Can Dale Steyn ever match the greatness of Wasim Akram?

[Neferpitou]

This point is easily countered by the fact that Steyn has dominated in Asia consistently. He has been absolutely outstanding when faced with flat slow SC pitches.

By no means has he dominated the SC except in India. He's performed reasonably well. 32 in UAE, 24 in Pak and SL, 20 in India.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

By no means has he dominated the SC except in India. He's performed reasonably well. 32 in UAE, 24 in Pak and SL, 20 in India.

Averaging 24 in Pak and SL and 20 in India isn't that domination?

SL produces pattas.

Pakistan has flat tracks as you said.

Its alien conditions for Steyn.

Except UAE, that's domination bro.

 

[Neferpitou]

Steyn has taken wickets in SC whenever he has toured post 2007. So he has taken wickets on phattas as well.

Then no excuses that an average below 25 can't be achieved on phattas.

 

[WrexEverything]

You can check the Aus vs SA pitches in Aus last series.

Absolute pattas except for Perth.

True....Wasim had to bowl in a lot of flatter tracks in his whole career. So extra credit must be given for that.

That's true. But what does that even lead us to conclude? Steyn being born in SA isn't his fault you know.

It's not as though Steyn relies on his home pitches to get wickets. In Asia, he has:

84 wickets in 17 games (!!!) at an average of 22, and a truly ridiculous strike rate of 39!

The "flat pitches argument" isn't relevant to this debate since they could both bowl brilliantly on them.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Bowler averaging below 25 in a country is like batsman averaging above 50 in a country.

 

[Neferpitou]

Averaging 24 in Pak and SL and 20 in India isn't that domination?

SL produces pattas.

Pakistan has flat tracks as you said.

Its alien conditions for Steyn.

Except UAE, that's domination bro.

Domination would be closer to 20.

 

[WrexEverything]

By no means has he dominated the SC except in India. He's performed reasonably well. 32 in UAE, 24 in Pak and SL, 20 in India.

Again, dude, you're using only averages. Even the averages are amazing, but STeyn has taken 84 wickets in 17 games in SC. With five 5 wicket hauls. He has destroyed SC teams more than any pacer ever.

In fact no overseas bowler in history of cricket has taken as many wickets as Steyn in SC conditions: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...4;team=5;team=9;template=results;type=bowling

Walsh is second with 77.

If that isn;t domination I don't know what is.

 

[WrexEverything]

By no means has he dominated the SC except in India. He's performed reasonably well. 32 in UAE, 24 in Pak and SL, 20 in India.

Again, dude, you're using only averages. Even the averages are amazing, but STeyn has taken 84 wickets in 17 games in SC. With five 5 wicket hauls. He has destroyed SC teams more than any pacer ever.

In fact no overseas bowler in history of cricket has taken as many wickets as Steyn in SC conditions: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...4;team=5;team=9;template=results;type=bowling

Walsh is second with 77.

If that isn;t domination I don't know what is.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

That's true. But what does that even lead us to conclude? Steyn being born in SA isn't his fault you know.

It's not as though Steyn relies on his home pitches to get wickets. In Asia, he has:

84 wickets in 17 games (!!!) at an average of 22, and a truly ridiculous strike rate of 39!

The "flat pitches argument" isn't relevant to this debate since they could both bowl brilliantly on them.

More credit relating to that point. Not overall conclusion.

Case for Wasim:

1. Catches dropped (legitimate claim)
2. Had to bowl majority of career in Pakistan
3. Didn't have much scoreboard pressure outside home

Case for Steyn:

1. Amazing all round average in a batting dominated era
2. Great average in Asia inspite of it being alien conditions
3. Countless spells where he has blown away the opposition and won the match/series for his team (of course SA had a good overall team but Steyn delivers the goods more often than not and impacts results)

 

[Neferpitou]

Anyway, I think we're going in circles. I've made my points. Adios.

 

[Chrish]

Insecurity from some of the posters here is unnecessary. If you read all the previous posts here, lot of people regardless of their nationalities think Steyn is a better test bowler and Wasim is better In LOI. I don't see anyone trying to bring Wasim down. All this desperation to attack certain nationality is without any reasoning

 

[Asif khan]

Wasim > Anybody else as far as I'm concerned.

I really doubt we will see anything like him again, ignoring the stats, of course.

 

[sajeebmcj]

wasim akram
vs eng 30.66
vs sa 29.76
vs ind 28.66
vs aus 25.76

dale steyn
vs eng 32.63
vs aus 27.13
vs pak 21.82
vs ind 20.93

 

[Chrish]

Steyn becomes demonic beast in SA conditions.. Virtually unplayable! The way he dominates the batsmen can only be matched by Lilee and Ambrose when they were in terminator mode. On top of that he has produced some amazing spells in India that shattered one of the strongest batting line ups. All these are the reasons why I rate him so highly in test format..

 

[Buffet]

Steyn becomes demonic beast in SA conditions.. Virtually unplayable! The way he dominates the batsmen can only be matched by Lilee and Ambrose when they were in terminator mode. On top of that he has produced some amazing spells in India that shattered one of the strongest batting line ups. All these are the reasons why I rate him so highly in test format..

Imagine him using the old ball in earlier eras.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Steyn is a bigger match winner.

In the test matches where Steyn played SA have had a W/L ratio of 2.33
ODIs - 1.7

For Akram it is 1.5 and 1.3

#PPLogic

Ouch!

/Thread

 

[sivaji]

Steyn, McGrath and Marshall are the best three. Wasim, Donald, Ambrose and the likes are in the next category. It is such a shane Wasim has never been rated no 1 in any period of his career. He was a decent bowler.

 

[sivaji]

Steyn is also better in ODIs. The rule changes and t20 era has helped the batsmen so an average of 27 now is like 21 in the 1990s.

