Can Dale Steyn ever match the greatness of Wasim Akram?

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

Steyn is like a serial killer, Akram is like the charming seducer..
Steyn treats the ball like a weapon, Akram treats the ball like a woman..
Steyn has the mind of a primal warrior, Akram has the mind of a chess player..
Steyn kills brutally and spits at the corpse, Akram kills and writes a poem at the corpse to tease the detectives..

Agree!!! Akram and Steyn are two different types of bowlers. To me they are Equally effective and If given to choose just one to watch I will choose Akram.

 

[yasir]

It is hard to compare them, since both have different style and era... But to me both were very close to be a complete fast bowler, they both have everything one wish for in a fast bowler(swing, aggression, pace, seam control, reverse swing, yorkers)...

But one of the big draw back of being Pakistani bowler is that you don't get that many test matches when you are at peak (every fast bowler is at peak for 4-6 years, you just cannot be at peak 18 years), you get far less test and also far more in non-seaming/swinging/green conditions than the bowlers from other countries do.

Lot of cricket pundits have said that if Wasim/Waqar had played their cricket mostly in west they would have easily add another 80-100 wickets... The other factor that does not help Wasim was Pakistan slip fielders, in his test career alone there may be 30-40 sitters are dropped in slip and that with the new ball, which can bring not just these drops but extra wickets if they have being avail.

Now Styen is immune to these problem more so than what we have. What also help Styen and other bowlers but not Pakistanis bowler is strong batting lineup. If your batsmen can put score on the board that gives more teeth to bowling, this helps you to be more aggressive. We have seen during Ws career when they had runs on board they were deadly to the best of the opposition and can truly dominate.

Beside all these factors Wasim was a bowler that inspired a generation of left arm fast bowlers, there are lot more kids trying to bowl left arm, all because of one single person Wasim Akram.

 

[ethan hunt]

Their opinions are just that, opinions. And Steyn is a better test bowler, that's all that counts.

I am sure their opinions hold more weight than yours or mine , since these legends have played against both and seen them in action up close .

And No . Just because steyn has an umar gulesque record in ODI cricket doesnt mean that ODIs dont matter .Wasim was a strike bowler even in ODI cricket , running through sides , a master at the death ,akram could turn it on at the big stage , he was a world cup winner, skills that steyn just doesnt have based on his ODI career stats .

 

[Jo_Don]

I am sure their opinions hold more weight than yours or mine , since these legends have played against both and seen them in action up close .

And No . Just because steyn has an umar gulesque record in ODI cricket doesnt mean that ODIs dont matter .Wasim was a strike bowler even in ODI cricket , running through sides , a master at the death ,akram could turn it on at the big stage , he was a world cup winner, skills that steyn just doesnt have based on his ODI career stats .

You've conveniently ignored my point about Marshall, and even cut it out of the quote. Does that help you support your view better?

 

[fusebulb]

hahaaa... these kids are really funny .... they just come up with strange comparisons when they were not born when these legends were at their peak.... first SRT vs Cook in the other thread and now Wasim vs Steyn.....

The comparisons are laughable only kids would dare to compare between these players...

BTW .... come back when Steyn bowls those two back to back magical deliveries in a world cup final and wins the cup for SA

 

[ethan hunt]

You've conveniently ignored my point about Marshall, and even cut it out of the quote. Does that help you support your view better?

what ?? i have nothing against marshall, just ignored him coz this debate is about akram and steyn , if the ex cricketers and batters who played against him rate marshall , than surely its because he was that damn good, never seen him bowl so dont have an opinion on him , i dont go by stats .

Plus if steyn is as good as you claim than i would have thought that surely at least 5 percent of the worlds batsman would place him ahead of akram as the best bowler they have faced , but it doesnt seem to be the case .

 

[AFM]

Steyn is the better Test bowler. ODI's are normally not included when discussing ATG bowlers, and Wasim only performed one in WC final. He couldnt save Pak in 99 final;, nor did he do any wonders in 96 or 99 or the majority of 92 WC's.

Wasim was a magician, a bowler who had all the skills. But Steyn isnt far too behind. While Steyn's inswinger might not be great, his outswing is more lethal than Akram's. I didnt watch much of Akram live, but from what I've read and seen, Steyn seems to be the more aggressive bowler.

 

[Jo_Don]

what ?? i have nothing against marshall, just ignored him coz this debate is about akram and steyn , if the ex cricketers and batters who played against him rate marshall , than surely its because he was that damn good, never seen him bowl so dont have an opinion on him , i dont go by stats .

Plus if steyn is as good as you claim than i would have thought that surely at least 5 percent of the worlds batsman would place him ahead of akram as the best bowler they have faced , but it doesnt seem to be the case .

It's entirely relevant. Most experts, ex-players and even cricket fans would rate Marshall as the best ever fast bowler. But his ODI record (in a bowling friendly era) was almost as average as Steyn's, and he never took a 5-fer. This proves that even using your logic of accepting other people's opinions, ODIs don't factor into things at all.

And batsmen rating Wasim as the most difficult bowler to face doesn't prove anything either. The fact is that most of his wickets were tailenders. The fact is that he was never rated the #1 bowler in his career. The fact is that he never crossed 900 points. Skills count for nothing without results.

Wasim was a great bowler no doubt, but not better than impact strike bowlers like Marshall, Ambrose, Waqar, Donald and Steyn, who consistently ran through top orders.

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

A comparison between Steyn and Waqr is much better. Same kind of bowler. Based on what i have seen, I used to think Waqar was better. But Seems like Steyn will retire ahead of Waqar

 

[Sakss]

Steyn is the better Test bowler. ODI's are normally not included when discussing ATG bowlers, and Wasim only performed one in WC final. He couldnt save Pak in 99 final;, nor did he do any wonders in 96 or 99 or the majority of 92 WC's.

