Wasim was obviously more skillful. But Donald has a better strike rate and average.
Well, Donald lost his prime years to apartheid. He still averages in the teens in the subcontinent.
Akram played only a few Test in South Africa and that too when he was 30 plus and past his prime.
Personal preference wasim. In terms of ability they are very even. It's a tough one for me.
I agree but do consider that Akram made his debut in 1984/85 and was past his prime by 1996. I think by then he had already played 70 plus Tests. On the other hand Donald started peaking from 1996 and by that time he had played half the Tests Akram had played.
Akram was only 17 when he made his Test debut and he was improving every series. He finally became a lethal fast bowler in the 1989/90 series against Australia. Before that he used to give good support to Imran Khan who was Man of the Series in away series wins against India, England and a close fought series in the West Indies. Until 1989 Imran was dominating the Pakistani pace attack, home and away.
Akram unfortunately didn't played in India when he was at his peak in the early to mid 90's . When he toured in 1999 he was in his last few years of international cricket.
True, but you have to rate bowlers based on whatever they did. For all we know, Donald may have been better than anyone in history if he had played international cricket earlier, but we can't rate anyone based on speculations.
One venue does not make that much difference. Overall, Wasim was good in all conditions. We have seen enough of him.
How is he far ahead with an inferior average and strike rate. It's pretty neck and neck.
I think Donald did enough in tests to put him slightly ahead of akram
I will be fine with anyone having that view. The difference in tests in not big either way.
Walsh has 500+ test wickets so he wins over Wasim and Donald.
Anderson has more wickets than mcg. Anderson wins
Thanks for confirming that sachin is better than sanga because he has more runs
without any doubt Anderson is better than Mcgrath same like Wasim akram is better than Donald.
Kidding right. Wasim yea case can be made for either being better. Wasim is the better player. As a bowler they are roughly equal.
There can be none like Mcgrath.
So true! No bowler during a career for 10 years or more constantly bullied almost every great/good batsman of his time like McGrath did. Yes, McGrath didn't just have the better of everyone, he outright bullied them in the long run. There's not a single criteria where McGrath doesn't come out among the top. He is the GOAT in Test cricket. In ODI's from performing in World Cups, to World Cup Finals, Tournament finals, Tournament KO's, he comes out on top in every criteria.
Valid points, but Donald lost the best years of his career due to apartheid, otherwise he picks up 500 wickets or so.
Numbers always define you in terms of greatness so when comparing Anderson to McGrath on paper Anderson appears to be ahead.
How? Bowling average shows otherwise. Performance vs top sides says otherwise. Just longevity alone isn't enough. Although Anderson has been a true great bowler in the last 10 years.
Akram played in the 1987 series ....
Yes he did.
He had played international cricket for 2 years by then. Not an experienced player, but not a rookie for sure.
Agree mate!
Can't agree more!
Akram is better than Ambrose imo.
