Jasprit bumrah vs Wasim Akram

[humaiyun.hibas]

I can't wrap my head around over someone genuinely, like in a non-trolly way, finding Bumrah's bowling boring.....

Bumrah lacks that nasty edge. He lacks the sternum-cracker.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And he has that ***y movement. The anticipation every ball is an event; in literally every format.

 

[smash84]

I can't wrap my head around over someone genuinely, like in a non-trolly way, finding Bumrah's bowling boring.....

Same. He is ridiculously entertaining to watch when not bowling against your team.

 

[humaiyun.hibas]

Medium paced swing bowlers like Bumrah CANNOT be entertaining unless you are an Englishman or an Indian used to County cricket trundlers. Bounce is fundamental to the art of entertainment in fast bowling. It's all about that nasty edge or the nasty chassis.

 

[smash84]

Medium paced swing bowlers like Bumrah CANNOT be entertaining unless you are an Englishman or an Indian used to County cricket trundlers. Bounce is fundamental to the art of entertainment in fast bowling. It's all about that nasty edge or the nasty chassis.

Ok, so you are here for the trolling.

Post reported.

 

[kyear2]

Anderson was a tier 1 bowler in home conditions after 2010. Decent away over all after 2010 but not enough skills to do well against top sides outside Eng. A wonderful bowler to watch in Eng after 2010 no matter who he has playing against.

Only true tier 1 pacers do well in dens of top teams. I never rated Anderson as tier 1 pacer any time in his career.



That's why , in Ambrose vs IK thread , I found argument about Ambrose lacking sample size in some country not convincing enough to start rating him lower.

Ambrose had a great away record against top teams and had an ATG away record against the best oppostion of his era.

Similarly, Bumrah has a great away record against top teams and has an ATG away record against the best oppostion of his era.

Ambrose did not play in India and Bumrah is not likely to play in Pakistan. But we can see what they have done where they played.

Strangely enough in that same series of vids I just mentioned Ambrose was heavily discussed, and I guess that it comes down to perspective, but his away record, especially against "the best teams of his era" was a plus point for him.

He was playing vs the best teams, home and away, that's pretty much all the check marks you need.

 

[kyear2]

I don't think many rate him ahead of McGrath. I don't.

Some rate him ahead of Steyn and some rate him below Steyn. Both are fine in my opinion and you can make a case.

It's fine to bring up him playing only 6 tests in Asia when comparing him with some bowlers but when he is far ahead of IK in away records, I think talking about it is not adding much to the debate.

Also, Asia was different during IK and Ambrose time. Asia had only 2 non-minnows teams during full career of both players. Ambrose did play 5 tests in Pak. Many have played only 2-3 tess in one venue. His only miss was India. It's fair to say that he was unproven in India due to not playing. If some one has similar great away career record with India included then sure, point it out when comparing.

All good points.

 

[kyear2]

Wasim is still better, for now.

The next few years for Bumrah will be telling, and interesting.

 

[humaiyun.hibas]

Wasim is still better, for now.

The next few years for Bumrah will be telling, and interesting.

Not just now, but forever. Wasim Akram is the dream cricketer. He had magic flowing through his veins. Bumrah only has pragmatism flowing through his veins.

 

[kyear2]

Not just now, but forever. Wasim Akram is the dream cricketer. He had magic flowing through his veins. Bumrah only has pragmatism flowing through his veins.

What the hell are you talking about?

Bumrah has top 5 (well 6 if he gets in) pacer potential, Wasim just isn't there.

 

[humaiyun.hibas]

What the hell are you talking about?

Bumrah has top 5 (well 6 if he gets in) pacer potential, Wasim just isn't there.

Lol!
Wasim Akram was a dream cricketer. A magic cricketer, like Warne or Marshall.

Bumrah is a pragmatism cricketer. If both Wasim Akram and Bumrah were footballers, Akram would be Iniesta, Zidane or Messi, whereas Bumrah would be Andy Carroll, John Terry or Darren Bent.
Bumrah has pragmatism flowing through his veins.