Wasim was a magician, a bowler who had all the skills. But Steyn isnt far too behind. While Steyn's inswinger might not be great, his outswing is more lethal than Akram's. I didnt watch much of Akram live, but from what I've read and seen, Steyn seems to be the more aggressive bowler.

mate you cant do anything when your defending a score of 130 odd in a WC final (WC 99)

 

[Varun]

mate you cant do anything when your defending a score of 130 odd in a WC final (WC 99)

And Steyn couldn't do much better than limiting New Zealand to 230 on a docile Dhaka wicket.

 

[IndianWillow]

hahaaa... these kids are really funny .... they just come up with strange comparisons when they were not born when these legends were at their peak.... first SRT vs Cook in the other thread and now Wasim vs Steyn.....

The comparisons are laughable only kids would dare to compare between these players...

BTW .... come back when Steyn bowls those two back to back magical deliveries in a world cup final and wins the cup for SA

Bowling two back to back magical deliveries in a world cup is the criterion for deciding who is better? Now we know who are the kids.

 

[ahmed778]

Steyn is probably a bit better than Wasim.

 

[srh]

Both of them are greats; Akram probably a little bit better bowler than Steyn. Akram's batting is a huge plus. I reckon everybody will take Akram in their team before Steyn.

 

[fusebulb]

Bowling two back to back magical deliveries in a world cup is the criterion for deciding who is better? Now we know who are the kids.

Bowling magical deliveries for your side in a world cup final is definitely legendary in my book ....

And i am not even talking about how wasim used to polish off the tail even with his eyes closed.... and the other unbeleivable feats he achieved with the ball...

that is the problem with you kids.... u were not around then but still have the guts to compare whoever is there now with the legends....

 

[Jo_Don]

Bowling magical deliveries for your side in a world cup final is definitely legendary in my book ....

And i am not even talking about how wasim used to polish off the tail even with his eyes closed.... and the other unbeleivable feats he achieved with the ball...

that is the problem with you kids.... u were not around then but still have the guts to compare whoever is there now with the legends....

I was around and I think you're talking crap. There's a reason why pretty much everyone rates Marshall the best fast bowler, and it's certainly not because he bowled two magical deliveries in a world cup final. Now go play with your mates while you wait for your folks to pick you up from day care.

 

[Buffet]

And i am not even talking about how wasim used to polish off the tail even with his eyes closed....

Somewhat undervalued trait for sure but there is flip side to this as well. Some criticizes Wasim's inability to run through top orders consistently. I don't really want to compare Steyn right now because he is still playing. This is just a general comment.

 

[IndianWillow]

Bowling magical deliveries for your side in a world cup final is definitely legendary in my book ....

And i am not even talking about how wasim used to polish off the tail even with his eyes closed.... and the other unbeleivable feats he achieved with the ball...

that is the problem with you kids.... u were not around then but still have the guts to compare whoever is there now with the legends....

Bringing in ODIs when comparing top bowlers isn't a great argument.

Polishing off the tail is a sort of a negative trait isn't it? Regardless of the merits of "tail polishing", that would mean a higher percentage of his wickets were tail wickets. Even you seem to admit that Akram did not polish off the top order like impact bowlers like Steyn.

 

[Justcrazy]

Both of them are greats; Akram probably a little bit better bowler than Steyn. Akram's batting is a huge plus. I reckon everybody will take Akram in their team before Steyn.

Batting is not the point.

 

[IndianWillow]

what ?? i have nothing against marshall, just ignored him coz this debate is about akram and steyn , if the ex cricketers and batters who played against him rate marshall , than surely its because he was that damn good, never seen him bowl so dont have an opinion on him , i dont go by stats .

Plus if steyn is as good as you claim than i would have thought that surely at least 5 percent of the worlds batsman would place him ahead of akram as the best bowler they have faced , but it doesnt seem to be the case .

The mass or expert opinion can still be very subjective.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153387.html

I am sure that a very good percentage of members of this forum will find the above list objectionable for the variety of reasons, and would not accept it just because the list was prepared by an authority like Wisden and its expert panel.

 

[Executioner]

Both of them are greats; Akram probably a little bit better bowler than Steyn. Akram's batting is a huge plus. I reckon everybody will take Akram in their team before Steyn.

Well, probably

 

[PlanetPakistan]

Recently A Donald was talking about how complete a bowler Wasim was. Steyn on the other hand is brilliant but he doesn't have a quality inswinger.

 

[alberto]

Ask Alan Border.He said Wasim Akram is the most complete cricketer.

 

[Ruri]

In this era of terribly flat dead pitches? Steyn is better, but marginally.

 

[rooster]

Steyn vs Akram

Recently A Donald was talking about how complete a bowler Wasim was. Steyn on the other hand is brilliant but he doesn't have a quality inswinger.

And already has as good a record as Wasim. What if he had an inswinger?

 

[Ruri]

And already has as good a record as Wasim. What if he had an inswinger?

Steyn has a lower average, only 4 fewer 5-fers in 39 fewer matches. If Steyn were to get 2.1 wickets per match for the next 39, he would equal Wasim's tally, which is rather ridiculous, Steyn does over 5 per match. His strike rate blows Wasim's out of the water (13.5). Same amount of 10fers and 4fers. The only thing against him is his econ, which I don't mind if he's getting the results. Sure he plays in South Africa, but the world's wickets have turned into batting paradises around the world, so it's not a walk in the park for Steyn by any means.

