shankar said:
IMO Rana slightly > Pathan, in terms of the effectiveness of the roles that they play. Rana basically needs to pick up the odd wicket with the new ball and keep it tight for Akhtar at the other end. He was very effective in this role in the England series. Between Zaheer and Sami again, it's very close - Zaheer is just coming back after a long gap and if he can hit the straps right from the first match, then he's probably better than Sami, but knowing Zaheer that's a huge IF. However, Akhtar is just miles ahead of Agarkar. So overall, the Pak pace attack is significantly better than India's.
Besides the above, I really don't think this > < method of comparing attacks is valid as it over-simplifies it too much. For example Akhtar is the one bowler from both the sides who has the crucial proven ability to turn in a match-winning performance running through the opposition batting. Based on this alone the Pakistan pace attack is far better than the Indian one irrespective of the other bowlers.
Pathan v Rana -
Comparing Averages -
Pathan excluding minnows(I have excluded minnows as many people have said that his average has been lifted due to the fact that he picked 39 wickets in 4 tests @ 11.56 against the minnows, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) - 34 wickets in 14 tests @
42.85
Rana - 15 wickets in 7 tests @
55.79 and he is yet to play against minnows.
Effectiveness of roles -
Pathan - Pathan, playing as an Indian pacer, does not have to be the wicket-taker for India in tests, in terms of his effectivenss, he just has to keep his tight and provide some early wickets before the spinners, Harbhajan and Kumble take over and take the remaining wickets. Pathan, has been very effective in this role providing the early breakthrough which India needs.
Rana - You said it about Rana.
Going by statistics and the effectiveness of their roles, I would put in Pathan > Rana. And, this makes Indian pace-bowling attack as good as, if not better than Pakistan.
Indian pace-bowling is highly under-rated whereas Pakistan pace-bowling is over-rated and this is mainly due to the fact that the Indian pacers, play the role of support bowlers and do not have much to do as we already have 2 world-class spinners in Kumble and Harbhajan in the team, who pick up the wickets. The job of the Indian pacers, is to get only those early wickets putting the opposition on the backfoot.
Pakistan pace-bowling is over-rated as their pacers, play the main role in taking the wickets and spinners are there only to keep things tight at the other end picking up occasional wickets. The job of the Pakistan pacers, is to take the wickets, not just early wickets.