 

[Randomfan]

I don't think Wasim is as good as Ambrose nor McGrath and I know that this gets overplayed a little. But even today I was watching anl (really poor) all time team panel discussion, and even in the highlights he was bowling to Border and it was dropped at 2nd slip.

Don't know how many wickets he missed out on like that, but it may have got him a little closer.

Pakistani fielding was not great. That's my memory of watching Wasim live as well. Having said that, I don't know how to account for all that. I think gap would have been a bit closer for sure, but not sure narrow enough to not have have much difference in output. Despite decent fielding, plenty of catches of Bumrah gets dropped like all other bowlers. I do feel Pakistan used to drop more frequently.

 

[Randomfan]

Ranking top 5 teams can be misleading sometimes.

NZ were a good team in 80s, SL good after 1995 and performance against England was given a lot of significance. I don’t think it is correct to skip those performances. For example, Wasim picked a 5-fer vs SL in SL in 2000. That is a top performance but won’t be captured when we look at top 5 teams during Wasim’s era. So, there is that hole in your analysis.

As for Bumrah, he definitely is right up there but players do face decline in latter phase and we will get a clear idea once we look at those numbers with higher overall.

Agree with some of the pointss you raised. Some counter points,

1) Wasim played 7 out of 9 tests against NZ after 80s.

2) Performance of Wasim against Eng: Avg 30-31 & SR 70 [ Given historical weight, it means negative for Wasim and not really positive. ]



3) SL was indeed a good team after 1995. Since SL was minnow for the first 10 years of Wasim's career, not sure how to account for it. Counting entire peiod for SL does not make sense and it gets tricky to do piece meal to get to numebr for Wasim.

4) Since we have just 7-8 non-minnows in entire history, we have to draw a line somewhere for top 5 test side. Not saying that bottom 3 or even minnows can't be a challenge. Also, given your point about historic significance of Eng and Wasim having 30 plus avg & SR of 70 against Eng, whatever advantage Wasim will get by having Sl after 95 and 2 tests from 80s agaisnt NZ, it will be negated due to poor output against Eng.

Wasim has good numbers against NZ and poor numbers against Eng from bottom 2. SL joined to form the bottom 3 after 95 so we are not missing much. Top 5 does a decent job of capturing the output. Not perfect as you pointed out. It has some flaws, but without doing manual filtering and calculations, I think it's not way off the mark for performance against good teams.

 

[Randomfan]

A complete skillset for a fast bowler is about having that sternum-cracker, that nasty rising ball off a length.

Skll set does not make any bowler better. Skill set is used to get wickets cheaply and quickly. Getting wickets cheaply and quickly makes you a better bowler.

If you can pick wickets cheaply and quickly with just one skill(anything) then you are producing a better output and you are a better bowler than some one else having 10 skills but not able to pick wickets cheaply and quickly. Off course, we will only compare bolwers with enough sample size otherwise you could be just better in one venue.

In case of Bumrah, he has pretty much all the skills. Deadly yorker & bouncer, moving ball both ways, setting up bastmen, reverse, very hard to hit, rarely poor balls .... List goes on. He is actually veyr very hard to hit due to his late release. Ball comes faster.

Anyway, Bumrah has all the skills you can ask and with that he has produced fantastic output. Skill; is anyway subjective, but output is result not subjective.

 

[Rob Wesley]

Agree with some of the pointss you raised. Some counter points,

1) Wasim played 7 out of 9 tests against NZ after 80s.

2) Performance of Wasim against Eng: Avg 30-31 & SR 70 [ Given historical weight, it means negative for Wasim and not really positive. ]

View attachment 44709

3) SL was indeed a good team after 1995. Since SL was minnow for the first 10 years of Wasim's career, not sure how to account for it. Counting entire peiod for SL does not make sense and it gets tricky to do piece meal to get to numebr for Wasim.

4) Since we have just 7-8 non-minnows in entire history, we have to draw a line somewhere for top 5 test side. Not saying that bottom 3 or even minnows can't be a challenge. Also, given your point about historic significance of Eng and Wasim having 30 plus avg & SR of 70 against Eng, whatever advantage Wasim will get by having Sl after 95 and 2 tests from 80s agaisnt NZ, it will be negated due to poor output against Eng.

