Better bat, Are you serious ? Which team has better batsmen today than they had in 80s ?
Bat = the wooden thing used to hit the ball.
Easier Batting conditions ? Out of curiosity, did you get to watch any Ind-Pak series that was played in 1980s ?
I have watched highlights of certain games. Are you implying the pitches
all around the world were flatter during 1979-1993 compared with 1998-2005?
Comparing Shoaib's and Kapil's sub-continental record:
Shoaib averages 26.48 in Pakistan from 21 matches at a strike-rate of
46.8.
The corresponding figures for Kapil are an average of 40.02 from 15 matches at a strike-rate of
71.7.
That's a difference of 15 and 24 in the average and strike-rate respectively. Even if I accept your assertance about pitches being more condusive during Shoaib's era [given that he has often taken wickets on pitches where pakistan had scored in excess of 400, I find this slightly ridiculous], that's still too big of a difference to be caused by anything other then a difference in quality.
In the sole match Shoaib played on the Indian soil, he took 8 wickets at an average of 14.7 and a strike-rate of
26.9.
Kapil's record in the sixty-one games he played on the Indian soil is 26.49 at a strike-rate of
55.7.
Akhtar's overall away (including India) average is 27.67 at a strike-rate of
46.6.
Kapil's overall away (including Pakistan) average is 32.85 at a strike-rate of
72.2.
Akhtar's neutral record is even better [this includes venues like Sharjah where he bowled one of the best spells I have ever seen from a Pakistani] - in 5 games he average 16.85 at a strike-rate of
36.1.
Which ever way you look at it, Akhtar is a better and more penetrative bowler. The potency of a bowler lies in the number of wicket-taking balls he bowls. This is best illustrated by the strike-rate. SJS's point about Shoaib's unorthodox line and length is true for a large part of his career. Recently though, it is clear that he has changed gears and has been focusing more and more on the traditional weapons available to a stock fast bowler. That in itself is a sign of age creeping up on him, to be honest.
But swing or seam isn't what makes Shoaib-as-we-know an excellent bowler. It is accuracy and speed coupled with a tendency to target the stumps. The difference between Kapil and Shoaib is that of between skill and natural ability, I feel. I am not saying Kapil wasn't talented - obviously he was an extremely skillful bowler, however, Shoaib is MORE talented and, importantly, has been successful in transmitting that talent to the field of play.
I am not going to enter in the debate regarding better batting line-ups. I find it to be tangential, irrelevent and taking the focus away from the real matter. Comparing across board, you'll need to compare every single batsman Kapil dismissed with Shoaib's dismissals. A general statement about the standard of batsmen is pretty much a throw-off red-herring.
Regarding
Sanz's point about neutral umpires:
Kapil played 50 odd games in India with home umpires. Shoaib hasn't played a single one. I think this more then offsets the fact that Kapil had to play 50 odd with away umpires.*
* = [Under the assumption of course that a system with neutral umpires is inherently more reliable then local umpires]