 

[Varun]

Steyn has a lower average, only 4 fewer 5-fers in 39 fewer matches. If Steyn were to get 2.1 wickets per match for the next 39, he would equal Wasim's tally, which is rather ridiculous, Steyn does over 5 per match. His strike rate blows Wasim's out of the water (13.5). Same amount of 10fers and 4fers. The only thing against him is his econ, which I don't mind if he's getting the results.

These stats officially end this thread.

 

[rooster]

Steyn vs Akram

Steyn has a lower average, only 4 fewer 5-fers in 39 fewer matches. If Steyn were to get 2.1 wickets per match for the next 39, he would equal Wasim's tally, which is rather ridiculous, Steyn does over 5 per match. His strike rate blows Wasim's out of the water (13.5). Same amount of 10fers and 4fers. The only thing against him is his econ, which I don't mind if he's getting the results. Sure he plays in South Africa, but the world's wickets have turned into batting paradises around the world, so it's not a walk in the park for Steyn by any means.

The guy is a beast in test cricket, ran through sides at will everywhere in the world. Definitely a superior bowler in tests than Wasim.

 

[Blistering Barnacle]

So far Wasim would appear to be the greater match-winner for his team.

Wasim has the 2nd most Man of the Match awards - 17 from 104 games. He was MoM in 1 out of every 6 matches he played, among the highest ratio in test cricket history I believe.

Steyn thus far has 7 MoM awards from 65 matches. That's about 1 every 9-10 games.

To put this in perspective, Tendulkar has 14 MoM awards from 198 matches. Lara has 12 from 131. McGrath has 11 from 124. Ambrose 14 from 98, Pollock 11 from 108, Ponting 16 from 168.

Steyn is a fantastic bowler, but wait till his career ends before proclaiming him to be better than Wasim.

Talking about things like bowling average are pointless at this stage. Wasim averaged under 23 for a long period during his career. His average went up above 23 towards the end of his career.

Wasim is a legend for a reason, and while it can be fun debating whether Steyn or Wasim is or will go down as the greater bowler, proclaiming Steyn to be better already as a fact is premature and immature.

 

[Blistering Barnacle]

As far as who would be the first pick in an eleven between the two, that would definitely be Wasim, if only because he was a much better batsman.

 

[Alexander]

Akram bowled to better batsman

 

[IndianWillow]

So far Wasim would appear to be the greater match-winner for his team.

Wasim has the 2nd most Man of the Match awards - 17 from 104 games. He was MoM in 1 out of every 6 matches he played, among the highest ratio in test cricket history I believe.

Steyn thus far has 7 MoM awards from 65 matches. That's about 1 every 9-10 games.

To put this in perspective, Tendulkar has 14 MoM awards from 198 matches. Lara has 12 from 131. McGrath has 11 from 124. Ambrose 14 from 98, Pollock 11 from 108, Ponting 16 from 168.

Steyn is a fantastic bowler, but wait till his career ends before proclaiming him to be better than Wasim.

Talking about things like bowling average are pointless at this stage. Wasim averaged under 23 for a long period during his career. His average went up above 23 towards the end of his career.

Wasim is a legend for a reason, and while it can be fun debating whether Steyn or Wasim is or will go down as the greater bowler, proclaiming Steyn to be better already as a fact is premature and immature.

Man of the matches are more an indication of one's relative strength in the team and not an absolute performance measure. The South African team is an unbelievably strong one, and MOMs are regularly shared across several players like Kallis, Smith, ABDV, Amla, Philander and so on. Steyn probably gets MOM only once in five or six SA wins, but Akram may have a much higher frequency like one in every two or three Pak wins.

Steyn matches Akram in terms of 4 wkt, 5wkt and 10 wkt hauls only mid way through his career. And by the time Steyn is finished, I wonder what their difference will be. That too in this era where the next best bowler is way behind.

 

[Blistering Barnacle]

Man of the matches are more an indication of one's relative strength in the team and not an absolute performance measure. The South African team is an unbelievably strong one, and MOMs are regularly shared across several players like Kallis, Smith, ABDV, Amla, Philander and so on. Steyn probably gets MOM only once in five or six SA wins, but Akram may have a much higher frequency like one in every two or three Pak wins.

Steyn matches Akram in terms of 4 wkt, 5wkt and 10 wkt hauls only mid way through his career. And by the time Steyn is finished, I wonder what their difference will be. That too in this era where the next best bowler is way behind.

I thought about that but Wasim played in a very strong Pakistan team, with players like Waqar, Mushtaq, Saqlain, Anwar, Inzi, Miandad, Imran, Salim Malik, etc. The Pak team was a very good one in the 80s and 90s.

So I don't think that point holds a lot of weight.

It's not like he was playing for Bangladesh or Zimbabwe.

And in any case, Lara for instance played for a weak WI team for years and he still has a far lower ratio than Wasim for MoM awards.

 

[IndianWillow]

I thought about that but Wasim played in a very strong Pakistan team, with players like Waqar, Mushtaq, Saqlain, Anwar, Inzi, Miandad, Imran, Salim Malik, etc. The Pak team was a very good one in the 80s and 90s.

So I don't think that point holds a lot of weight.

It's not like he was playing for Bangladesh or Zimbabwe.

And in any case, Lara for instance played for a weak WI team for years and he still has a far lower ratio than Wasim for MoM awards.

MOMs often go to batsmen. Pakistan is a team that has a weaker batting line up and compared with nations like India, many MOMs for Pakistanis are taken by bowlers, which significantly increases Akram's odds for getting a MOM. Moreover, Akram did not have to compete with Miandad, Imran, Malik etc because they retired early into Akram's career. The only real contenders were Waqar and Inzi. Compare with Steyn who is facing a much stiffer challenge from his fellow players, including South African batsmen.