Wasim has good numbers against NZ and poor numbers against Eng from bottom 2. SL joined to form the bottom 3 after 95 so we are not missing much. Top 5 does a decent job of capturing the output. Not perfect as you pointed out. It has some flaws, but without doing manual filtering and calculations, I think it's not way off the mark for performance against good teams.

You are right about his output being around about same if we count Eng, NZ and SL too.

But his sample would be much higher, probably 90 tests and 360 wickets. That’s a bowler known for his longevity and not being injury prone. At the moment, this is one point that is denting Bumrah’s career to an extent.

He doesn’t need a lot of tests to prove his worth but I feel 15-20 tests later, we may be in a better position for a comparison because I just don’t feel that picking wickets vs Eng, NZ and SL should be simply counted as cheap wickets. He should get to 60 tests by 2027 which is about 10 years career and that will give us a better idea.

 

[Coronis]

@smash84 in case you missed it try checking out his thread/other posts. He literally only posts about how pacers who can get bounce are the best and other pacers are useless. Better things to do than respond lol

 

[smash84]

@smash84 in case you missed it try checking out his thread/other posts. He literally only posts about how pacers who can get bounce are the best and other pacers are useless. Better things to do than respond lol

I didn't see his other posts. Now I've seen enough

 

[Narayana]

I can't wrap my head around over someone genuinely, like in a non-trolly way, finding Bumrah's bowling boring.....

Why though?
His action is completely different from others like Steve Smith, Indian will love, others might not like him.

 

[Randomfan]

You are right about his output being around about same if we count Eng, NZ and SL too.

But his sample would be much higher, probably 90 tests and 360 wickets.

I tried doing it manually to have all non-minnows wickets for Wasim.

73 tests - 304 wickets against Ind, Aus, SA, Eng, NZ, WI
9 tests - 28 wickets against SL starting from 1995 [ till the end of 94, SL did not have even 5 test win in entire history. In 1995 they crossed that thresh hold ]

Wasim non-minnows : 81 tests - 332 wickets


------------------------------------------------------------


I think wickets against bottom 3 teams ( Eng, NZ and post 95 Sl) still counts, but Wasim was collectively not great in away matches against top oppositions. He was poor against historic significant team like Eng as well if you step out of top 5. Performing against the best teams in their dens is the hardest job in test cricket. It comes down to weighing Wasim's longevity versus hardest job in test cricket.

In short it comes down to,

--------------

Weight of hardest part in the test cricket,

Wasim's 105 away wickets - Avg 26.9 & SR 61 - top 5 teams [ Raw stats can be misleading but lots of peers outperformed Wasim here by a large margin. Wasim was not even close against best bowlers ]

Bumrah 145 away wickets - Avg 20.3 & SR 44 - top 5 teams [ Bumrah is stand out here and outperformed his peers by a big margin. 40 more wickets than Wasim already and it will go much higher. ]

---------------

Versus

------------------------------------------------
Weight of longevity

Wasim longevity against non-minnows ( 332 wickets )
Bumrah wickets against non-minnows ( 194 wickets )

------------------------------------------------


I think there comes a point where quality with a large enough sample size over takes longevity. Emphasis is on large enough. In my opinion, Bumrah has crossed that point with 194 wickets against non-minnows and being a stand out in his generation. For some fans, it may take 40-50 more wickets from Bumrah to seal the deal. I feel longevity argument holds more water with somewhat similar output, but there is a lage gap there.

Considering everything, I think the case is marginal at best in either direction right now for most fans. 40-50 more wickets at good output from Bumrah, it will become one sided for most fans. Output from Bumrah has to be good to make it one sided for most fans and just longevity of 40-50 more wickets won't cut it. Quality over longevity , same argument again.

 

[Johan]

Medium paced swing bowlers like Bumrah CANNOT be entertaining unless you are an Englishman or an Indian used to County cricket trundlers. Bounce is fundamental to the art of entertainment in fast bowling. It's all about that nasty edge or the nasty chassis.

you realise that's the vast, vast majority of the Cricket fanbase right?