-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Greatest Pakistani fast bowler - Wasim or Imran?
- Thread starter Beleg
- Start date
BlackCap_Fan
State Vice-Captain
He just rates Lillee below the likes of Hadlee, Marshall, Mcgrath, Imran etc.steds said:Lillee. Second tier.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Lillee in the subcontinent: 6 wickets at 68.33.Anil said:
No seamer can be regarded in the top echleon without success in the subcontinent, however good they were elsewhere, and it's utterly ludicrous that people take Lillee seriously in the "fast bowler's graveyard" nonsense when scores of high-quality seamers have had success there.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Whose choice was it to play so few Tests in the subcontinent? Lillee opted-out of countless tours of Pakistan and India, and he has to take the full blame for that.
Being a good bowler in England, Australia and West Indies does not make you a great of the modern era. Success in the subcontinent is an unequivocal neccessity.
Being a good bowler in England, Australia and West Indies does not make you a great of the modern era. Success in the subcontinent is an unequivocal neccessity.
Fusion
Global Moderator
Didn't know he did that. What was his reason? I have been following the back and forth people are having here about Lillee's failure in Pakistan, and I think that it didn't make a difference in an otherwise stellar career. However, I would lose a little respect for him if it's true that he opted out of tours of the subcontinent. Did he have a good reason?Richard said:
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
I'm not exactly going to get into the Lillee debate because I still think he's one of the best ever, but if you don't want to use his poor sub-continent record against him when defining how good he was... that's fine. But at the same time, you have to acknowledge that there were terrific all-time great fast bowlers who have superb records over there, and also around the world where Lillee succeeded. Logically, it just makes sense for them to be rated slightly higher since they have accomplished everything Lillee did, plus something he was never able to do, for whatever reason.
The reason you can't say Lara or Kallis is better than Bradman even though they have a great record in the sub-continent whilst Bradman didn't play there, is because they do not equal what Bradman did anywhere else. Whereas Marshall, Holding, Imran etc. have equalled what Lillee did around the world, plus succeeded in the sub-continent (and in the case of Imran, continously did because it was his home turf).
The reason you can't say Lara or Kallis is better than Bradman even though they have a great record in the sub-continent whilst Bradman didn't play there, is because they do not equal what Bradman did anywhere else. Whereas Marshall, Holding, Imran etc. have equalled what Lillee did around the world, plus succeeded in the sub-continent (and in the case of Imran, continously did because it was his home turf).
adharcric
International Coach
In regard to this "how great was Lillee?" debate, it all boils down to one thing.
Lillee did poorly in a few tests in the subcontinent and thus can't be labelled a "poor subcontinental bowler", as it could have been a one-off series or simply a case of his not having seen such conditions enough before.
Then, the question is why did Lillee play in the subcontinent so rarely?
If it is indeed his refusal to play on a "fast bowler's graveyard" as pointed out by Richard, then he can't be considered in the same class as Marshall, McGrath etc.
If it's simply a case of injuries, etc, then the question is should Lillee be excused for "lack of opportunity" and should we assume that like the other all-time greats, he too would've succeeded in the long run in the subcontinent?
You guys figure out the answers to those questions.
Lillee did poorly in a few tests in the subcontinent and thus can't be labelled a "poor subcontinental bowler", as it could have been a one-off series or simply a case of his not having seen such conditions enough before.
Then, the question is why did Lillee play in the subcontinent so rarely?
If it is indeed his refusal to play on a "fast bowler's graveyard" as pointed out by Richard, then he can't be considered in the same class as Marshall, McGrath etc.
If it's simply a case of injuries, etc, then the question is should Lillee be excused for "lack of opportunity" and should we assume that like the other all-time greats, he too would've succeeded in the long run in the subcontinent?
You guys figure out the answers to those questions.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
If the idea is to first decide what you guys want to prove and then use stats selectively to prove that join my rather defunct company 
SJS Stats Factory
SJS Stats Factory
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
The moral of the story is that if a player can not afford to have ONE poor series for if you arent able to tour that country again, you better be prepared to be consigned to the dustbin of the 2nd tier downwardsmarc71178 said:So being injured or not allowed to play are all his own fault then?
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Stats are all about selectivity. All stats are selective, it's just a question of which selections you make.SJS said:If the idea is to first decide what you guys want to prove and then use stats selectively to prove that join my rather defunct company
And IMO success \ lack of therewith in the subcontinent is an extremely important part of being a high-quality seam-bowler in the modern era.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yes exactly. There were 4 sub-continental tours during Lillee's career; one he was banned for (he was a Packer player and it was for ABC loyalists only), one he was injured for, he other was the now infamous 3-Test series against Pakistan and the other was a one-Test 'series' against SL. None of this is debateable and is all a matter of public record.
Richard; your posts above are exactly how crap rumours start because you have no clue of that which you speak in this instance yet insist 'you heard different'. Check your sources.