WI team did not have too many wins during Lara's time. WI had only a W/L ratio of 0.66 between 1990-2005 and playing in such conditions, you do not win a lot of MOMs in a predominantly loser side.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...1990;spanval2=span;template=results;type=team

 

[Yossarian]

Polishing off the tail is a sort of a negative trait isn't it? Regardless of the merits of "tail polishing", that would mean a higher percentage of his wickets were tail wickets. Even you seem to admit that Akram did not polish off the top order like impact bowlers like Steyn.

Why is polishing off the tail a negative trait?

For anyone saying that, in comparison to Steyn, Wasim's wickets came from tailenders whilst Steyn's are from the top order, are then also saying that Steyn is not able to finish off the tail whereas Wasim could.

Taken to it's conclusion, this implies that Steyn's wickets come from the top order, at the start of innings, when the batsman are trying to defend and consolidate whilst Wasim took his wickets when the tail enders have nothing to lose and are hitting out, meaning that Steyn is ineffective when batsmen are counter attacking him and not simply trying to defend. You see, every argument can be taken both ways.

 

[IndianWillow]

Why is polishing off the tail a negative trait?

For anyone saying that, in comparison to Steyn, Wasim's wickets came from tailenders whilst Steyn's are from the top order, are then also saying that Steyn is not able to finish off the tail whereas Wasim could.

Taken to it's conclusion, this implies that Steyn's wickets come from the top order, at the start of innings, when the batsman are trying to defend and consolidate whilst Wasim took his wickets when the tail enders have nothing to lose and are hitting out, meaning that Steyn is ineffective when batsmen are counter attacking him and not simply trying to defend. You see, every argument can be taken both ways.

Why is polishing off the tail a negative trait? It is not, provided the bowler is good at polishing the top order also. Else it means the bowler is getting cheap wickets like an FTB getting tonnes of runs.

Polishing off the tail is negative for the same reasons, scoring against top bowlers on tough wickets is tougher than scoring against weak bowlers on batting wickets. A top notch bowler is one who can rattle top order batsmen regularly. Whether such a bowler is consistently successful against the tail does not have as much importance as his ability to get rid off better batsmen.

 

[Varun]

Taken to it's conclusion, this implies that Steyn's wickets come from the top order, at the start of innings, when the batsman are trying to defend and consolidate whilst Wasim took his wickets when the tail enders have nothing to lose and are hitting out, meaning that Steyn is ineffective when batsmen are counter attacking him and not simply trying to defend. You see, every argument can be taken both ways.

So Steyn can get genuine batsmen out but Wasim can only dispose of tailenders going for the tonk?

It's a no-brainer, I'll stick with Dale.

 

[Bewal Express]

Recently A Donald was talking about how complete a bowler Wasim was. Steyn on the other hand is brilliant but he doesn't have a quality inswinger.

Nor did Wasim for large parts of his career. This myth that Akram could bowl an inswinger with the new ball at will is simply not true. I watched him many times and struggled to swing the ball into the batsman. If he did bowl the inswinger all the time, then a lot more top orders would have been destroyed by him.

Can someone please do stats analysis on where Akram stands in relation to the number of top 6 wickets compared to other bowlers considered to be great. As i said earlier he is more likely to be in the 15-20 range, which is where i would put him on the all time list of fast bowlers.

 

[IndianWillow]

See
http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2003/dec/06guest.htm

Akram has the lowest Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal among all top bowlers which is indicative of his prowess against the tail and weakness against top order bat.

====
So, from the distribution, it is clear that Lillee got much fewer wickets of tail-enders, while Akram relished those opportunities. Continuing this comparison, 60% of Lillee's dismissals came of batsmen whose batting averages were > 30, while only 40% of Akram's dismissals came from that group. This is another piece of evidence that Lillee specialized in getting the top and middle order, while Akram enjoyed polishing off the tail.

Bowlers who got `better' batsmen out are Lillee, McDermott, Ambrose, Marshall, Gibbs and Underwood. There are many more on the mid-range like Kapil, Hadlee, Imran etc. The bowlers who dismissed batsmen with a lower batting average were Akram, Waqar and Murali.
====

Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal

CA Walsh 29.66
SK Warne 28.29
M Muralitharan 27.42
N Kapil Dev 29.81
RJ Hadlee 29.55
GD McGrath 29.79
Wasim Akram 26.34
CEL Ambrose 30.15
IT Botham 29.32
MD Marshall 30.49
Waqar Younis 27.78
Imran Khan 29.90
A Kumble 28.33
DK Lillee 31.27
AA Donald 29.59
RGD Willis 29.96
SM Pollock 28.92
LR Gibbs 30.45
DL Underwood 31.50
CJ McDermott 31.37
BS Bedi 28.95

 

[soso_killer]

I think the guy that takes 5 wickets a match is obviously better

 

[OutKast]

Steyn >>>> Wasim
Both statistically and otherwise.

 

[Bewal Express]

See
http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2003/dec/06guest.htm

Akram has the lowest Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal among all top bowlers which is indicative of his prowess against the tail and weakness against top order bat.

====
So, from the distribution, it is clear that Lillee got much fewer wickets of tail-enders, while Akram relished those opportunities. Continuing this comparison, 60% of Lillee's dismissals came of batsmen whose batting averages were > 30, while only 40% of Akram's dismissals came from that group. This is another piece of evidence that Lillee specialized in getting the top and middle order, while Akram enjoyed polishing off the tail.

