Wasim Akram vs Dennis Lillee

[Kirkut]

I'm pretty sure I'm on the only person on cw who believes most of that, and could be wrong, but don't recall making a contribution in the thread.

Additionally you are also one of the ones who diminish the importance of slip fielding, so apparently there are contradictions and lack of awareness on both sides.

Additionally no one has ever said that it wouldn't have impacted on Wasim, though it would be difficult to quantify just how much of an impact that would be. But has to be disheartening to see opportunities being spilled in the slips.

So dispute your face palming and righteous indignation, slip fielding is important and impactful towards team and individual success, but for Finn to state that with a better cordon, Wasim is undisputably the best, is questionable at best

And yes, when making an ATG team, who's going to be in the codon should cross your mind. So if I'm choosing between Tendulkar and Smith, I'm choosing the guy who was spectacular at two disciplines, the same way you want to "bat deep" with diminishing returns. My selection however, costs nothing.

It could also be said that poor fielding in domestic cricket shaped up Pakistani fast bowlers into attacking stumps and getting lbws and bowleds, instead of forcing a batsman to play a false shot.

So hypothetically if Pakistan always had top notch fielders, then the inswinging yorker would have never been a trademark Pakistani thing.

 

[nightprowler10]

So hypothetically if Pakistan always had top notch fielders, then the inswinging yorker would have never been a trademark Pakistani thing.

Yes, which is exactly why no Australian ever developed an amazing yorker.

 

[srbhkshk]

Yes, which is exactly why no Australian ever developed an amazing yorker.

India must have had an otherworldly great fielding side for most of our history, it took us 70+ years to learn how to bowl any pace at all.

 

[trundler]

Garner's crazy yorker was developed after Richards and Lloyd told him they weren't going to catch anything that came their way off his bowling.

That demonic inswinging yorker was a result of reliance on reverse swing on dead pitches. Literally every Wasim compilation on Youtube has like 4 catches dropped in a spell. If you think that didn't impact his stats especially against the top order you've either never watched a game of cricket or you're working backwards from a pre-conceived notion.

 

[social]

The impact of Pakistan’s fielding upon Akram’s figures is undeniable and not just confined to the dropped catches

The fact that he still took 414 wickets @ 23 is remarkable

Personally rate him well above Lillee as he proved that he could do it everywhere

 

[social]

He retired around 33. He basically was past his peak from 89 onwards. So likely could have last another couple of years.

33 was relatively old for a bowler in those days so his retirement was not seen as being premature at the time

 

[TheJediBrah]

It could also be said that poor fielding in domestic cricket shaped up Pakistani fast bowlers into attacking stumps and getting lbws and bowleds, instead of forcing a batsman to play a false shot.

So hypothetically if Pakistan always had top notch fielders, then the inswinging yorker would have never been a trademark Pakistani thing.

Haha don't buy it for a second but interesting concept

 

[subshakerz]

The impact of Pakistan’s fielding upon Akram’s figures is undeniable and not just confined to the dropped catches

The fact that he still took 414 wickets @ 23 is remarkable

Personally rate him well above Lillee as he proved that he could do it everywhere

Then would you also boost Imran's position based on poor fielding standards?

 

[social]

Then would you also boost Imran's position based on poor fielding standards?

2 amazing bowlers

I have both in front of Lillee

 

[Coronis]

Didn’t Wasim miss out on a hattrick once because Imran couldn’t catch?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Didn’t Wasim miss out on a hattrick once because Imran couldn’t catch?

That was Damien Fleming because Warne couldn't catch

 

[subshakerz]

That was Damien Fleming because Warne couldn't catch

No, Imran did the same off Wasim in 88 or 89 in an ODI, I think.

 

[kyear2]

Garner's crazy yorker was developed after Richards and Lloyd told him they weren't going to catch anything that came their way off his bowling.

That demonic inswinging yorker was a result of reliance on reverse swing on dead pitches. Literally every Wasim compilation on Youtube has like 4 catches dropped in a spell. If you think that didn't impact his stats especially against the top order you've either never watched a game of cricket or you're working backwards from a pre-conceived notion.

Who are you arguing against though? I don't think anyone has said that. Unless I've missed something, the primary argument was the extended dips at both ends of his careers and then the fact that he may have taken a higher percentage of tail end wickets.

But again what are you arguing? Are you saying that he's better than Lillee? Better than McGrath and Marshall? How much do we adjust his numbers by?

 

[trundler]

Who are you arguing against though? I don't think anyone has said that. Unless I've missed something, the primary argument was the extended dips at both ends of his careers and then the fact that he may have taken a higher percentage of tail end wickets.

But again what are you arguing? Are you saying that he's better than Lillee? Better than McGrath and Marshall? How much do we adjust his numbers by?

I was initially spurred on by the remark the Lillee and McGrath were significantly worse than McGrath and Marshall then a bunch of idiocy followed culminating in the evergreen "worse fielders made Akram better somehow". In between I got triggered by a pet peeve tbh. I don't think either was better than McGrath but they're close and I was equally annoyed with the Lillee bashing to start with.

 

[trundler]

Akram played around 40 series in his career and averaged below 25 in about half of them.

Marshall played 21 series and averaged below 25 in 15.

In order for Akram to even be compared to Marshall, you lot have to use all sorts or caveats, peaks etc. Peak Akram</=Average Marshall basically.

To clarify, this was pretty absurd. Saying those things are silly caveats, instead of y'know, essential context is completely lacking in common sense.

Did preface the career length rant with this TBF:

Not that anyone asked

 

[kyear2]

I was initially spurred on by the remark the Lillee and McGrath were significantly worse than McGrath and Marshall then a bunch of idiocy followed culminating in the evergreen "worse fielders made Akram better somehow". In between I got triggered by a pet peeve tbh. I don't think either was better than McGrath but they're close and I was equally annoyed with the Lillee bashing to start with.

Who do you rate higher, Wasim or Imran?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

How??

Shorter career.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Did not predict Zaheer Khan being a top discussion point in this thread tbh.

Another surprise..

Average of wickets taken by Batting order
Lillee vs Akram vs Mcgrath

Lower order (8-11)
Champion - McGrath 142 wickets at 8.46
2. Wasim Akram 145 at 9.16
3.Dennis Lillee 97 at 13.09

Middle order ( 4-7 )
1. Lillee 130 at 23.09
2. Akram 137 at 24.85
3. Mcgrath 196 at 25.33

Top order ( 1-3 )
1. Akram 132 at 17.9
2. Mcgrath 225 at 18.2
3. Lillee 128 at 29.3

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

The fact he used to get them after they'd mate something between 140-230 seems to be overlooked here.

Sorry to inform you,

Top order wickets
Mcgrath 40%
Zaheer 45%

Average
Lillee 29.3
Zaheer 26.7

 

[Coronis]

Whats the source for these stats?