 

[Slog]

He is better than Waqar but not Wasim

Wasim was a magician with the ball.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Steyn is also better in ODIs. The rule changes and t20 era has helped the batsmen so an average of 27 now is like 21 in the 1990s.

Yes its harder to bowl in ODI's nowadays but Steyn has the luxury of picking and choosing the ODI's he wants to play. Wasim did not have that. So no, Wasim is still the better ODI bowler in my opinion. Only in Tests i'd agree that Marshall/Steyn/McGrath are a notch above Waz.

 

[Buffet]

Steyn, McGrath and Marshall are the best three. Wasim, Donald, Ambrose and the likes are in the next category. It is such a shane Wasim has never been rated no 1 in any period of his career. He was a decent bowler.

Yes its harder to bowl in ODI's nowadays but Steyn has the luxury of picking and choosing the ODI's he wants to play. Wasim did not have that. So no, Wasim is still the better ODI bowler in my opinion. Only in Tests i'd agree that Marshall/Steyn/McGrath are a notch above Waz.

Ambrose should belong with McGrath and others if you are bracketing bowlers. Wasim was surely better in ODI than Steyn.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

South Africans have finally arrived [MENTION=134608]Hawkeye[/MENTION]

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Wasim >>> Steyn in ODIs

In Tests though I do feel Steyn has been better though he is no where near Wasim's talent.

But I sometimes get doubtful because Wasim had to deal with dropped catches, no scoreboard pressure, etc which is why I am confused a bit.

But purely results wise, Steyn has delivered more.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Ambrose should belong with McGrath and others if you are bracketing bowlers. Wasim was surely better in ODI than Steyn.

i wasn't really bracketing them. For what it's worth i think Ambrose is ahead of Waz in tests but behind those 3. These differences are probably marginal and it's subjective after a point anyway.

 

[Boxer]

two epic players. you don't compare players from different generations

 

[junaid.ahmed]

steyn kapoor is better than any Pakistani bowler

 

[Buffet]

Wasim >>> Steyn in ODIs

In Tests though I do feel Steyn has been better though he is no where near Wasim's talent.

But I sometimes get doubtful because Wasim had to deal with dropped catches, no scoreboard pressure, etc which is why I am confused a bit.

But purely results wise, Steyn has delivered more.

If we want to talk about stuff like dropped catches then why not about other advantages held by bowlers in older era ?

When all said and done, Wasim was not good enough performer to ever ranked as number one in the test format. Not for even single day. Talent, skill wise - Wasim is the best I have seen but if Steyn hangs his boot right now, he will clearly go down as a better test bowler. McGrath/Ambrose were better performers when Wasim played. Donald has better performance than Wasim but I club Wasim with Donald. Not many SA fans will rate Steyn lower than Donald. You can't really present any convincing argument for rating Wasim higher than even Donald. I haven't heard any so far and I will love to hear from anyone.

Older era batting records count more because it was difficult for batsmen to average 50+. But reverse logic is not used by many for current era for bowlers because that will put Steyn far ahead of others

Bowlers job is to take wickets cheaply and quickly. Steyn has done is better than most in history on both counts despite playing in era when batsmen are scoring centuries for fun due to various reasons. He is also far ahead of the second best pacer. I guess he had to average in teens for some folks to realize who we are witnessing here.

 

[WrexEverything]

Another thing I find amazing about Steyn is that he has almost as many wickets as Ambrose (7 fewer) and Wasim (18 fewer) despite having played 25 fewer test matches. The rate at which he takes wickets is unmatches by anyone except Lillee and Hadlee.

 

[WrexEverything]

If we want to talk about stuff like dropped catches then why not about other advantages held by bowlers in older era ?

When all said and done, Wasim was not good enough performer to ever ranked as number one in the test format. Not for even single day. Talent, skill wise - Wasim is the best I have seen but if Steyn hangs his boot right now, he will clearly go down as a better test bowler. McGrath/Ambrose were better performers when Wasim played. Donald has better performance than Wasim but I club Wasim with Donald. Not many SA fans will rate Steyn lower than Donald. You can't really present any convincing argument for rating Wasim higher than even Donald. I haven't heard any so far and I will love to hear from anyone.

Older era batting records count more because it was difficult for batsmen to average 50+. But reverse logic is not used by many for current era for bowlers because that will put Steyn far ahead of others

Bowlers job is to take wickets cheaply and quickly. Steyn has done is better than most in history on both counts despite playing in era when batsmen are scoring centuries for fun due to various reasons. He is also far ahead of the second best pacer. I guess he had to average in teens for some folks to realize who we are witnessing here.

I agree overally, but the bolded part is unfair on Wasim. While there are many world class bowlers even today, it's not like in 90s where Wasim had competition from McGrath Ambrose Waqar Donald in the rankings.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

If we want to talk about stuff like dropped catches then why not about other advantages held by bowlers in older era ?

When all said and done, Wasim was not good enough performer to ever ranked as number one in the test format. Not for even single day. Talent, skill wise - Wasim is the best I have seen but if Steyn hangs his boot right now, he will clearly go down as a better test bowler. McGrath/Ambrose were better performers when Wasim played. Donald has better performance than Wasim but I club Wasim with Donald. Not many SA fans will rate Steyn lower than Donald. You can't really present any convincing argument for rating Wasim higher than even Donald. I haven't heard any so far and I will love to hear from anyone.

Older era batting records count more because it was difficult for batsmen to average 50+. But reverse logic is not used by many for current era for bowlers because that will put Steyn far ahead of others

Bowlers job is to take wickets cheaply and quickly. Steyn has done is better than most in history on both counts despite playing in era when batsmen are scoring centuries for fun due to various reasons. He is also far ahead of the second best pacer. I guess he had to average in teens for some folks to realize who we are witnessing here.

Very good post.

That's true. Steyn didn't play in an era of relaxed rules when it comes to reverse swing bowling.

Can we have a analysis of each of them in their peak?