Bowlers who got `better' batsmen out are Lillee, McDermott, Ambrose, Marshall, Gibbs and Underwood. There are many more on the mid-range like Kapil, Hadlee, Imran etc. The bowlers who dismissed batsmen with a lower batting average were Akram, Waqar and Murali.
====

Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal

CA Walsh 29.66
SK Warne 28.29
M Muralitharan 27.42
N Kapil Dev 29.81
RJ Hadlee 29.55
GD McGrath 29.79
Wasim Akram 26.34
CEL Ambrose 30.15
IT Botham 29.32
MD Marshall 30.49
Waqar Younis 27.78
Imran Khan 29.90
A Kumble 28.33
DK Lillee 31.27
AA Donald 29.59
RGD Willis 29.96
SM Pollock 28.92
LR Gibbs 30.45
DL Underwood 31.50
CJ McDermott 31.37
BS Bedi 28.95

Was my theory correct that he would finish between 15th and 20th in terms of getting the top 6 out?

 

[Jo_Don]

Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal

CA Walsh 29.66
SK Warne 28.29
M Muralitharan 27.42
N Kapil Dev 29.81
RJ Hadlee 29.55
GD McGrath 29.79
Wasim Akram 26.34
CEL Ambrose 30.15
IT Botham 29.32
MD Marshall 30.49
Waqar Younis 27.78
Imran Khan 29.90
A Kumble 28.33
DK Lillee 31.27
AA Donald 29.59
RGD Willis 29.96
SM Pollock 28.92
LR Gibbs 30.45
DL Underwood 31.50
CJ McDermott 31.37
BS Bedi 28.95

Where does Steyn fit into the list?

 

[Bewal Express]

On my quick calculations, Akram was 16th on the list(OUT OF 16) of fast bowlers(This list doesn`t include Steyn, Garner, Holding). So my anacdotal observations weren`t too far from reality.

 

[IndianWillow]

Where does Steyn fit into the list?

I am not sure at present, but some time in 2010 Steyn was 29.9 or so.

 

[Bewal Express]

Can You do a full analysis of the top 6 wickets taken by each bowler on the list. Great bowlers knock out top orders.

 

[ahmed778]

See
http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2003/dec/06guest.htm

Akram has the lowest Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal among all top bowlers which is indicative of his prowess against the tail and weakness against top order bat.

====
So, from the distribution, it is clear that Lillee got much fewer wickets of tail-enders, while Akram relished those opportunities. Continuing this comparison, 60% of Lillee's dismissals came of batsmen whose batting averages were > 30, while only 40% of Akram's dismissals came from that group. This is another piece of evidence that Lillee specialized in getting the top and middle order, while Akram enjoyed polishing off the tail.

Bowlers who got `better' batsmen out are Lillee, McDermott, Ambrose, Marshall, Gibbs and Underwood. There are many more on the mid-range like Kapil, Hadlee, Imran etc. The bowlers who dismissed batsmen with a lower batting average were Akram, Waqar and Murali.
====

Weighted Batting Avg per Dismissal

CA Walsh 29.66
SK Warne 28.29
M Muralitharan 27.42
N Kapil Dev 29.81
RJ Hadlee 29.55
GD McGrath 29.79
Wasim Akram 26.34
CEL Ambrose 30.15
IT Botham 29.32
MD Marshall 30.49
Waqar Younis 27.78
Imran Khan 29.90
A Kumble 28.33
DK Lillee 31.27
AA Donald 29.59
RGD Willis 29.96
SM Pollock 28.92
LR Gibbs 30.45
DL Underwood 31.50
CJ McDermott 31.37
BS Bedi 28.95

Wasim Akram averaged 22.1 against the Top 6(Ave. of Averages).
Dennis Lillee averaged 26 against the Top 6.
Glenn McGrath averaged 23 against the Top 6.

But you call Wasim Akram the tail end Basher.

And did you consider that McGrath and Lillee didn't have very good yorkers to clean up the tail hence they were not bowled at the Tail Enders, where as Wasim was asked to bowl at them every time, because there was almost a guarantee that he'd get them out cheaply.

But i didn't expect you to know that, Einstein.

 

[Varun]

Can You do a full analysis of the top 6 wickets taken by each bowler on the list. Great bowlers knock out top orders.

This. It's priceless to have a test match batting line-up floundering at 30/3, a couple more wickets in short to medium order after that and you've got that innings in the bag.

 

[IndianWillow]

Wasim Akram averaged 22.1 against the Top 6(Ave. of Averages).
Dennis Lillee averaged 26 against the Top 6.
Glenn McGrath averaged 23 against the Top 6.

But you call Wasim Akram the tail end Basher.

And did you consider that McGrath and Lillee didn't have very good yorkers to clean up the tail hence they were not bowled at the Tail Enders, where as Wasim was asked to bowl at them every time, because there was almost a guarantee that he'd get them out cheaply.

But i didn't expect you to know that, Einstein.

Top 6 average is very subjective. Taking out top six Bangladeshi batsmen and six Indian batsmen are not even close. The article (with all its limitations) does a better job than this method.

The issue raised by you is discussed in that link I posted - please read it completely. Wasim did not get the tail very cheaply either, even though he took a lot of tail wickets. Check out the 3X3 table and the "Dismissal Quotient" (where Akram gets placed near the bottom) described at the end of the page.

 

[ahmed778]

Top 6 average is very subjective. Taking out top six Bangladeshi batsmen and six Indian batsmen are not even close. The article (with all its limitations) does a better job than this method.

No it is not subjective at all, the Top 6 of Bangladesh or Zimbabwe aren't comprised of Tail Enders.
Your post mentioned Tail End basher and no Top 6 Batsman is a Tail Ender regardless of the country of the Batsman.

So your post, taking into context your other post, is invalid.

The issue raised by you is discussed in that link I posted - please read it completely. Wasim did not get the tail very cheaply either, even though he took a lot of tail wickets. Check out the 3X3 table and the "Dismissal Quotient" (where Akram gets placed near the bottom) described at the end of the page.

