Wasim Akram vs Allan Donald

[Bolo.]

Seriously, how old are some of you lot?? No bowler is easily or any of that rubbish better than Donald in ODIs. His stats are amazing but beyond that the dude was box office. I assume some are basing this on his performance in his last world cup (bs) because in the decade prior he excelled. In the world cups prior he also excelled.

We obviously prioritise different things in ODI bowlers.

Box office is a pretty worthless trait in assessing quality of pre 2015ish bowlers in my eyes, however fun it is to watch. Give me boring and consistent when it comes to winning games.

I watched Donald's first, last and the vast majority of the middle FTR. My opinion of him was formed years before his last WC. Not sure, but probably the best bowler in his team before Pollock started to get good and boring in ODIs. Def not boring Pollock quality in my eyes. Comparing Donald and Pollock is a bit like comparing Mcgrath and Lee to me, if a little less exaggerated.

His stats are great. And he was a matchwinner on his day. But by ATG standards, he was also a matchloser on his day, which wasnt what RSA needed.

 

[Bolo.]

Back to tests.

Donald and Wasim are leagues apart by ATG standards in stats. Donald is close to the top of the ATG pile. Akram close to the bottom.

Their careers are extremely comparable considering they are the same age and retired at the same time. For what it is worth (which isn't much considering sample size, despite having comparably strong batting opponents), Donald was also way ahead when RSA and PAK played.

The real argument in favour of Akram is longevity. He played for about 7 years before Donald debutted. Obviously a massive reason to rank him ahead. But Donald was shut out of cricket by Apartheid, so tough comparison.

Compare from the start of Donalds career. Donald still better. But not by much. Akram clearly better in the early 90s (Donalds excuse being that Akram had had years in international cricket to grow into the role before Donalds debut).

Donald was clearly better from the late 90s on. Akrams excuse being decaying with diabetes (or age if this makes any difference considering they are the same age). FTR, Donald has a couple hundred more FC wickets than Akram, so workload is not just tests.

Donald started his pseudo-test career with the rebel tours 2 years after Akram started his test career. Indicative of what age he would have been picked at to compare the lengths of their potential careers if not for the ban. He did well in the rebel tours, but they were not the quality of lineups Akram was bowling at in the era, so I am not sure the rebel tours count for much in relation to Akram other than an indication of what age Donald would have joined the party at if not for Apartheid.

Edit:

Sorry, long post.

Been on holiday with the missus for a while and havent had the chance to post my thoughts.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Back to tests.

Donald and Wasim are leagues apart by ATG standards in stats. Donald is close to the top of the ATG pile. Akram close to the bottom.

Their careers are extremely comparable considering they are the same age and retired at the same time. For what it is worth (which isn't much considering sample size, despite having comparably strong batting opponents), Donald was also way ahead when RSA and PAK played.

The real argument in favour of Akram is longevity. He played for about 7 years before Donald debutted. Obviously a massive reason to rank him ahead. But Donald was shut out of cricket by Apartheid, so tough comparison.

Compare from the start of Donalds career. Donald still better. But not by much. Akram clearly better in the early 90s (Donalds excuse being that Akram had had years in international cricket to grow into the role before Donalds debut).

Donald was clearly better from the late 90s on. Akrams excuse being decaying with diabetes (or age if this makes any difference considering they are the same age). FTR, Donald has a couple hundred more FC wickets than Akram, so workload is not just tests.

Donald started his pseudo-test career with the rebel tours 2 years after Akram started his test career. Indicative of what age he would have been picked at to compare the lengths of their potential careers if not for the ban. He did well in the rebel tours, but they were not the quality of lineups Akram was bowling at in the era, so I am not sure the rebel tours count for much in relation to Akram other than an indication of what age Donald would have joined the party at if not for Apartheid.

Edit:

Sorry, long post.

Been on holiday with the missus for a while and havent had the chance to post my thoughts.

Missed one important point.
Donald had far better fielding support.

Still
Donald is one of the 3 most underrated bowlers of CW. ( other 2 being Akram and Lillee)

 

[Coronis]

Missed one important point.
Donald had far better fielding support.

