Salamuddin
International Debutant
Who do you think is a better bowler ?
-
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.
Shoaib Akhtar v Brett Lee
- Thread starter Salamuddin
- Start date
Gaijin-san
Banned
Lee.
Whatever people say about him he's actually surprisingly accurate, although he has a tendency to be wayward occasionally, as does Akhtar.
Shoaib too often gets distracted by a bad decision or fired up to the point that it has a negative effect, whereas Lee always concentrates on the next ball.
You can't say Lee isn't a good bowler. He was man of the VB series last season, and he had some good competition.
Whatever people say about him he's actually surprisingly accurate, although he has a tendency to be wayward occasionally, as does Akhtar.
Shoaib too often gets distracted by a bad decision or fired up to the point that it has a negative effect, whereas Lee always concentrates on the next ball.
You can't say Lee isn't a good bowler. He was man of the VB series last season, and he had some good competition.
Last edited:
Eclipse
International Debutant
For me it's Shoiab.
However Lee has the chance to be the better bowler and do it for a longer period if he gets his act together.
Lee has more tool's to work with he has a better and less stressfull action. He bowl's genuine outswingers and while not as explosive over 1-2 overs he does maintain a higher avrage speed.
Controll is not Lee's problem he does have fairly good accuracy. He just need's to know were to bowl and why. And not to get to carried away with yorkers and bouncers.
However Lee has the chance to be the better bowler and do it for a longer period if he gets his act together.
Lee has more tool's to work with he has a better and less stressfull action. He bowl's genuine outswingers and while not as explosive over 1-2 overs he does maintain a higher avrage speed.
Controll is not Lee's problem he does have fairly good accuracy. He just need's to know were to bowl and why. And not to get to carried away with yorkers and bouncers.
agreed 100%Eclipse said:
It's quite perplexing to why Lee's record in recent years has been so poor - he has bowled well. He bowls quick, genuine outswiner and bowls a fairly good line and length. But unlike someone like McGrath, he's not a smart bowler.
Out of all the cricketers in the Australian team, Lee is the most talented (except maybe bar Gilchrist and Hayden), but unfortunately in terms of cricket he is the dumbest.
The best game that sums up Lee is the fifth test v england last season.Eclipse said:
His first 4-5 overs in that test was one of the, if not the best start from an opening bowler i've ever seen - and most people there that day agreed with that too.
He got Vaughan out early and IIRC he got an edge of Buthcer that was dropped. And he was just bowler quick, getting a heap of outswing and hitting the right spot time and time again. But as usual, luck didn't go his way, he lost his patience, and he ended up with 2/100-odd.
If he had've had the brain of McGrath, stayed patient, and continued the way he was going for 10-12 overs (or more) he would've been desperately unlucky not have had 3 or 4 (or more) wickets in his opening spell.
Eclipse
International Debutant
I remember that spell it was absouloutly amazing.
no one and I mean none of the English batsman could lay bat on ball for about 3 overs no matter how hard they were trying.
The spell was actualy too good to be truley effective in some way's because he was moving the ball so far and so late that he was almost imposible to nick.
He also had Butcher plum first ball not given out.
no one and I mean none of the English batsman could lay bat on ball for about 3 overs no matter how hard they were trying.
The spell was actualy too good to be truley effective in some way's because he was moving the ball so far and so late that he was almost imposible to nick.
He also had Butcher plum first ball not given out.
PY
International Coach
She most definitely isn't the only girl on this forum. Kim and Anna are two off the top of head. Apologies to others I can't remember :P
Akhtar for me, scared the living daylights out of the Aussies a while ago just by raw aggression and pace. Shifted the mental equation a little which is a big part of the Australian game.
Akhtar for me, scared the living daylights out of the Aussies a while ago just by raw aggression and pace. Shifted the mental equation a little which is a big part of the Australian game.
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
KimGo_India said:
Anna
Tamara
I'd take Shoaib at present, see others' posts for reasons.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
For me it is an insult to Shoaib to compare him to Lee.
