subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No he wasn't. Took him a few years to get his strides. I would say the first real knockout series I remember from him was when India toured SA in 96. By 96 his action was in full flow.
-
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.
McGrath & Lillee vs Donald & Steyn vs Imran & Akram
- Thread starter DrWolverine
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
@kyear2
Interested in your response to the below:
What is the big advantage of SA over Pak in this scenario?
I would concede that SA may be slightly better with the new ball in good bowling conditions but I don't see their bowling styles as meshing well and things can go rocky. SA have traditionally had one aggressive swinger and a more tight seamer at the other end.
Interested in your response to the below:
What is the big advantage of SA over Pak in this scenario?
I would concede that SA may be slightly better with the new ball in good bowling conditions but I don't see their bowling styles as meshing well and things can go rocky. SA have traditionally had one aggressive swinger and a more tight seamer at the other end.
kyear2
International Coach
That's a good point.
And I noticed that being the case in the list the Pererhrt posted as well.
Donald and Akram retired at essentially exactly the same age and time. Akram had played about 10 matches before Donald made his rebel tour debut, but he also missed about 30 games in his career. Akram's longevity in proper tests means he had a better test career, but it doesn't make him a better bowler.
Donald has a better away record than Akram anyway by just about any measure.
I don't have a problem with Akram ahead of Pollock but I do think Akram is seriously overrated on style, and his low quality of wickets flies seriously under the radar. A huge percentage of his wickets comes against the weakest batting lineups around, and the big numbers make the impact on the quality of wickets bigger than people who get slagged off for being minnow bashers. Throw in his high proportion of tail enders and his relatively low WPM and he isn't taking many quality wickets at all.
Pollock ahead of Donald is just a weird take though. Whether through stats or impact.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Akram debuting as a teen meant a larger formative stage and that impacted his numbers whereas Donald debuted basically in his bowling prime.
Donald has prettier away numbers but I would take Akram just about anywhere over Donald except England where Donald was dominant.
Akram just made more impact as a bowler away from home. Can you remember a single standout Donald away spell where he seriously stamped his name on the game?
The exception would be England where Donald was terrific in 98 (but then he also notoriously failed to bowl out England twice which cost them the series)
Pollock until 2003 was averaging 20 @over 4 wickets test. Until that point, I would dare to say he was a better bowler than Donald overseas especially the SC. So it's not ridiculous at all though overall Donald takes it.
kyear2
International Coach
I don't know why you do this, then get annoyed when I answer.
Steyn I rate higher than the other 3 (who I rate closely together), he's closer to my top tier than he is to them.
Imran, Donald and Wasim I rate together and more or less in that order. So I see Steyn as the x factor in this comp.
Donald and Steyn were better with the new ball, and I trust both of them more when away from home.
They both also have much better strike rates and it will be all out attack from both. Steyn also provides all the reverse the team needs.
kyear2
International Coach
Yeah, his record vs the better teams isn't the greatest and among the ATG's his percentage of lower order wickets taken is easily the highest.
His WPM is also below ATG standards but there are mitigating factors.
His value for me comes as a old ball bowler who has strong opening support, he wouldn't have that in this scenario and hence I don't think that the Pakistani duo is stronger.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Ok
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
One thing I will push back on is this idea that since Wasim had more lower order wickets, he was less effective with the new ball.
Wasim was a dynamite new ball bowler and no opening bat was comfy against him. I would have only Ambrose and McGrath ahead of him in his era as a new ball bowler because of their seam bounce combo but I think he rivals Donald on this score. I think what you mentioned about slips has a big reason for him to not have a bigger share but not in terms of quality.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Another issue with Donald is that 53 of his 72 tests are in SA, Eng and Aus. His away record here in massively overrated.
He hardly played much outside that.
He has single series in NZ, SL, Pak and WI and two mini series with four tests in India and didn't set the world on fire in any of those places.
How can we compare that with Wasim who had a much longer career and at least 2-3 tours per country?
Let's also not ignore the fact that not a single peer one can recall ever rated Donald ahead of Wasim.
He hardly played much outside that.
He has single series in NZ, SL, Pak and WI and two mini series with four tests in India and didn't set the world on fire in any of those places.
How can we compare that with Wasim who had a much longer career and at least 2-3 tours per country?
Let's also not ignore the fact that not a single peer one can recall ever rated Donald ahead of Wasim.
Last edited:
DrWolverine
U19 Cricketer
Donald was great but he was essentially fast and furious.Akram was a magician with the ball. Obviously Akram will have more peer acclaim
sayon basak
International Debutant
As you give much importance to peer rating, what is your take on Abdul Qadir?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Nah peers are usually rating who they find more difficult to play not who they enjoy to watch.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
His peer rating is unusually higher because he was in a period in the 80s when quality spinners weren't common and it was all about pure pace. Made him seem bigger than what he was.
DrWolverine
U19 Cricketer
That’s 73% of his tests. It’s comparable to other greats
McGrath played 71% of Tests in SA, Eng & Aus
Pollock played 71% of Tests in SA, Eng & Aus
Marshall played 72% of Tests in WI, Eng & Aus
Walsh played 78% of Tests in WI, Eng & Aus
Ambrose played 86% of Tests in WI, Eng & Aus
kyear2
International Coach
Yes I believe the slip support did have a negative impact on his overall numbers, but I also remember him being way more effective with the old ball.
DrWolverine
U19 Cricketer
Hopefully it was because of his talent and not any other reason
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I am not talking percentage per se. It's the small sample number of tests outside those countries.
All those other bowlers played at least much more in the other countries.
Let's take Marshall out of the bowlers you mentioned who played the least. Marshall played 50/81 games away compared to 34/72 for Donald.
Marshall played three series in Eng, three in Pakistan, two in India, two in Aus and one in NZ. In other words, he has strong samples everywhere except NZ.
Donald has two in Eng, two in Aus, two (mini) in India, and one each in WI, NZ, Pak, and SL.
As in, outside of Eng and Aus, Donald doesn't really have a big sample or outstanding series performance anywhere. Its all pretty numbers that don't mean much.
Last edited:
kyear2
International Coach
When we start stating that most of a cricketer's matches were in certain areas, it almost comes across like they were protected or hiding. This isn't like Lillee where he didn't visit at all, or Trueman or some spinners that weren't / aren't selected to travel. One can only play who was in front of him and he did well.
Re the peer rating, equally I can say that Imran played with other ATGs, notable Hadlee, who had a similar career arc and Hadlee is universally rated higher. You would still argue they're not far apart or in the same tier.
And along that same line, Steyn is almost universally rated higher than Imran as well, and again, better with the new ball.
kyear2
International Coach
Because, that's where the money was, and in the era, where the acclaim lay.
Not that difficult.