Still
Donald is one of the 3 most underrated bowlers of CW. ( other 2 being Akram and Lillee)

I don’t remember South Africa having great fielding at any time, especially in ODI’s.

 

[smash84]

I don’t remember South Africa having great fielding at any time, especially in ODI’s.

Whattttt???????

 

[smash84]

You probably just remember Herschelle Gibbs "dropping the world cup", otherwise him, Jonty, Kallis, and pretty much the whole team had awesome fielding

 

[subshakerz]

Back to tests.

Donald and Wasim are leagues apart by ATG standards in stats. Donald is close to the top of the ATG pile. Akram close to the bottom.

Their careers are extremely comparable considering they are the same age and retired at the same time. For what it is worth (which isn't much considering sample size, despite having comparably strong batting opponents), Donald was also way ahead when RSA and PAK played.

The real argument in favour of Akram is longevity. He played for about 7 years before Donald debutted. Obviously a massive reason to rank him ahead. But Donald was shut out of cricket by Apartheid, so tough comparison.

Compare from the start of Donalds career. Donald still better. But not by much. Akram clearly better in the early 90s (Donalds excuse being that Akram had had years in international cricket to grow into the role before Donalds debut).

Donald was clearly better from the late 90s on. Akrams excuse being decaying with diabetes (or age if this makes any difference considering they are the same age). FTR, Donald has a couple hundred more FC wickets than Akram, so workload is not just tests.

Donald started his pseudo-test career with the rebel tours 2 years after Akram started his test career. Indicative of what age he would have been picked at to compare the lengths of their potential careers if not for the ban. He did well in the rebel tours, but they were not the quality of lineups Akram was bowling at in the era, so I am not sure the rebel tours count for much in relation to Akram other than an indication of what age Donald would have joined the party at if not for Apartheid.

Edit:

Sorry, long post.

Been on holiday with the missus for a while and havent had the chance to post my thoughts.

As mentioned, Akram's started playing at a really young age for a fast bowler and took longer to develop, which definitely affected his stats. I still think Donald would have ended with better ones but Akram's average should likely be reflected in the 22 zone, more respectable for a ATG bowler.

One minus point for me is that while Donald has pretty stats away from home, I hardly remember spells of consequence from him on an away tour, except for England in 1998. He seemed much more impactful at home while Pollock I recall had the great away spells.

 

[Calm_profit]

As mentioned, Akram's started playing at a really young age for a fast bowler and took longer to develop, which definitely affected his stats. I still think Donald would have ended with better ones but Akram's average should likely be reflected in the 22 zone, more respectable for a ATG bowler.

One minus point for me is that while Donald has pretty stats away from home, I hardly remember spells of consequence from him on an away tour, except for England in 1998. He seemed much more impactful at home while Pollock I recall had the great away spells.

You are right,he was consistent at away tours but not had any memorable performance.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I don’t remember South Africa having great fielding at any time, especially in ODI’s.

Thats a serious Memory loss symptom.

 

[subshakerz]

Missed one important point.
Donald had far better fielding support.

Still
Donald is one of the 3 most underrated bowlers of CW. ( other 2 being Akram and Lillee)

Not sure. Donald here gets more props than I have seen from pundits who would likely never put him in the top ten pacers ever. Posters here wouldn't find a comparison between Donald and McGrath that jarring.

 

[The Sean]

Not sure. Donald here gets more props than I have seen from pundits who would likely never put him in the top ten pacers ever. Posters here wouldn't find a comparison between Donald and McGrath that jarring.

Yeah agreed - I think Donald gets rated more highly in these parts than he does in a lot of the cricketing world. I'd certainly never call him one of CW's most underrated players.

 

[Bolo.]

As mentioned, Akram's started playing at a really young age for a fast bowler and took longer to develop, which definitely affected his stats. I still think Donald would have ended with better ones but Akram's average should likely be reflected in the 22 zone, more respectable for a ATG bowler.


One minus point for me is that while Donald has pretty stats away from home, I hardly remember spells of consequence from him on an away tour, except for England in 1998. He seemed much more impactful at home while Pollock I recall had the great away spells.

I have given Akram his due on account of longevity pretty comprehensively in relation to Donald.