 

[Scrolln]

Greatness wise Steyn is already a superior test bowler, no question about it. Although Wasim was better to watch, and was a much better ODI bowler.

 

[Buffet]

I agree overally, but the bolded part is unfair on Wasim. While there are many world class bowlers even today, it's not like in 90s where Wasim had competition from McGrath Ambrose Waqar Donald in the rankings.

Agree with that. It's not Wasim's fault that he played with better performers. By performers, I am not looking at average or any stats but rankings for 10-15 years here. Rankings at any one time may not be 100% correct but over a long period, they do tell a story.

I have actually listed Wasim in my top 5 pacers many times( list keeps changing depending on mood) and don't really go only by stats but I was pointing that out for folks who are overrating Wasim and under rating Steyn. I saw both and I have no hesitation in saying that if Steyn hangs his boot right now, he will go down as a better test bowler. I guess, we should wait for his retirement to see where he gets ranked by everyone. Taking opinions from SA or Pakistani fans may be biased.

 

[cricketindiafan]

steyn kapoor is better than any Pakistani bowler

But then isnt Wasim also Vikram

 

[junaid.ahmed]

But then isnt Wasim also Vikram

wish $$ can change the place of birth

 

[Buffet]

Can we have a analysis of each of them in their peak?

Here you can see how ratings graph's of both bowlers. I am not using ranking because we already know that we had better performers when Wasim played. ICC ratings takes account of relative contribution in match, opposition strength and so on... So we have some context here rather than raw stats. 30/4 by two bowlers can mean vastly different things in two matches. Rating graphs puts some context behind those raw stats. Steyn has simply performed at different level than Wasim. It should be clear from rating trend over the long period.




Since everyone picks a different period for peak, I don't want to get into that. You can see for both how they performed and then pick a peak period to compare. Steyn's peak is everything except his first 3 years and on going. If you need stats then his peak consists of 364 wickets at average of 21 and SR of 40. I personally don't rate players with comparable peak with 150 wickets at the same level as 300 wickets. They absolutely belong in different categories due to ability to perform at such a high level for so long.

To cut to the chase, Wasim's peak period of 5-6 years should be lower than 80% of career of Steyn. You can do comparisons with any chosen 5-6 years and see for yourself with raw stats even though raw stats are not a good replacement of rating points for obvious reasons.

I hope you didn't mean peak rating points for both because that's a lousy way to compare two players. Steyn has far higher peak rating but I don't see that as a factor in comparison to be honest. Rating trend over a period is much better way to judge players.

If you pull ratings for Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose etc then you will see striking similarity with Steyn and that's not a surprise or co-incidence. It simply shows how consistently they were contributing relative to others. I normally refrain from one to one comparison for Steyn and prefer to do it after he retires but too many PPers underrate Steyn by a big margin. I may still prefer to watch Wasim over Steyn but that's a different issue.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Here you can see how ratings graph's of both bowlers. I am not using ranking because we already know that we had better performers when Wasim played. ICC ratings takes account of relative contribution in match, opposition strength and so on... So we have some context here rather than raw stats. 30/4 by two bowlers can mean vastly different things in two matches. Rating graphs puts some context behind those raw stats. Steyn has simply performed at different level than Wasim. It should be clear from rating trend over the long period.

View attachment 57484


Since everyone picks a different period for peak, I don't want to get into that. You can see for both how they performed and then pick a peak period to compare. Steyn's peak is everything except his first 3 years and on going. If you need stats then his peak consists of 364 wickets at average of 21 and SR of 40. I personally don't rate players with comparable peak with 150 wickets at the same level as 300 wickets. They absolutely belong in different categories due to ability to perform at such a high level for so long.

To cut to the chase, Wasim's peak period of 5-6 years should be lower than 80% of career of Steyn. You can do comparisons with any chosen 5-6 years and see for yourself with raw stats even though raw stats are not a good replacement of rating points for obvious reasons.

I hope you didn't mean peak rating points for both because that's a lousy way to compare two players. Steyn has far higher peak rating but I don't see that as a factor in comparison to be honest. Rating trend over a period is much better way to judge players.

If you pull ratings for Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose etc then you will see striking similarity with Steyn and that's not a surprise or co-incidence. It simply shows how consistently they were contributing relative to others. I normally refrain from one to one comparison for Steyn and prefer to do it after he retires but too many PPers underrate Steyn by a big margin. I may still prefer to watch Wasim over Steyn but that's a different issue.

Thanks bro.

By peak, I was referring to his peak years with averages in different countries.

Of course, peak isn't everything but we take peak and other factors into account when doing analysis.

Steyn has been super consistent with all factors going for him inspite of playing in a batsmen's era.

I will probably dig in and post stats of both Wasim and Steyn in their best years ALONG with sample set (of peak) and also how they did otherwise.

 

[sajeebmcj]

wasim akram is the most overrated bowler in cricket history.
he is way behind of mcgrath,donald,ambrose.

 

[Buffet]

I will probably dig in and post stats of both Wasim and Steyn in their best years ALONG with sample set (of peak) and also how they did otherwise.

That will be again simply raw stats which will miss all context of relative contributions. 30/3 top order wickets right now is far more valuable than 30/3 twenty years ago. Anyway, let's see your work. I don't want to spend time on that. For me , Steyn is ahead by a clear margin in performance to not have any doubt. I have seen both so not really talking about stats here. I presented all those graphs to add some objectivity otherwise it will be me giving some opinions without any basis.

 

[Diffusion]

Steyn's the better bowler. Wasim was the 'greater cricketer' though once you take into account the batting and the iconic-ness.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

That will be again simply raw stats which will miss all context of relative contributions. 30/3 top order wickets right now is far more valuable than 30/3 twenty years ago. Anyway, let's see your work. I don't want to spend time on that. For me , Steyn is ahead by a clear margin in performance to not have any doubt. I have seen both so not really talking about stats here. I presented all those graphs to add some objectivity otherwise it will be me giving some opinions without any basis.