What a load of rubbish that article is,

Wasim averages against the number 7-11 Batsmen are,

Number 7: 16
Number 8: 17
Number 9: 11
Number 10: 2
Number 11: 4


Including 42 Ducks out of 162, percentage of 26.

McGrath averages this,

Number 7: 19
Number 8: 21
Number 9: 8
Number 10: 8
Number 11: 3


And TBH i read the article, and it is rubbish written by an Indian to undermine a Pakistani Great, just what you are doing right now.

 

[Osman]

bear in mind the pitches that Akram played most of his cricket on before you compare. His record is fantastic. The way some people here are talking its like Akram is not that great. Grow up.

 

[Osman]

Steyn vs Waqar is a better comparison

 

[Mamoon]

Steyn vs Waqar is a better comparison

pre injury Waqar was a beast never before and never seen again.


He was a gun.

 

[Bewal Express]

All i want is the percentage of dismissals that were top 6, compared to their overall total. The reason for this is that it will prove why Akram never was the number one bowler in the world. Once again knocking out the tail is an art but to win matches you have to get the top order and he was relatively weak against the top orders despite the hype.

 

[ahmed778]

Re: Steyn vs Akram

All i want is the percentage of dismissals that were top 6, compared to their overall total. The reason for this is that it will prove why Akram never was the number one bowler in the world. Once again knocking out the tail is an art but to win matches you have to get the top order and he was relatively weak against the top orders despite the hype.

Weak?
He averaged better against the Top 6 than Lillee and McGrath.

The percentage(57) is irrelevant because he had one of the best if not the best yorkers in the World and almost definately got the Tail out hence he was also given the ball to clean up fhe tail, whereas other bowlers like McGrath werent so skilled at doing that and weren't bowled much and nor picked much wickets against the Tail.

 

[HamzaSaeen]

consider the tracks that played on, dead SC pitches. consider the tracks dale plays on, not dead at all. both ATGs, but was better IMO.

 

[Buffet]

All i want is the percentage of dismissals that were top 6, compared to their overall total.

I don't know if calculations are true but one thread comes up in PP itself. Calculations are not for the top 6 but it has some interesting data points. It talks about only three Pakistani bowler so don't know how others compare with these data points.

Wasim had total 35% of his wickets from tails (8 -11) when IK/Waqar had less than 30%. Waqar/IK had more than 35% of top order(1-3) and Wasim had less than 32%.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showpost.php?p=4009344&postcount=1

 

[Bewal Express]

Weak?
He averaged better against the Top 6 than Lillee and McGrath.

The percentage(57) is irrelevant because he had one of the best if not the best yorkers in the World and almost definately got the Tail out hence he was also given the ball to clean up fhe tail, whereas other bowlers like McGrath werent so skilled at doing that and weren't bowled much and nor picked much wickets against the Tail.

I know its not a smoking gun but the percentage is not irrelevent. For me great bowlers knock out the top order of the opposition on a very frequent basis, by saying that it is irrelevant you are suggested that all wickets have the same value, which is patently not true. The wicket of Hashim Amla is always worth more than the wicket of Paul Harris.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Both of them are greats; Akram probably a little bit better bowler than Steyn. Akram's batting is a huge plus. I reckon everybody will take Akram in their team before Steyn.

They will take Akram not because he was better in tests,

But perhaps he was the best leftie fast bowler.

In ODI's no doubt he was a genius.

 

[ahmed778]

I know its not a smoking gun but the percentage is not irrelevent. For me great bowlers knock out the top order of the opposition on a very frequent basis, by saying that it is irrelevant you are suggested that all wickets have the same value, which is patently not true. The wicket of Hashim Amla is always worth more than the wicket of Paul Harris.

Yes, and Wasim Akram did better against players like Hashim Amla and got them out more cheaply than Lillee and McGrath.

Therefore your point is irrelevant.

Wasim bowled a lot more at the tail compared to other bowlers as he was a specialist at getting them out, but even at getting the Top 6 out he was more efficient than Lillee and McGrath.

 

[Buffet]

Therefore your point is irrelevant.

Wasim bowled a lot more at the tail compared to other bowlers as he was a specialist at getting them out, but even at getting the Top 6 out he was more efficient than Lillee and McGrath.

Hang on a minute. You are claiming that Wasim was more efficient than McGrath in getting top 6 wickets and also more efficient in getting getting tails. Great story but it doesn't add up.

Efficient means getting wickets cheaply and quickly. Top 6 + tails = covers everything. Let's see how they compare.

Wasim took 414 wickets at avg 23.62 & SR 54.6

McGrath took 563 wickets at avg 21.64 & SR 51.9

 

[rooster]

Steyn vs Akram

Hang on a minute. You are claiming that Wasim was more efficient than McGrath in getting top 6 wickets and also more efficient in getting getting tails. Great story but it doesn't add up.

Efficient means getting wickets cheaply and quickly. Top 6 + tails = covers everything. Let's see how they compare.

Wasim took 414 wickets at avg 23.62 & SR 54.6

McGrath took 563 wickets at avg 21.64 & SR 51.9

You are wasting your time Buffet. Even if you bring up a comparison between Rana Naveed vs Glen McGrath, he'll come out and claim Rana is better than McGrath with some impressive stats.

 

[IndianWillow]

No it is not subjective at all, the Top 6 of Bangladesh or Zimbabwe aren't comprised of Tail Enders.
Your post mentioned Tail End basher and no Top 6 Batsman is a Tail Ender regardless of the country of the Batsman.

So your post, taking into context your other post, is invalid.






