Shane Warne vs Imran Khan

[DrWolverine]

Better test bowler

 

[Johan]

Warne.

 

[subshakerz]

Imran. In fact I am trying to think of what would be a good argument for Warne outside of just sheer wicket tally.

 

[kyear2]

Warne.

The first of the pacers where he clearly has the advantage.

 

[Cricket Bliss]

Imran. In fact I am trying to think of what would be a good argument for Warne outside of just sheer wicket tally.

Performance across unfavorable conditions

 

[Bolo.]

Imran. In fact I am trying to think of what would be a good argument for Warne outside of just sheer wicket tally.

Outside of sheer wicket tally, whatever made you think that a comparison to Holding was insulting to Warne is probably a pretty good place to start.

 

[Coronis]

Fun fact, Shane Warne in the 00’s has significantly more wickets than Imran away in his whole career. In significantly less matches. With a significantly better average.

 

[subshakerz]

Performance across unfavorable conditions

Huh? Imran was never as horrible in any country as Warne in India. He was far better against the best batting lineup he faced. Did relatively better at home.

 

[subshakerz]

Fun fact, Shane Warne in the 00’s has significantly more wickets than Imran away in his whole career. In significantly less matches. With a significantly better average.

Fun fact he averaged around 30 at home in the 2000s.

 

[subshakerz]

Outside of sheer wicket tally, whatever made you think that a comparison to Holding was insulting to Warne is probably a pretty good place to start.

I also said Holding was likely in the top tier class of bowlers better than Warne but not with the wicket tally to justify a comparison.

 

[sayon basak]

I also said Holding was likely in the top tier class of bowlers better than Warne but not with the wicket tally to justify a comparison.

Imran's wicket tally is way closer to Holding's than to Warne's.

 

[subshakerz]

Imran's wicket tally is way closer to Holding's than to Warne's.

Yes I have acknowledged wicket tally argument favors Warne.

 

[sayon basak]

Yes I have acknowledged wicket tally argument favors Warne.

If Imran is better than Warne, why is Holding vs Warne insulting to Warne?

 

[Coronis]

Fun fact he averaged around 30 at home in the 2000s.

Fun fact other spinners averaged 42 in Aus in his career in the 2000’s

 

[subshakerz]

Fun fact other spinners averaged 42 in Aus in his career in the 2000’s

So he struggled just not as much others.

 

[subshakerz]

If Imran is better than Warne, why is Holding vs Warne insulting to Warne?

Because you should have a minimum wicket tally to make the comparison between modern ATG bowlers. Comparing Warne with 700 wickets to someone with with less than 300 is insulting. At least to me.

 

[kyear2]

Now I'm going to temporarily un-ignore this gentleman to see these arguments?

Is it worth it?

 

[DrWolverine]

At the time of his retirement, Michael Holding was the 10th highest wicket taker among fast bowlers and he missed 3 years of his prime due to WSC.

 

[subshakerz]

Now I'm going to temporarily un-ignore this gentleman to see these arguments?

Is it worth it?

Congrats on your recent Hall of Fame designation.

 

[subshakerz]

I agree with Kyear before he changed his mind.

For the guys in the second or in-between tier, it is closer, but then I recalled Warne and Murali's record vs India, Murali vs Australia and what Lara did to both. I'll go with Imran on this one.