I agree with you. For me too, I felt Steyn was more impactful (in tests) but just wanting to see all the stuff for analysis sake.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

Here you can see how ratings graph's of both bowlers. I am not using ranking because we already know that we had better performers when Wasim played. ICC ratings takes account of relative contribution in match, opposition strength and so on... So we have some context here rather than raw stats. 30/4 by two bowlers can mean vastly different things in two matches. Rating graphs puts some context behind those raw stats. Steyn has simply performed at different level than Wasim. It should be clear from rating trend over the long period.

View attachment 57484


Since everyone picks a different period for peak, I don't want to get into that. You can see for both how they performed and then pick a peak period to compare. Steyn's peak is everything except his first 3 years and on going. If you need stats then his peak consists of 364 wickets at average of 21 and SR of 40. I personally don't rate players with comparable peak with 150 wickets at the same level as 300 wickets. They absolutely belong in different categories due to ability to perform at such a high level for so long.

To cut to the chase, Wasim's peak period of 5-6 years should be lower than 80% of career of Steyn. You can do comparisons with any chosen 5-6 years and see for yourself with raw stats even though raw stats are not a good replacement of rating points for obvious reasons.

I hope you didn't mean peak rating points for both because that's a lousy way to compare two players. Steyn has far higher peak rating but I don't see that as a factor in comparison to be honest. Rating trend over a period is much better way to judge players.

If you pull ratings for Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose etc then you will see striking similarity with Steyn and that's not a surprise or co-incidence. It simply shows how consistently they were contributing relative to others. I normally refrain from one to one comparison for Steyn and prefer to do it after he retires but too many PPers underrate Steyn by a big margin. I may still prefer to watch Wasim over Steyn but that's a different issue.

Ya watching wasim was always amazing and no other bowlers give me that satisfaction but It is also true that McGrath and Steyn have got passed Wasim.
Now Steyn only has to time his retirement,shouldn't play like Pollock beyond the peak and that too for 4years.

 

[Hawkeye]

wasim akram is the most overrated bowler in cricket history.
he is way behind of mcgrath,donald,ambrose.

[MENTION=138983]Neferpitou[/MENTION]

I agree. Chetan Sharma > Wasim, Waqar, Imran. Agarkar and Zaheer Khan just miss out marginally.

 

[Neferpitou]

[MENTION=138983]Neferpitou[/MENTION]

I agree. Chetan Sharma > Wasim, Waqar, Imran. Agarkar and Zaheer Khan just miss out marginally.

Nothing surprising here, an Indian Saffer and a bunch of Indians agreeing with each other. They'll never be able to answer the questions I put forward. Buffet as usual brings his biased statistics.

 

[Chrish]

It's a pity Wasim didn't play more matches in SA.. Those conditions are very ideal for any pacer since they offer both bounce and swing. Sample size of two test is not good enough to judge him over there.

 

[as-95]

Ya watching wasim was always amazing and no other bowlers give me that satisfaction but It is also true that McGrath and Steyn have got passed Wasim.
Now Steyn only has to time his retirement,shouldn't play like Pollock beyond the peak and that too for 4years.

No matter how many times you Indian posters try to reiterate that Steyn is better than Wasim, it will never be true. Steyn has flopped against the best sides and has choked on the World Stage. Wasim is a World Champion regarded as arguably THE finest bowler of All time by many ex cricketers, pundits and neutral fans. The amount of times you repeat yourself won't affect this. Steyn is a tier below and is not on the same level.

 

[Neferpitou]

Steyn's done nothing but feasted on weak batting lineups. When he was faced with teams(Aus and Eng) equipped to face him but relatively weaker to the ones Wasim faced, he has a glaring average of 27 and 32.

If one is to be considered the best then he better have performed against the best. Not only performed but Steyn should've beasted against these lineups if he was that great.

 

[as-95]

Steyn's the better bowler. Wasim was the 'greater cricketer' though once you take into account the batting and the iconic-ness.

In ODI's, only a fool could say Steyn was better. Steyn is a mediocre ODI bowler compared to the likes of Wasim. One can argue, that Steyn is on a similar level to Wasim in tests, but I still think Wasim is greater as he always performed where's Steyn was poor against the likes of Aus,Eng.

 

[WrexEverything]

Steyn's done nothing but feasted on weak batting lineups. When he was faced with teams(Aus and Eng) equipped to face him but relatively weaker to the ones Wasim faced, he has a glaring average of 27 and 32.

If one is to be considered the best then he better have performed against the best. Not only performed but Steyn should've beasted against these lineups if he was that great.

Again and again you choose to ignore Steyn's phenomenal performances against probably the strongest batting lineups of the era, India (Sachin, Sehwag, Dravid, Laxman). In no way shape or form have Australia been a better batting lineup than India in this era. They were better in the Waughs-Gilchrist-Hayden-Langer-Ponting era but after 2007, India's batting lineup has undoubtedly been more formidable. Shouldn't Steyn get credit for that?

 

[Haroon786]

Quality of batsmen has also declined severely, I mean the likes of Hafeez and Shezhad in a Test team is absolutely a farce- wouldn't make make a county second eleven 20-30 years.

 

[as-95]

Here you can see how ratings graph's of both bowlers. I am not using ranking because we already know that we had better performers when Wasim played. ICC ratings takes account of relative contribution in match, opposition strength and so on... So we have some context here rather than raw stats. 30/4 by two bowlers can mean vastly different things in two matches. Rating graphs puts some context behind those raw stats. Steyn has simply performed at different level than Wasim. It should be clear from rating trend over the long period.

View attachment 57484


Since everyone picks a different period for peak, I don't want to get into that. You can see for both how they performed and then pick a peak period to compare. Steyn's peak is everything except his first 3 years and on going. If you need stats then his peak consists of 364 wickets at average of 21 and SR of 40. I personally don't rate players with comparable peak with 150 wickets at the same level as 300 wickets. They absolutely belong in different categories due to ability to perform at such a high level for so long.

