How in the world is Akthar ranked 8th best in the world????

[Matt79]

I'd take Zaheer Khan over him as an ongoing prospect, every day of the week. Hypothetically fit and firing bowlers are no match for actual performances. Might as well take Wasim Akram and say, "if he was able to get himself fit and bowling at his best again".

 

[susudear]

What about the collateral damage?

I'd take Zaheer Khan over him as an ongoing prospect, every day of the week. Hypothetically fit and firing bowlers are no match for actual performances. Might as well take Wasim Akram and say, "if he was able to get himself fit and bowling at his best again".

Not to mention the collateral damage to the team environment and potential injury to other team members .

 

[Rant0r]

yeah i would take any of the current indian seamers over him

and for the record
v Australia 31 wickets @ 35.64 epic

 

[krkode]

Shoaib's average against India and Aus is actually his worst (34+). But I suppose that is to be expected - his career happened to coincide with arguably the strongest Aussie side ever and the best Indian batting lineup ever. Still, that he was capable of destroying a lineup on his day is undeniable and few could do it like he did. Even Muralitharan and Shaun Pollock averaged mid-30s against Australia.

Barring the fact that he is kind of a destructive influence on the team and prone to injury, he definitely seems like a hard-working bowler. And yeah, on his day, he was pretty deadly. Would probably take him over any Indian fast bowler in recent history. Although perhaps the new Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma are hope for the future. Still, I have trouble thinking highly of bowlers who average 30+. Even in series where people are singing high praise about Zaheer Khan being arguably the best bowler in the world, he still averages above 30. I suppose it comes with the territory when you're Indian playing half your matches on Indian pitches.

 

[Rant0r]

yeah i'm gonna have to agree to disagree with you, shoaib doesn't know the meaning of working hard, he'll fake a hammy at the first sight of trouble.

and in my opinion sharma > zaheer > rpsingh > sreesanth > pathan > munaf > shoaib

 

[Pathan09]

and in my opinion sharma > zaheer > rpsingh > sreesanth > pathan > munaf > shoaib

I wouldn't go that far mate. Shoaib still has the talent and he has tried his best in the ODIs played in 2008.

 

[Richard]

yeah i'm gonna have to agree to disagree with you, shoaib doesn't know the meaning of working hard, he'll fake a hammy at the first sight of trouble.

and in my opinion sharma > zaheer > rpsingh > sreesanth > pathan > munaf > shoaib

There's no doubt Shoaib has been a phenomenal waste of talent, but equally there's no doubt that even what he has managed to achieve despite this wastage is of some amount of note. He's achieved more than all Test bowlers in history bar a handful.

Of course, none of that changes the fact that right now (and for at least the last couple of years or so) Pakistan cricket would've been much better-off if they could've been shot of him. His useful date as a bowler has passed, he's always had some caveats about what he detracts from the team, and it's a shame his presence has continued to cancerise Pakistan in recent times.

Nonetheless, his career between about 1998 and about 2006 was a pretty decent, if still hugely let-down, one.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I think people hold his fitness and discipline issues against him. It kind of seems unfair considering Chris Cairns probably missed as many games as Shoaib did too, but people don't seem to play the fitness card when his name crops up.

 

[Rant0r]

yeah but that is the complete player, if he can't be fit, bowl long spells and get along with his teamates then what good is he (need i mention him hitting his teamate with a bat) ? i never even thought he was that good, he was quick as, but that's really it, just a bit of shock value because he was genuinly very quick

 

[Richard]

I think people hold his fitness and discipline issues against him. It kind of seems unfair considering Chris Cairns probably missed as many games as Shoaib did too, but people don't seem to play the fitness card when his name crops up.

Cairns isn't the same though. Cairns only missed a handful of games between 1995/96 and 2004. All of them were with obvious, serious ailments. Shoaib has regularly missed all sorts of stuff with all sorts of things.

I couldn't really care less for this "faking it" stuff TBH. I think Shoaib's just not quite up to the fitness and strength levels required to bowl fast and not constantly fall down. It's been said many times by people on and off CW but bowling fast puts ridiculous strain on your body and not all bodies can cope. Shoaib's, from what I can tell, is one.

And being able to stay (relatively) injury-free is one of the natural attributes which contributes greatly to the calibre of a seam-bowler. Every bit as much as a fast arm, tall height and the ability to swing the ball. Shoaib doesn't have it. So he isn't as good as some of those who did.

