Imran Khan vs Curtley Ambrose

[kyear2]

I always felt Ambrose was jinxed against India (a bit like Lara).
In the 1989 home series, pitches were extremely fast bowler friendly and Indian batting performance in that series wasn't particularly great. There was no logical reason why Ambrose couldn't have performed well in that series.
While Bishop/Marshall/Walsh shared the spoils, Ambrose just couldn't get into the party.
I remember Bishop was vey very quick back then. One of his thunderbolts breaking the forearm of Indian opener Kris Srikkanth in the last ODI match.

Bishop was lightning back then.

One of the great what if's.

 

[Van_Sri]

Oh wow, wonder what @subshakerz answer to that one was.

Even in Imran's 3 most successful countries, vs Curtly's worst 3 countries Ambrose still had a better average and similar s/r.

That's interesting.

In any event, away from home Imran was definely below elite ATG standards.

He was almost as good as Lillee outside Pakistan. Ambrose cannot be that effective in Sub-Continent as he uses his height more so he might have been economical but not as lethal as he was in England or Australia

 

[Sliferxxxx]

And WI and NZ.

WI? Did you really say WI ? It'd have been better if you'd said Imran did better in the WI than Ambrose did in Pakistan. That makes sense. What you're saying is like me saying hey Steve Waugh did better than Lara in the Caribbean because he averaged 69 there vs 58 for Lara or Kallis was better than Sachin India because Kallis averaged 58 there vs 53. Please stop the bs....

 

[subshakerz]

Oh wow, wonder what @subshakerz answer to that one was.

Even in Imran's 3 most successful countries, vs Curtly's worst 3 countries Ambrose still had a better average and similar s/r.

That's interesting.

In any event, away from home Imran was definely below elite ATG standards.

Have you ever argued Hadlee was below ATG standards in England based on raw average?

 

[DrWolverine]

Ok, so where was Imran successful in the SC?

Simple question. Pakistan was home, SL was a minnow and India was a failure.

Imran toured India twice.
One great series and in another he didn’t do well.

 

[Van_Sri]

Super 8 of West Indies

 

[Sliferxxxx]

He was almost as good as Lillee outside Pakistan. Ambrose cannot be that effective in Sub-Continent as he uses his height more so he might have been economical but not as lethal as he was in England or Australia

In Asia with more tests, I can only assume Ambrose would keep his average down to around 25 or so but his sr would be around 60. Which would roughly be equivalent or better than what Imran did away overall.

 

[DrWolverine]

View attachment 44650Super 8 of West Indies

All of them debuted between 1974-1989

 

[subshakerz]

Please stop the bs....

No you stop the bs of using group averages of countries that have nothing to with each.

You guys were the ones asking how Ambrose and Imran did country by country. That only leaves Eng, Aus, NZ, Pak, SL and WI they commonly played. Ambrose excels in Eng and Aus, Imran the rest then.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Have you ever argued Hadlee was below ATG standards in England based on raw average?

Average below 25? Check. Sr below 60? Check. Even with England alone, Hadlee is already caught up to Imran in away venues he averaged below 25 and struck at under 60.

 

[subshakerz]

Imran toured India twice.
One great series and in another he didn’t do well.

The other series had deliberate featherbeds prepared by India to ensure no result, similar to Lillee in 79.

 

[kyear2]

No the argument of Ambrose having 90 percent of wickets in three countries and 36 wickets in 12 tests outside. Which you haven't even touched but have made every effort to dodge.

There's nothing to dodge.

He played the most against the best team if his time, and at their place.

He also played on two of the flattest pitches on earth with regards to ARG and Bourda.

There was very little to prove, you think that when we were building our schedule that they were thinking about that you would think in 30 years? Or when he was wrecking Australia anyone was thinking it would be better for his legacy if this was in India?

But again, where was Imran great where he out performed Ambrose.

Ok he played in India and averages 28, that's what makes him more well rounded?

 

[Van_Sri]

All of them debuted between 1974-1989

I have placed them in the order of their debut. Roberts, Holding, Croft, Garner, Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop

 

[subshakerz]

Average below 25? Check. Sr below 60? Check. Even with England alone, Hadlee is already caught up to Imran in away venues he averaged below 25 and struck at under 60.

Hadlee is literally 24.9. so if he was 0.2 more he would be below ATG? You don't see how rigid and one dimensional that measurement style is?

In Asia with more tests, I can only assume Ambrose would keep his average down to around 25 or so but his sr would be around 60. Which would roughly be equivalent or better than what Imran did away overall.

Even if he played more after his shoulder op?

 

[subshakerz]

There's nothing to dodge.

He played the most against the best team if his time, and at their place.

He also played on two of the flattest pitches on earth with regards to ARG and Bourda.

You are dodging again and again and again. The question was on lack of sample and low wickets outside of that.

 

[DrWolverine]

1. Ambrose played against the best opposition of his era both at home and away and he was extraordinary.

2. Ambrose did not play much outside Aus, Eng and WI. 5 in Pak, 4 in SA, 2 in NZ and 1 in SL and he did not play even a single test in India as well.

 

[subshakerz]

1. Ambrose played against the best opposition of his era both at home and away and he was extraordinary.

2. Ambrose did not play much outside Aus, Eng and WI. 5 in Pak, 4 in SA, 2 in NZ and 1 in SL and he did not play even a single test in India as well.

Yes. They are deliberately misconstruing the argument against Ambrose.

Low sample outside supportive conditions and low yield in that low sample.

 

[kyear2]

We agree then.

I meant the bowing ranking where Curtly was easily ahead of Imran there as well.

It was also the vote for the previous ranking where again Curtly was ahead of Imran.

It's pretty consensus at this point.

 

[subshakerz]

It's pretty consensus at this point.

Yes but consensus can change. Lillee was well ahead of Wasim previously. Now Wasim is ahead.

 

[pardus]

He had a poor series against them in 97 too.

But that 97 India team at least had a young, strong batting lineup and the pitches in that series - other than the one at Barbados - were absolutely dead.
Despite having batsmen like Lara, Hooper, Tendulkar, the 97 series mainly reminds me of Sidhu's dreary double century and India 4th innings collapse in Barbados.
4 of the 5 Tests ended in dull draws. Given the hype (Lara vs Tendulkar etc.), it was one of the most boring Test series I have watched.
Given all this, Ambrose's poor series performance as a fast bowler is understandable.

In 89 series though, everything was in Ambrose's favor. Wickets were fast bowler friendly. India innings total crossed 300 just once in the entire series. India lost the 4-match Test series 3-0 (one match got rained off after Windies finished their first innings). This means West Indies bowlers took around 60 Indian wickets in the series of which Ambrose's share was just 5 of those 60 wickets.
There is no explanation. I just think it was a one-off. I honestly don't think Ambrose is as pathetic as his figures in that 89 series against India show. Nor do I think that, that Indian batting lineup was especially skilfull against a bowler of Ambrose's quality on those pitches (while being miserable against Walsh, Marshall and Bishop).
Just a one-off, I can't see any logical reason.