To cut to the chase, Wasim's peak period of 5-6 years should be lower than 80% of career of Steyn. You can do comparisons with any chosen 5-6 years and see for yourself with raw stats even though raw stats are not a good replacement of rating points for obvious reasons.

I hope you didn't mean peak rating points for both because that's a lousy way to compare two players. Steyn has far higher peak rating but I don't see that as a factor in comparison to be honest. Rating trend over a period is much better way to judge players.

If you pull ratings for Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose etc then you will see striking similarity with Steyn and that's not a surprise or co-incidence. It simply shows how consistently they were contributing relative to others. I normally refrain from one to one comparison for Steyn and prefer to do it after he retires but too many PPers underrate Steyn by a big margin. I may still prefer to watch Wasim over Steyn but that's a different issue.

Everyone knows how flawed ICC ratings are. Whether it is rankings or this malarkey that you have dug up to suit your argument. As I have said, Steyn is a great Test bowler and an average ODI bowler. However, until he stops choking on the World stage,, and finally performs against the best sides of his era, he will only remain a great test bowler and below the top rung of bowlers like Wasim.

 

[Neferpitou]

Again and again you choose to ignore Steyn's phenomenal performances against probably the strongest batting lineups of the era, India (Sachin, Sehwag, Dravid, Laxman). In no way shape or form have Australia been a better batting lineup than India in this era. They were better in the Waughs-Gilchrist-Hayden-Langer-Ponting era but after 2007, India's batting lineup has undoubtedly been more formidable. Shouldn't Steyn get credit for that?

I did give him credit for his performance against India but I highlighted that the sample size is too small.

 

[WrexEverything]

Steyn has performed against the best sides of his era. He averages 27 vs Australia, which is very good, and 21 against India. Only thing holding him back is his record vs England, but when even Wasim was nothing special vs SA and ENgland why is Steyn the only one penalised? I have no problem with people rating Wasim higher, but you guys are just being disingenuous in your reasons here.

 

[WrexEverything]

I did give him credit for his performance against India but I highlighted that the sample size is too small.

12 matches isn't enough?

 

[Neferpitou]

Steyn has performed against the best sides of his era. He averages 27 vs Australia, which is very good, and 21 against India. Only thing holding him back is his record vs England, but when even Wasim was nothing special vs SA and ENgland why is Steyn the only one penalised? I have no problem with people rating Wasim higher, but you guys are just being disingenuous in your reasons here.

England was not the best side during Wasim's era. Australia and Windies were.

 

[Haroon786]

Steyn is better than Wasim in tests.

 

[WrexEverything]

England was not the best side during Wasim's era. Australia and Windies were.

Indeed. So he should be dominating England too. An average of 30 against a supposedly weaker team in a sample of 18 matches isn't impressive.

 

[Neferpitou]

12 matches isn't enough?

7 matches, by 2011 that Indian side was pretty much ready to retire as shown by the thrashing received in England. Okay despite all that, I'll give him India although he didn't do much in India's recent tour.

 

[as-95]

Steyn has performed against the best sides of his era. He averages 27 vs Australia, which is very good, and 21 against India. Only thing holding him back is his record vs England, but when even Wasim was nothing special vs SA and ENgland why is Steyn the only one penalised? I have no problem with people rating Wasim higher, but you guys are just being disingenuous in your reasons here.

India is definitely not one of the best Test sides in Steyn's era so don't even bring them into the discussion. His average of 27 against Australia is FOUR runs greater than his career average therefore demonstrating that he was below par against them and has feasted on weaker batting lineups . His average of 34 against England is simply pathetic :). Steyn has not performed against the best sides of his era in Tests and is a mediocre ODI bowler. He has time on his side though, and if he can perform against big sides and stop choking on the World Stage, maybe he will be comparable to the likes of Wasim

 

[Neferpitou]

Indeed. So he should be dominating England too. An average of 30 against a supposedly weaker team in a sample of 18 matches isn't impressive.

Okay, he didn't perform against England(27 in 14 matches) but takes nothing away from his performances against the best.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

If anything I would compare Steyn to the likes of Waqar and Marshall, who were VERY similar sort of bowlers

 

[as-95]

Indeed. So he should be dominating England too. An average of 30 against a supposedly weaker team in a sample of 18 matches isn't impressive.

Ok kid, if you want to play it this way and talk about Wasim not dominating England(who were a very good side although not the best in Wasim's era), lets talk about Steyn against Pakistan. Although I am a Pakistani, I would be lying if I said that we have been one of the best in Steyn's era. Steyn has a bowling average of 30.5 against Pakistan in the 10 innings he has played against us.

 

[WrexEverything]

Ok kid, if you want to play it this way and talk about Wasim not dominating England(who were a very good side although not the best in Wasim's era), lets talk about Steyn against Pakistan. Although I am a Pakistani, I would be lying if I said that we have been one of the best in Steyn's era. Steyn has a bowling average of 30.5 against Pakistan in the 10 innings he has played against us.

Oh dear oh dear, someone seems to have completely screwed up the stats. I'm talkig about tests, in which Steyn averages 21.82 vs Pakistan.

Please try again

 

[as-95]

Okay, he didn't perform against England(27 in 14 matches) but takes nothing away from his performances against the best.

The poster you have replied to you claims that Steyn's 27 vs Aus is in his own words "very good", so he surely must agree that 27 is a good average in Wasim's case, or is this just Blue tinted glasses from our Indian brother?

 

[WrexEverything]

Okay, he didn't perform against England(27 in 14 matches) but takes nothing away from his performances against the best.

I agree with you, but I don't get this notion of England having been "the best" team of Steyn's era along with Australia. When have ENgland really been that great in the last 10 years. Apart from that short stretch in 2011-12, England have always been a step below in terms of quality.

