Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

[subshakerz]

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.

I always said unproven in India, like Lillee.

He could have played in SL in the latter half of the 90s when they weren't minnows. And how well he would do against SA or NZ depends if he played them before or after his shoulder op.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

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

Actually just looked it up, Ambrose was great in that 1990 series in Pakistan: 14 wickets at 17. He was never ever going to take much more than 4 wickets a test because he was competing with Bishop. Walsh and Marshall. 1997 was terrible though. Overall good and passable in Pakistan.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I always said unproven in India, like Lillee.

He could have played in SL in the latter half of the 90s when they weren't minnows. And how well he would do against SA or NZ depends if he played them before or after his shoulder op.

The shoulder op comment is fair. Let's ignore SL because if Ambrose played there in the 90s, their lineup then, was night and day from what Imran played.

 

[pardus]

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

Well for me, in an extremely small sample of series, one great series is good enough.
Cannot be remotely compared with Lillee who doesn't have a single successful series in the SC.

 

[subshakerz]

Actually just looked it up, Ambrose was great in that 1990 series in Pakistan: 14 wickets at 17. He was never ever going to take much more than 4 wickets a test because he was competing with Bishop. Walsh and Marshall. 1997 was terrible though. Overall good and passable in Pakistan.

Yeah so 15 wickets in 5 tests with one good series and one bad series overall is middling

 

[subshakerz]

Well for me, in an extremely small sample of series, one great series is good enough.
Cannot be remotely compared with Lillee who doesn't have a single successful series in the SC.

In that case, Imran is good in India since he had a great series in 79 even though he had a poor one in 87 and similarly had middling returns.

 

[pardus]

In that case, Imran is good in India since he had a great series in 79 even though he had a poor one in 87 and similarly had middling returns.

Defintely not unproven or bad in India.

 

[subshakerz]

Defintely not unproven or bad in India.

They argue he is poor though.

 

[DrWolverine]

Curtly Ambrose barely played in the subcontinent.
He played like one proper series
1990 in Pak : 3 Tests(106 overs)14 wickets @ 17.
1993 in SL : 1 Test(18 overs). 3 wickets @ 9.
1997 in Pak : 2 Tests(44 overs). 1 wicket @ 149.

 

[DrWolverine]

Cannot be remotely compared with Lillee who doesn't have a single successful series in the SC.

Lillee played 1 series. That’s it.
Unproven in the sub continent.

 

[pardus]

They argue he is poor though.

Sorry I missed that. Too many posts to read, just skimmed through and posts that Ambrose was unproven in SC like Lillee caught my attention.
So addressed that.
IMO, Imran has proven himself in most conditions.

 

[pardus]

Lillee played 1 series. That’s it.
Unproven in the sub continent.

Yes, but unlike Lillee, Ambrose did have one great series (of only 2 that he played) in the subcontinent.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Yeah so 15 wickets in 5 tests with one good series and one bad series overall is middling

Yeah I agree. Just like Imran in Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah I agree. Just like Imran in Australia.

We disagree there.

 

[DrWolverine]

Yes, but unlike Lillee, Ambrose did have one great series (of only 2 that he played) in the subcontinent.

Allan Donald in the sub continent.
Best average by any pacer with 30+ wickets.
1993 in SL : 3 Tests. 12 wickets @ 19.
1996 in Ind : 2 Tests. 10 wickets @ 14.
1997 in Pak : 2 Tests. 7 wickets @ 32.
2000 in Ind : 2 Tests. 7 wickets @ 19.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Allan Donald in the sub continent.
Best average by any pacer with 30+ wickets.
1993 in SL : 3 Tests. 12 wickets @ 19.
1996 in Ind : 2 Tests. 10 wickets @ 14.
1997 in Pak : 2 Tests. 7 wickets @ 32.
2000 in Ind : 2 Tests. 7 wickets @ 19.

Lol lol those are crap according to Subz. Nice try though.

 

[kyear2]

I'm not kyear2. Test bowling for me in terms of importance it goes average then strike rate, econ, then wpm. Wpm is very much a function of bowling competition, team strength etc.

Wpm didn't even come up in this entire discourse.

 

[kyear2]

Ok but imo wsc numbers should not be included in test stats. They can be added in fc

I have no issue with them being included, I include them for everyone and it factors in to how I rate the Richards x2, Chappell etc ...

But it's either they do or they don't.

Can't be convenient, and even more importantly it doesn't invalidate the stats outside of those 4 tests.

Why did he averaged 28?

 

[kyear2]

Yeah I contextualise WPM with SR but it's still important to know penetration.

S/ r shows penetration, wpm shows use and volume.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah but in Ambrose case we are looking at a bowler who takes 3WPM@22/23 with a high SR outside of his favorite conditions of England/Aus/WI vs Imran taking 4 plus WPM@25/26 outside Eng/Aus/Pak.

Obviously 3WPM is just a lot worse.

Ambrose doesn't even take 4WPM at home and has an SR of 57.

You mentioned Ambrose's "high strike rate"

What was Imran's?