Over a longer career than Lee, Shoaib has left no doubt that at his best he is totally devestating.
Lee may appear to have the better raw materials; Lee's stock-ball is an outswinger, Shoaib's an inswinger, Lee may give the misleading impression that he is more accurate.
However the simple fact of the matter is that since July 2001 Lee has taken Test-wickets at closer to 40 than 30. To even bother with the part before that is simply to attempt a sidestep.
Shoaib is not the perfect bowler and nor I suspect will he ever be. He goes in fits and starts - one game 2.5-an-over, next 6-an-over. However he has definately had spells, which seem to be getting longer as his career goes on, where he's strung good performances together.
There is no arguing with Lee's ODI average (Shoaib's economy-rate is slightly better) but the fact is his Test average is only going in one direction and that is up. Shoaib's is presently going down.
Over a longer career than Lee, Shoaib has left no doubt that at his best he is totally devestating.
Lee may appear to have the better raw materials; Lee's stock-ball is an outswinger, Shoaib's an inswinger, Lee may give the misleading impression that he is more accurate.
However the simple fact of the matter is that since July 2001 Lee has taken Test-wickets at closer to 40 than 30. To even bother with the part before that is simply to attempt a sidestep.
Shoaib is not the perfect bowler and nor I suspect will he ever be. He goes in fits and starts - one game 2.5-an-over, next 6-an-over. However he has definately had spells, which seem to be getting longer as his career goes on, where he's strung good performances together.
There is no arguing with Lee's ODI average (Shoaib's economy-rate is slightly better) but the fact is his Test average is only going in one direction and that is up. Shoaib's is presently going down.
Bouncer
State Regular
Lee deos have a better action and fitness than akhter and because he bowls more out swingers,(which is more traditional way in fast bowling) so he which gives us impression that he is more accurate..
But as much as Destructiveness and chaninging the game is concerned Akhter is a much better bowler than Lee. i dont even think there has been any body closer to akhter other than waqar younis(both have ability to take wickets in a bunch which saperates them from the rest)
when Akhter takes a wicket, he follows it with another more often than not and changes the game. He is a game winner in his first over, 6th over or 10th over., and even more lethal in test matches
But as much as Destructiveness and chaninging the game is concerned Akhter is a much better bowler than Lee. i dont even think there has been any body closer to akhter other than waqar younis(both have ability to take wickets in a bunch which saperates them from the rest)
when Akhter takes a wicket, he follows it with another more often than not and changes the game. He is a game winner in his first over, 6th over or 10th over., and even more lethal in test matches
deeps
International 12th Man
Hayden isn't that talented...His success is a result of his hard work over the years,not talent... Have u seen hayden about 10 years back? He used to trip over his own feet, had terrible foot work and was not the batsman he is now... The most talented would have to be Ricky Pontinghourn said:
deeps
International 12th Man
I think Lee is mroe reliable then Akhtar, in that Lee usually goes for around 4 an over,and usually doesn't get hit for much more...ie,u know wat to expect from him
Akhtar,like most pakistani players, have too many hot and cold days...Sometimes Akhtar can rip a team to shreds (that game against australia) and sometiemes the bowlers will demolish Akhtar (World cup match against india)
I think if the opposition needed 12 runs to win off the last over,i would rather bowl Lee than akhtar,but if i wanted 3 wickets off the last over, i would bowl akhtar...
Lee can rip a team to shreds as well,but it happens less frequently than akhtar
Personality wise, Lee seems 2 b a really nice cool guy,and AKhtar seems to be a bit of a loser
Akhtar,like most pakistani players, have too many hot and cold days...Sometimes Akhtar can rip a team to shreds (that game against australia) and sometiemes the bowlers will demolish Akhtar (World cup match against india)
I think if the opposition needed 12 runs to win off the last over,i would rather bowl Lee than akhtar,but if i wanted 3 wickets off the last over, i would bowl akhtar...
Lee can rip a team to shreds as well,but it happens less frequently than akhtar
Personality wise, Lee seems 2 b a really nice cool guy,and AKhtar seems to be a bit of a loser