SA have been No.1, and after them, Australia, India and England have all been very good. Out of those 3 Steyn has done superbly against 2. So why is it being repeated constantly that Steyn "hasn't performed against the best"? I just don't get it. He has.

 

[WrexEverything]

The poster you have replied to you claims that Steyn's 27 vs Aus is in his own words "very good", so he surely must agree that 27 is a good average in Wasim's case, or is this just Blue tinted glasses from our Indian brother?

Ok, so let me get this straight here. 27 not a good average but Wasim's average of 25.7 vs Australia is? That's such a minuscule difference for god's sake.

 

[Buffet]

Everyone knows how flawed ICC ratings are.

Yes, it's not always 100% accurate at any time but if in entire career, rating of one bowler is towering above another then it's futile to argue about some flaws in ratings. Flaws in rating will surely put some inferior player above another player temporarily but not for entire career. Ratings are most unbiased performance measure over a long period. Everything has opinions but some are closer to fact and some are just opinions.

I personally don't have any issue if you rate Wasim higher. He was the only Pakistani players which interested me enough to tune in to watch Pakistani games in 90s in weird hours and I will probably prefer watching Wasim over Steyn even now. But arguments are ridiculously weak to support Wasim's case here. Steyn is not perfect. No one is perfect but if we pick some negative trait in one bowler then it's common sense to see if other bowler in discussion does well or poorly in same measure. Now if we keep all logic aside and simply write XYZ is better despite all facts pointing to one conclusion then it's meaningless to debate this.

Steyn has better avg, better SR, light years ahead of his peers, takes more wickets per match, picks up more top order wickets, better ratings in his entire career, and .... all that when batsmen are dominating. And yet, some posters are debating as if there are any factual points to debate. Any points you pick up , look it up where Wasim stands using the same point.

Can anyone even prove that Wasim performed better than Donald? If anyone can present any facts to prove this then we can move up in pecking order and do factual comparison of Wasim with the likes of Mcgrath, Steyn etc. That should be easy enough and no confusion because both played in the same period.

 

[Neferpitou]

I agree with you, but I don't get this notion of England having been "the best" team of Steyn's era along with Australia. When have ENgland really been that great in the last 10 years. Apart from that short stretch in 2011-12, England have always been a step below in terms of quality.

SA have been No.1, and after them, Australia, India and England have all been very good. Out of those 3 Steyn has done superbly against 2. So why is it being repeated constantly that Steyn "hasn't performed against the best"? I just don't get it. He has.

Another great point. Very lucky to not have faced his own lineup, he probably would've failed against them as well.

The past decade was one of England's most successful eras and they had batsmen the calibre of KP, Strauss, Bell, Cook, Trott, Prior all in their prime. If that is not a strong team then I don't know what is.

27 is a decent average against the weakest squads Australia had fielded in 2-3 decades or so.

 

[as-95]

I agree with you, but I don't get this notion of England having been "the best" team of Steyn's era along with Australia. When have ENgland really been that great in the last 10 years. Apart from that short stretch in 2011-12, England have always been a step below in terms of quality.

SA have been No.1, and after them, Australia, India and England have all been very good. Out of those 3 Steyn has done superbly against 2. So why is it being repeated constantly that Steyn "hasn't performed against the best"? I just don't get it. He has.

Steyn's Test debut was in 2004. Australia has dominated Test's with England also being superior in the early part of Steyn's career. India hasn't been a paticularly strong Test outfit and should not be in the discussion. Steyn's bowling average against Aus in Tests is 4 higher than his career average theerefore demonstrating that he has feasted on the weaker lineups. Steyn has flopped against England and his average against them is an utter embarassment. Not to mention his uncanny ability to choke on the World Stage.). Until he performs against the best and shows something on the World Stage, he will remain in the bracket below the likes of Wasim.

 

[WrexEverything]

Steyn's Test debut was in 2004. Australia has dominated Test's with England also being superior in the early part of Steyn's career. India hasn't been a paticularly strong Test outfit and should not be in the discussion. Steyn's bowling average against Aus in Tests is 4 higher than his career average theerefore demonstrating that he has feasted on the weaker lineups. Steyn has flopped against England and his average against them is an utter embarassment. Not to mention his uncanny ability to choke on the World Stage.). Until he performs against the best and shows something on the World Stage, he will remain in the bracket below the likes of Wasim.

Complete and utter rubbish.

 

[WrexEverything]

Another great point. Very lucky to not have faced his own lineup, he probably would've failed against them as well.

The past decade was one of England's most successful eras and they had batsmen the calibre of KP, Strauss, Bell, Cook, Trott, Prior all in their prime. If that is not a strong team then I don't know what is.

27 is a decent average against the weakest squads Australia had fielded in 2-3 decades or so.

Now these are better points. I agree with most.

However, I still don't see how you can say Steyn's record against Australia is anything but excellent. I've been saying this repeatedly... looking at just the average with no context makes no sense. It's an average of 27, yes, but it's coupled with a rate of 5 wickets per match and a strike rate of 45. He's produced series winning spells in Australia twice. Sure, expecting this from Wasim is unfair since the Australia of his time were stronger, but this is a big point in favour of Steyn which is being ignored. Twice (Melbourne in 2008 and Perth in 2012) Steyn has won the series with a decisive spell of bowling. So much for him being a choker like some posters are saying. In tests, he has delivered in the big moments.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

[MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] - Where can I get the charts bro?

Want to check for all batsmen, bowlers, etc.

Seems like a fun thing to do.

 

[Stallion__]

If only stats are the basis of superiority, then there is not point of this thread. Steyn is a better test bowler stat-wise.

But then why Steyn only? Why not Pollock, Donald, Garner, Hadlee, Ambrose or even Imran or Waqar for that matter, almost of of them have better averages and strike rate than Wasim.