What a load of rubbish that article is,

Wasim averages against the number 7-11 Batsmen are,

Number 7: 16
Number 8: 17
Number 9: 11
Number 10: 2
Number 11: 4


Including 42 Ducks out of 162, percentage of 26.

McGrath averages this,

Number 7: 19
Number 8: 21
Number 9: 8
Number 10: 8
Number 11: 3


And TBH i read the article, and it is rubbish written by an Indian to undermine a Pakistani Great, just what you are doing right now.

I don't think you understand that article. Inconvenient articles do appear rubbish.

You are claiming that Wasim was better than McGrath in both cleaning up the top order as well as the tail. But McGrath's overall stats were better than Wasim. How do you explain that? You can't have the cake and eat it too.

In fact you have made up all the figures, Why?

This is what you wrote:
Wasim Akram averaged 22.1 against the Top 6
Number 7: 16
Number 8: 17
Number 9: 11
Number 10: 2
Number 11: 4

If all these were true, Wasim's bowling average would be less than 20. But his average is 23.62. According to you Wasim averaged less than 22 at all positions yet his overall avg is 23.6. This shows that you made up all these figures out of thin air.

 

[Bewal Express]

Yes, and Wasim Akram did better against players like Hashim Amla and got them out more cheaply than Lillee and McGrath.

Therefore your point is irrelevant.

Wasim bowled a lot more at the tail compared to other bowlers as he was a specialist at getting them out, but even at getting the Top 6 out he was more efficient than Lillee and McGrath.

Surely if what you are saying is true, then he would have been the best in world for most of his career- as those rankings give extra weighting to wickets of better players but he wasn`t. I just have a feeling that you are just making things as you go along. Please explain why he was never the best in the world at anytime in his career(18 seasons to choose from)

 

[90MPH]

What about the pitches, FFS it matters a lot.

There is a big difference when playing on rolled up mud pitches compared to juicy green tracks. Not just that there is a big difference in atmospheric conditions as well - new ball swing is non existent (except reverse swing) in the subcontinent.

I will say though that Wasim despite his immense talent did underachieve Test cricket.

 

[Bewal Express]

Fair point-but the avarage and sr of other great players on SC are generally better or equal to his.

 

[IndianWillow]

What about the pitches, FFS it matters a lot.

There is a big difference when playing on rolled up mud pitches compared to juicy green tracks. Not just that there is a big difference in atmospheric conditions as well - new ball swing is non existent (except reverse swing) in the subcontinent.

I will say though that Wasim despite his immense talent did underachieve Test cricket.

Most of the sub continental pacers have better bowling averages at home even though home tracks are flatter. Why?

 

[Jo_Don]

Steyn vs Akram

What about the pitches, FFS it matters a lot.

There is a big difference when playing on rolled up mud pitches compared to juicy green tracks. Not just that there is a big difference in atmospheric conditions as well - new ball swing is non existent (except reverse swing) in the subcontinent.

I will say though that Wasim despite his immense talent did underachieve Test cricket.

What's Wasim's record in England and SA? Pitches are not an excuse, greats perform everywhere. You're allowed to fail in one or two countries, but please don't use pitches as an excuse.

 

[ads101]

What about the pitches, FFS it matters a lot.

There is a big difference when playing on rolled up mud pitches compared to juicy green tracks. Not just that there is a big difference in atmospheric conditions as well - new ball swing is non existent (except reverse swing) in the subcontinent.

I will say though that Wasim despite his immense talent did underachieve Test cricket.

It definitely does.

People go on about lack of fast bowlers in Sri Lanka and India but partly that's not their fault. Hard pitches for fast bowlers. A lot of those average bowlers would have looked a lot better bowling in English conditions all their life.

Pakistan is sort of an anomaly. Fast bowlers devastating on tracks little for the fast bowlers. Also hard to see how they got these fast bowlers given that the bouncy tracks offered a lot more in terms of allowing the bowlers to apply their trade an improve themselves.

Steyn does have an advantage bowling in SA half his games, but he has done well in the subcontinent too and proved he can bowl in all conditions.

 

[Jo_Don]

Steyn vs Akram

It definitely does.

People go on about lack of fast bowlers in Sri Lanka and India but partly that's not their fault. Hard pitches for fast bowlers. A lot of those average bowlers would have looked a lot better bowling in English conditions all their life.

Pakistan is sort of an anomaly. Fast bowlers devastating on tracks little for the fast bowlers. Also hard to see how they got these fast bowlers given that the bouncy tracks offered a lot more in terms of allowing the bowlers to apply their trade an improve themselves.

Steyn does have an advantage bowling in SA half his games, but he has done well in the subcontinent too and proved he can bowl in all conditions.

Wasim played 14 matches in England and averages 29. He played 2 in SA and averages 39. I don't believe that pitches can be used as an excuse. Steyn has a good record in the SC after all, so did Marshall.

 

[IndianWillow]

What's Wasim's record in England and SA? Pitches are not an excuse, greats perform everywhere. You're allowed to fail in one or two countries, but please don't use pitches as an excuse.

Pitches matter to some extent, but not to a high degree. If flat tracks take away some credit from batsmen then helpful tracks take away some credit from bowlers too.

 

[PlanetPakistan]

Nor did Wasim for large parts of his career. This myth that Akram could bowl an inswinger with the new ball at will is simply not true. I watched him many times and struggled to swing the ball into the batsman. If he did bowl the inswinger all the time, then a lot more top orders would have been destroyed by him.

Can someone please do stats analysis on where Akram stands in relation to the number of top 6 wickets compared to other bowlers considered to be great. As i said earlier he is more likely to be in the 15-20 range, which is where i would put him on the all time list of fast bowlers.

I have no idea who you were watching but it certainly wasn't Wasim...