 

[Richard]

yeah but that is the complete player, if he can't be fit, bowl long spells and get along with his teamates then what good is he (need i mention him hitting his teamate with a bat) ? i never even thought he was that good, he was quick as, but that's really it, just a bit of shock value because he was genuinly very quick

Not really. He can swing the ball both ways, he can bowl a superb Yorker, and he can even hit really good lines and lengths from time to time. The ability to do the aforementioned plus the ability to regularly bowl at 95mph (even if it's just for 4 or 5 overs at a time) = incredibly dangerous bowler.

Thing about Shoaib is, he doesn't have the ability to stay fit for all that long while doing this, and he also loses his line and length from time to time - more often than the very best do. And at that speed, losing your lines means you're going to go for lots and lots before you know it.

 

[zaremba]

Not really. He can swing the ball both ways, he can bowl a superb Yorker, and he can even hit really good lines and lengths from time to time. The ability to do the aforementioned plus the ability to regularly bowl at 95mph (even if it's just for 4 or 5 overs at a time) = incredibly dangerous bowler.

AWTA

 

[Harry Harrison]

http://www.iccreliancerankings.com/

Bull ****.

Akthar is ranked presently 8th in the list of bowlers.

And to make it even sound ridiculous, he was ranked 9th in the last week.

Which means his rankings pushed up without him playing a single match in the entire year??

And here are the stats of his since 1-Jan-2004

60 wickets from 17 matches @ 30.18!! (Not one year, but a full 5 years!!!)

That puts him as the 20th best bowler (in terms of bowling average) for bowlers with 50+ wickets since 2004!!!

And last two years, he's taken just 13 wickets.

Is the ranking rewarding players for not playing????

Isn't it time ICC rankings were completely overhauled to avoid these types of anomalies??

Or am I missing something???

Another question like that is how come Dhoni is number 1 ranked batsman in the world? What special he has done?

 

[ozone]

Another question like that is how come Dhoni is number 1 ranked batsman in the world? What special he has done?

Well, he's played cricket in the last year. Thats definately a start...

 

[Harry Harrison]

i would not have him in any first, second or third strength team no, he's an overrated waste of space

What???????????????????? About which Akhter you are talking about? I hope its not Shoaib Akhter. And if it was Shoaib Akhter, then think again when you are not drunk.

 

[Rant0r]

i don't think he swings or seams it that much, he tails in the odd yorker yes, but it's mainly his pace that's his asset, i'd much rather a slower bowler who gets some movement as there's a lot of pace around these days that it's not that much of a shock factor

harry harrison ? are you a 15 year old nang inhaler ?

 

[Sanz]

yeah i'm gonna have to agree to disagree with you, shoaib doesn't know the meaning of working hard, he'll fake a hammy at the first sight of trouble.

and in my opinion sharma > zaheer > rpsingh > sreesanth > pathan > munaf > shoaib

Yeah and Agarkar is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marshall.

Come on, let's not be kidding here. Munaf patel, SreeSanth, Pathan, RP Singh better than Shoaib ? On Recent form, Zaheer/Ishant may be, although I am not so sure.

 

[Rant0r]

your comparins akthar so marshall ?

maybe in peak form i would have akthar maybe 3rd or 4th on that list, disregarding all outside factors maximum 2nd or 3rd.

but on recent form, attitude, fitness i wouldn't have him anywhere near those blokes. but then india have a great battery of pacemen at the moment so it could sound/look a bit worse than it is

 

[Richard]

i don't think he swings or seams it that much, he tails in the odd yorker yes, but it's mainly his pace that's his asset, i'd much rather a slower bowler who gets some movement as there's a lot of pace around these days that it's not that much of a shock factor

I'm really not sure which Shoaib Akhtar you've been watching all career but he swings the ball every bit as much as Waqar Younis under comparable circumstances.

If Shoaib had been a bowler who depended entirely on pace and whose control of swing was poor then he'd just have been the sort of bowler Brett Lee was between 2001 and 2005 - ie, pretty useless.

 

[Migara]

yeah i'm gonna have to agree to disagree with you, shoaib doesn't know the meaning of working hard, he'll fake a hammy at the first sight of trouble.

and in my opinion sharma > zaheer > rpsingh > sreesanth > pathan > munaf > shoaib