And if someone is really self-obsessed better don't read this post.

So why is Wasim picked in World XI's so often than any of these bowlers?

Steyn no doubt, is a fantastic bowler and would end up in top league of fast bowler when he retires, I still doubt many would pick him over Wasim in their All Time XI's.

Yes, its true that nature of pitches have flattened in recent era and batsman average more than they used to. For that matter here is the bowling comparison of both Wasim and Steyn era


Bowling Average in Wasim's Era

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling]

[/url]


Bowling Average in Steyn's Era

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling]

[/url]


Notice that overall average is 2.5 runs/wicket higher in Steyn's era than in Wasim's.

Although bowling averages have increased, the bowling Strike rate has decreased to about 4 balls/wicket, means wickets in Steyn's era are cheaper in terms of SR but expensive in terms of average. This is possible because economy rates of bowlers have increased in recent times from 2.75 to 3.16.

What these stats don't tell is how inefficient batsmen techniques have become in recent times.

Take Hafeez. A player like him averages 40 in tests. This guy is a walking wicket for Steyn and even after being exposed by Steyn, he still manages that average. While in 90's someone like Atherton, who could survive Donald Trent Bridge 1998, averages only 37. I need not mention which of the above two names is a better player.

Modern day batsman, no doubt have improved in temperament to score heavily on flat pitches against ineffective medium pacers and develop healthy averages but they collapse like a pack of cards once they have to bat on even a little grassy pitch against half a decent bowlers and Steyn is much more than that.

As a statistical proof, I gathered the sub-100 team totals during Wasim and Steyn era and here is the result


Sub-100 Totals During Wasim's Era

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...span;template=results;type=team;view=innings]

[/url]


Sub-100 Totals During Steyn's Era

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...span;template=results;type=team;view=innings]

[/url]


Such innings totals are more in Steyn's period than in Wasim's. And we all know Wasim played sufficiently longer than Steyn.

We have 25 such cases in 575 matches in Wasim's career at an once in 23 matches (0.04348)

We have 28 such cases in 440 matches in Steyn's career at an once in 16 matches (0.06363)

So despite in the time of flats tracks and lesser ATG bowlers the rate of batting collapses has increased. And three of those have been sub-50 totals all happening in South Africa.


Now another thing which Steyn lacks is getting out batsman when he is well set. He is fantastic in bundling out batsman when he is on song but when a pitch stops assisting and a partnership develops, he struggles to break it, this is exactly what Wasim was so good at. Sanga-Mahela 600+, Sehwag triple ton, Michael Clarke 2012, Kevin Pietersen 2012, Kohli-Pujara 2013, Bell, Chanderpaul the list is longer than it should have been. I can recollect only two consequential incidents in Wasim's career where he couldn't provide breakthrough. One is that Langer-Gilchrist Hobart partnership (he got Langer edge behind umpire didn't give that) and other being Grant Flower double ton.

Actually that can be proved with stats as well.

I found this stat screen-shot earlier in the thread, and this shows the average score at which batsman got out to the particular bowler (not the bowlers average for that batsman).

For that matter, these averages are shown in LHB/RHB batsman rows

For Wasim

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=results;type=bowling;view=dismissal_summary]

[/url]


For Steyn

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=results;type=bowling;view=dismissal_summary]

[/url]


So the average score of batsman when he gets out against Wasim is 17.186

So the average score of batsman when he gets out against Steyn is 19.479
That average being higher is due to Steyn's relative inability to break partnerships or getting a set batsman out.

I find further proof of this when saw the highest individual totals being made against Wasim and Steyn


Highest Individual scores against Wasim

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=batting]

[/url]


Highest Individual scores against Steyn

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=batting]

[/url]


One more thing, there is an argument going on that Wasim was good at rapping up the tail and Steyn has more top order wickets than Wasim. In Steyn's generation, when top order batsman are like Hafeez, who are not less than any tail-ender when balls does a bit, it don't make much difference. If top order players performance is to be analyzed, we should talk about quality players only, not the ones with fake averages.

If we observe the best players during Wasim's and Steyn's period


Best players during Wasim's tenure

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=batting]

[/url]


Best players during Steyn's tenure

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;team=8;team=9;template=results;type=batting]

[/url]


Among the top 25 players in Wasim's time, 5 of them average more than they do otherwise against bowling attack having Wasim.
(Vengsarkar, Crowe, Gooch, Richards, Langer), while there are 3 players who don't make top 25 (or average lesser than they do otherwise) list but has scored more than 500 runs at an average of 50+ against Wasim's bowling attack (Manjrekar, Slater, Taylor).

Among the top 25 players in Steyn's time, 8 of them average more than they do otherwise against bowling attack having Steyn.
(Chanderpaul, Steve Smith, Clarke, Warner, Samaraweera, Jayawardene, Tendulkar, Sehwag), while there are 5 players who don't make top 25 (or average lesser than they do otherwise) list but has scored more than 500 runs at an average of 50+ against Steyn's bowling attack (Flemming, Sanga, Hughes, Samuels, Bell).


Another thing, Wasim was a consistent wicket taker, Steyn is more or blowing hot and cold type of bowler. Thats why percentage of Steyn's 5-er is greater than Wasim's.

But we easily forget that Wasim was just a medium pacer after once he was diagnosed with diabetes and how that disease affected his bowling. And its not another injury where you can blame him on the lack of fitness. It could happen to anyone and we should rather give credit to Wasim that he carried on when doctors told him his career is over. His was diagnosed with diabetes in late 1997.

So here is Wasim's record before he had confirmed diabetes

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling]

[/url]


And that dropped catches on Wasim's bowling is a very valid point. A quick analysis of their mode of dismissals would tell the story.