Go to youtube and watch his spells in Australia in 1989 and 1995 e.g the over to M Slater where he had him plumb twice in one over with two big inswingers.

 

[Bewal Express]

Did you see the series in England 1992 or the Windies in 1993. I also remember very vividly that in the England series in Pakistan in 2000 there was no Inswing. These are just the ones i remember from memory. He went through phases where he had it and he went through other parts where he didn`t. A left arm fast bowler who swings the ball consistently destroys top orders(Mohammed Amir showed in his short career).

 

[ahmed778]

I don't think you understand that article. Inconvenient articles do appear rubbish.

You are claiming that Wasim was better than McGrath in both cleaning up the top order as well as the tail. But McGrath's overall stats were better than Wasim. How do you explain that? You can't have the cake and eat it too.

In fact you have made up all the figures, Why?

This is what you wrote:
Wasim Akram averaged 22.1 against the Top 6
Number 7: 16
Number 8: 17
Number 9: 11
Number 10: 2
Number 11: 4

If all these were true, Wasim's bowling average would be less than 20. But his average is 23.62. According to you Wasim averaged less than 22 at all positions yet his overall avg is 23.6. This shows that you made up all these figures out of thin air.

Surely if what you are saying is true, then he would have been the best in world for most of his career- as those rankings give extra weighting to wickets of better players but he wasn`t. I just have a feeling that you are just making things as you go along. Please explain why he was never the best in the world at anytime in his career(18 seasons to choose from)

It was the average of average of their averages, since their complete averages can not be calculated as that data is not available, but i didn't expect you to read all of my posts carefully because i mentioned this clearly in my previous posts.

Really making up the figures an lying?

What kind of pathetic nonsense is that, accusing me of lying?
That's only what you do to try to make our players look bad, i don't need to lie to do that, that rubbish article you posted has no relevance or credibility. Next time before accusing someone of lying do think again.

Both of you should be the last persons to question someones integrity.

WASIM:

MCGRATH:

I guess that clears that then?
Or you still want to make pathetic claims accusing people of lying?

 

[Varun]

Did you see the series in England 1992 or the Windies in 1993. I also remember very vividly that in the England series in Pakistan in 2000 there was no Inswing. These are just the ones i remember from memory. He went through phases where he had it and he went through other parts where he didn`t. A left arm fast bowler who swings the ball consistently destroys top orders(Mohammed Amir showed in his short career).

Even an average performer such as Mitchell Johnson too, check out his dismantling of the England top-order at the WACA during the last Ashes.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Hang on a minute. You are claiming that Wasim was more efficient than McGrath in getting top 6 wickets and also more efficient in getting getting tails. Great story but it doesn't add up.

Efficient means getting wickets cheaply and quickly. Top 6 + tails = covers everything. Let's see how they compare.

Wasim took 414 wickets at avg 23.62 & SR 54.6

McGrath took 563 wickets at avg 21.64 & SR 51.9

Cricket is not only paid by stats.Else MoYo and Sanga would be better than Richards.

And Murali better than Warne.

Almost every batsman of Wasim's era and i mean greats like Lara/Ponting/Kallis/Dravid have said Wasim was the toughest bowler they faced.Donald and Ambrose think he is the most complete bowler.

If Wasim got to bowl to SC batsman on Aussie pitches he would have eaten them alive.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Btw who said Wssim didnt bowl inswingers with the new ball?Its like saying Warne didnt spin the leg spinner,Saqi didnt bow the doosra,Lara didnt have a square cut and Tendulkar never played the striaght drive.

He isnt called the Sultan of Swing and the Left arm of God for nothing.

 

[Buffet]

Cricket is not only paid by stats.Else MoYo and Sanga would be better than Richards.

And Murali better than Warne.

Almost every batsman of Wasim's era and i mean greats like Lara/Ponting/Kallis/Dravid have said Wasim was the toughest bowler they faced.Donald and Ambrose think he is the most complete bowler.

If Wasim got to bowl to SC batsman on Aussie pitches he would have eaten them alive.

Talk about missing the whole point of my post. You can claim that Wasim is greatest bowler in world or whatever and that's an another matter. But a fellow PPer claimed that Wasim was more efficient in taking wickets of top 6 + tails, both when compared to McGrath. I also quoted him in my post. Efficient can only mean two things, taking wickets quicker or cheaper. There is no subjectively allowed here.

How can Wasim be more efficient in taking top 6 + tails, both when he has an inferior career avg & strike rate than McGrath? My post was not addressing toughest bowler, complete bowler or any subjective criterion. My post was addressing facts and that specific claim was illogical based on stats. Care to back up the claim about Wasim being more efficient by any rational way? I am all ears.

 

[Bewal Express]

Btw who said Wssim didnt bowl inswingers with the new ball?Its like saying Warne didnt spin the leg spinner,Saqi didnt bow the doosra,Lara didnt have a square cut and Tendulkar never played the striaght drive.

He isnt called the Sultan of Swing and the Left arm of God for nothing.

As i have said on many occasions i didn`t need youtube videos or anacdotal evidence from other people to tell me how good or bad he was. I am telling you that there were many series where he could not swing the ball into the right handers. I named you 3 from memory. Any left arm bowler who swings the ball into batsman(right handed) consistently will always take wickets with new ball. Akram had some dry periods. My point was not that he didn`t do it- i remember the wicket of Bill Athey at Old Trafford and Jack Richards at Leeds in 1987 from inswingers but that he couldn`t do it at will like its claimed.

 

[James]

Just for the Akram cheerleaders who always try and shut down debates like this, an ongoing 400-post thread proves that it's not an open-and-shut case. Steyn is seriously excellent by any measurable standard.