Stats are not equal to average. The fact that Donald was close to 20% better in SR and WPM while picking up bigger wickets is more important than the difference in average by orders of magnitude.

How many of his away games do you actually remember watching ? Everything between 95 and the mid 2000s is a bit blurry to me. Just remember that he was awesome. With the exception of SL 93? I cant remember ever having watched an RSA win that he was not excellent in before the late 90s... batting was trash and RSA were not winning unless he was pulling amps. His stats are pretty for a reason.

 

[subshakerz]

I have given Akram his due on account of longevity pretty comprehensively in relation to Donald.

Stats are not equal to average. The fact that Donald was close to 20% better in SR and WPM while picking up bigger wickets is more important than the difference in average by orders of magnitude.

How many of his away games do you actually remember watching ? Everything between 95 and the mid 2000s is a bit blurry to me. Just remember that he was awesome. With the exception of SL 93? I cant remember ever having watched an RSA win that he was not excellent in before the late 90s... batting was trash and RSA were not winning unless he was pulling amps. His stats are pretty for a reason.

My point is that the early debut and longer development period did affect his overall stats. He took 30 tests averaging 28 with a high SR and low WPM before getting into worldclass mode.

I watched Donald touring the subcontinent and dont recall him bowling poorly, just not standing out like an ATG would.

Virtually every ATG pacer has some virtuoso signature away performances in which they displayed their ultimate skills. Marshall had the broken hand 7-fer in England in 84, McGrath's 5-fer in Lords, Hadlee's 9-fer in Brisbane, Akram's Sydney masterclass, Ambrose's Perth performance, Imran's 7-fer in the WI. So what about Donald? Seems odd that he doesn't have one, perhaps why he was not rated quite as highly as the others.

 

[Coronis]

Thats a serious Memory loss symptom.

Was not sarcastic at all

 

[h_hurricane]

My point is that the early debut and longer development period did affect his overall stats. He took 30 tests averaging 28 with a high SR and low WPM before getting into worldclass mode.

I watched Donald touring the subcontinent and dont recall him bowling poorly, just not standing out like an ATG would.

Virtually every ATG pacer has some virtuoso signature away performances in which they displayed their ultimate skills. Marshall had the broken hand 7-fer in England in 84, McGrath's 5-fer in Lords, Hadlee's 9-fer in Brisbane, Akram's Sydney masterclass, Ambrose's Perth performance, Imran's 7-fer in the WI. So what about Donald? Seems odd that he doesn't have one, perhaps why he was not rated quite as highly as the others.

Are you referring to 1995-96 test here ? 6 wicket in the match haul is hardly earth shattering. It was Mushy who did most of the damage iirc. Akram didn't pick any wicket in 1989-90 either.
On Donald, he was great in both 1996-97 and 1999-00 trips to India. Was better than any trip Mcgrath or Akram had to India. Donald was also rated as the best bowler in world around 1997-98. So him not rated as highly as the others is revisionism.

 

[The Sean]

I assume subshakerz means Melbourne rather than Sydney, and is referring to Wasim's 11-for in 89/90.

 

[The Sean]

On Donald, he was great in both 1996-97 and 1999-00 trips to India. Was better than any trip Mcgrath or Akram had to India.

McGrath in 2001 surely at least on a par?

 

[ankitj]

Not sure. Donald here gets more props than I have seen from pundits who would likely never put him in the top ten pacers ever. Posters here wouldn't find a comparison between Donald and McGrath that jarring.

Pundits are prone to too much generalization from some memorable performances and and too much emphasis on impressions than results. CW crowd thinks differently (for better IMO).

Donald vs. McGrath - worthy comparison IMO. Donald had better career strike rate than McGrath incidentally.

 

[miscer]

Akram better. Stats without context are meaningless. Worse fielding side, skillset tailored to asian wickets/playing on flat tracks vs pitces that look like lawns in SAF, worse batting unit (need to bowl defensively / contain) etc.

This isn't a 100m dash where all else is equal and you just go by the stopwatch

 

[subshakerz]

I assume subshakerz means Melbourne rather than Sydney, and is referring to Wasim's 11-for in 89/90.

Yes Melbourne sorry.