Shoaib Akhtar or Brett Lee?

[iamdavid]

Doesn't that just highlight the reason so many people have picked Lee though? The OP was asking who was better, with all factors taken into account, not who had the most talent or potential. Potential and talent are only useful if they are realised.

I went for Lee because I love that he's made the most of what he was given. He was always a rung below the McGrath's and Wasim's of the world, but he was tireless in his attempts to better himself. He had a body that was not standing up to the rigors of cricket, but every time he had a crippling injury he's picked himself up again, refusing to be beaten by setback after setback. His comeback for this WC has been nothing short of an incredible achievement, and testament to his determination. That determination, combined with the fact I don't think there's as much difference between the two as is being made out (and probably shades Shoaib with the white ball), I'd pick Lee in my team every day of the week.

I agree with you on Lee, and if the question were "who had the better career?" then I'd likely have to go for Lee on account of his longevity and better ODI record. However as great as Lee's attitude was and as much as I'm sure he would've been a real pain in the ass to face, I just don't think he was a better bowler than Shoaib.

Lee at times could be very one dimensional, he had great pace and was capable of swining the ball away but he was always a bit of a two-length bowler, while the effort was always there the control and ability to exert pressure was often lacking. His shortcomings were exposed pretty regularly throughout his test career. Lee was great in his first 7 tests where he burst onto the scene against India and New Zealand, and for a period of about a year following McGrath's retirement in 2007/08, when he displayed greater control and maturity than at any time previously, but for the other 50-odd tests outside of those two periods Lee was average at best and quite often pretty disappointing, despite his obvious effort/great attitude etc.

Don't get me wrong I loved watching the guy bowl and I agree that he got the best out of himself, but I think Shoaib had him covered.

 

[Top_Cat]

Again that sort of highlights it. Lee maintained a high level of performance for longer, and took more wickets for his country. In other words he got more out of himself than Shoaib did, which narrows the talent gap between the two. Most would agree that they'd take Shoaib over Lee at their respective best, but I think Australia got more out of Lee than Pakistan got out of Shoaib, particularly when you take ODI's into account, which is how I interpreted the question.

Yeah we're just interpreting it differently. I look at it like a captain would, if I had to choose one or the other for my team for any given game, who'd be more likely to take Test wickets? Shoaib the better bowler for me.