India for Imran is like Pak for Ambrose, both a good and bad series. But Imran has an entire home career in Pak to show for his SC record. Ambrose has nothing in SL and India.

Yeah, a little ordinary at home, but we didn't have the umpires or sharp accessories. And actually an actual mixture of pitches. And again, there was an entire 2nd half to his career.

Wasim came in at the tail end of Imran's career and his and Ambrose's s/r aren't that dissimilar.

Again, please tell me which countries Imran was better in than Ambrose. Which countries did he excel in that Ambrose didn't.

And who performed better against the best team of their era.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I mean part of the reason I only have Ambrose 5th anyway is his record not being as well rounded.

Lillee’s record is also not as well rounded but its also worse than Ambrose’s… so I guess I already penalise both?

I mean otherwise I’d have Ambrose right up there at the top, right?

Fair. Curious to know who you have above. I'll guess: Marshall, Hadlee, Steyn and McGrath?

 

[kyear2]

Competed at home certainly with Qadir.


They aren't random caveats though. For example, in 84 in Aus he was playing as a pure bat, didn't bowl a ball. Does it make sense to include those tests? Etc.

So how would that impact his average or strike rate of he didn't bowl a single ball?

Please explain.

 

[Coronis]

Fair. Curious to know who you have above. I'll guess: Marshall, Hadlee, Steyn and McGrath?

Haha not sure why that’d be a subject of curiosity, those are generally the 5 mentioned pacers round here. (Yes, though not in that order)

 

[DrWolverine]

And Ambrose didn't get to play in the SC, but how did Imran play in India?

I am not actually comparing both. Just saying Ambrose’s has played very little outside Aus/Eng/WI

Imran played 2 series in India
1979 : 19 wickets @ 19
1986 : 8 wickets @ 49

 

[subshakerz]

So how would that impact his average or strike rate of he didn't bowl a single ball?

Please explain.

You critiqued his WPM in Aus before.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

So how would that impact his average or strike rate of he didn't bowl a single ball?

Please explain.

He can't because if Imran didn't bowl his average and sr would be unaffected. Just checked, there are no bowling stats for Imran for that series because he didn't bowl.

 

[subshakerz]

Well the thing is, Subz picks and chooses when and what he wants to highlight. I'll give an example. There was a Imran vs Donald comparison not too long ago, and Donald played extensively all over and was great. But that wasn't good enough for Subz because Donald didn't do well against the atg team of his time Australia and especially so in Australia. Many of us pointed out that Donald's numbers got messed up due to his tests while on his last legs and especially so in Australia but Subz didnt care. But in other arguments, Donald being old is an issue (lara vs Rsa at home 2000). And according to Subz, Donald didnt have an "impactful series". Notice all of a sudden wickets and doing well vs Australia is a big deal.

No I said Donald played 5 series against Aus but was only quality in one, which is true. And that is excluding his last test.

 

[Shri]

25 pages? Subs active? No thx

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, a little ordinary at home

Good admission. Finally.

Again, please tell me which countries Imran was better in than Ambrose. Which countries did he excel in that Ambrose didn't.

Pakistan for one. NZ even with small sample. Also WI frankly but we don't need to go there.

And who performed better against the best team of their era.

They both performed great overall but I always said and Ambrose was ATG in Aus.

 

[DrWolverine]

I'll give an example. There was a Imran vs Donald comparison not too long ago, and Donald played extensively all over and was great. But that wasn't good enough for Subz because Donald didn't do well against the atg team of his time Australia and especially so in Australia.

The only flaw or hole in Allan Donald’s record is his record against or in Australia. Outside of that, he has an almost perfect record that very few can match.

 

[pardus]

Ambrose played 3 series in the subcontinent.
In 2 of those 3 series, Ambrose did very well.
Agreed he failed miserably in the one series in 1997 but then he bowled in only 2 innings in that series (he was nursing a back injury and bowled significantly lesser than other West Indian bowlers).
I don't think Ambrose can be rightly called as a failure in the SC.

 

[DrWolverine]

So unproven

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose played 3 series in the subcontinent.
In 2 of those 3 series, Ambrose did very well.
Agreed he failed miserably in the one series in 1997 but then he bowled in only 2 innings in that series (he was nursing a back injury and bowled significantly lesser than other West Indian bowlers).
I don't think Ambrose can be rightly called as a failure in the SC.

In SL he bowled in literally one complete innings in a drawn game. Don't think that counts as a good series.

Nobody is saying he failed in SC. He is unproven but he didn't impress with his overall output in Pakistan.

 

[pardus]

So unproven

How can it be unproven when he had at least one definitely successful series there?

In SL he bowled in literally one complete innings in a drawn game. Don't think that counts as a good series.

Nobody is saying he failed in SC. He is unproven but he didn't impress with his overall output in Pakistan.

His overall output in Pak is heavily skewed by just those 2 innings in 1997.

 

[subshakerz]

How can it be unproven when he had at least one definitely successful series there?


His overall output in Pak is heavily skewed by just those 2 innings in 1997.

One good series, and one bad series. Mixed results in Pak. Nothing really in SL and India. So can't draw conclusions.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

One good series, and one bad series. Mixed results in Pak. Nothing really in SL and India. So can't draw conclusions.

Well then, say he's unproven in India. Him playing more in SL would be pointless they were minnows. And if he played more in South Africa or NZ, i shudder to think of the damage he'd have inflicted.

 

[Coronis]

Let me see if Ambrose has FC work in Asia.

None outside of the 6 tests