Wasim's Dismissals

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=results;type=bowling;view=dismissal_summary]

[/url]


Steyn's Dismissals

[http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=results;type=bowling;view=dismissal_summary]

[/url]

Percentage of Wasim's wickets (caught) : 46.6%
Percentage of Steyn's wickets (caught) : 63.4%


Last thing, most of Wasim's players, from Ambrose to Donald, from Ganguly to Ponting, rate him best or most skill fast bowler they have ever seen despite many other bowlers having superior record. Think over it, there must be a reason for that!

 

[as-95]

Wasim has always been a top performer and didn't go missing against the best sides in his era. I reiterate that this is specifically the most dominant sides. Let me give you an example:

Wasim bowling avg vs Aus :25.7---------------------Just 2 runs above his career aaverage
Wasim bowling avg vs WIndies:20.82-------------------This is almost 3 runs lower than his Career average!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These numbers clearly show that Wasim was an excellent bowler, but also brought his A game against the most dominant sides in his time. That record against WIndies is simply phenomenal!

Now lets see how Steyn compares against the best sides of his era......

Steyn bowling avg vs Aus:27.13--------------------This is 4 runs higher than his career avg
Steyn bowling avg vs Eng:32.63--------------------This is more than 10 runs higher than his career avg

Steyn's avg of 27 against Aus is not bad when looked at on its own, but when you see that his career average is 22.5, it creates uncertainty and tells you that he MAY not be as effective against the best sides. Then, when you look at his average against England, it really hits that point home. It is over 10 runs higher than his career average and it supports the notion that he feasted on the weaker sides and thus artificially deflated his average.

Don't get me wrong...Despite his inability to perform against the top sides, it still takes a great bowler to dominate against the weaker sides; so credit where credit is due...Steyn is still a very very good bowler, but until he performs against the most dominant sides of his era and shows something on the World Stage, he will not enter the bracket of the likes of Wasim!

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

No matter how many times you Indian posters try to reiterate that Steyn is better than Wasim, it will never be true. Steyn has flopped against the best sides and has choked on the World Stage. Wasim is a World Champion regarded as arguably THE finest bowler of All time by many ex cricketers, pundits and neutral fans. The amount of times you repeat yourself won't affect this. Steyn is a tier below and is not on the same level.

Wasim was most difficult bowler to face, most skilled but McGrath and Steyn have done better , neither of them are as skillfull but they have crossed Wasim in test.
It is nothing to do with average as Mcgrath and coupleof other bowler average are better than Wasim in ODI but everybody put Wasim at number1in odi. Steyn(till now) and McGrath has done better and that its.
Let me try in other way, nearly everybody in Pak passion, people put The great Khan as a better bowler in comparison to Wasim, but hasn't Steyn ,McGrath crossed Imran purely as a bowler so indirectly aren't they both better than Wasim.
I mean Steyn has 396 wickets in 78 matches 8 less than Wasim but with 26less test matches

 

[Stallion__]

But then why Steyn only? Why not Pollock, Donald, Garner, Hadlee, Ambrose or even Imran or Waqar for that matter, almost all* of them have better averages and strike rate than Wasim.

And if someone is really stat-obsessed* better don't read this post.

Long posts are most prome to mistakes

 

[as-95]

Wasim was most difficult bowler to face, most skilled but McGrath and Steyn have done better , neither of them are as skillfull but they have crossed Wasim in test.
It is nothing to do with average as Mcgrath and coupleof other bowler average are better than Wasim in ODI but everybody put Wasim at number1in odi. Steyn(till now) and McGrath has done better and that its.
Let me try in other way, nearly everybody in Pak passion, people put The great Khan as a better bowler in comparison to Wasim, but hasn't Steyn ,McGrath crossed Imran purely as a bowler so indirectly aren't they both better than Wasim.
I mean Steyn has 396 wickets in 78 matches 8 less than Wasim but with 26less test matches

Refer to [MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] post above. It came before yours, but you may not have refreshed. It answer your question for you without me having to do so. I acknowledge your point that Wasim was the better ODI bowler, but Stallion's post should tell you why he was also better in Tests.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

Wasim has always been a top performer and didn't go missing against the best sides in his era. I reiterate that this is specifically the most dominant sides. Let me give you an example:

Wasim bowling avg vs Aus :25.7---------------------Just 2 runs above his career aaverage
Wasim bowling avg vs WIndies:20.82-------------------This is almost 3 runs lower than his Career average!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These numbers clearly show that Wasim was an excellent bowler, but also brought his A game against the most dominant sides in his time. That record against WIndies is simply phenomenal!

Now lets see how Steyn compares against the best sides of his era......

Steyn bowling avg vs Aus:27.13--------------------This is 4 runs higher than his career avg
Steyn bowling avg vs Eng:32.63--------------------This is more than 10 runs higher than his career avg

Steyn's avg of 27 against Aus is not bad when looked at on its own, but when you see that his career average is 22.5, it creates uncertainty and tells you that he MAY not be as effective against the best sides. Then, when you look at his average against England, it really hits that point home. It is over 10 runs higher than his career average and it supports the notion that he feasted on the weaker sides and thus artificially deflated his average.

Don't get me wrong...Despite his inability to perform against the top sides, it still takes a great bowler to dominate against the weaker sides; so credit where credit is due...Steyn is still a very very good bowler, but until he performs against the most dominant sides of his era and shows something on the World Stage, he will not enter the bracket of the likes of Wasim!

What are Wasim average against England, Africa and India?

 

[as-95]

[MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] Great post. I would reply to it but it would tak up too much of the page. Well thought out post and should sway posters who have an open mind rather than an unwavering agenda.

 

[Buffet]

I agree with you, but I don't get this notion of England having been "the best" team of Steyn's era along with Australia. When have ENgland really been that great in the last 10 years. Apart from that short stretch in 2011-12, England have always been a step below in terms of quality.

SA have been No.1, and after them, Australia, India and England have all been very good. Out of those 3 Steyn has done superbly against 2. So why is it being repeated constantly that Steyn "hasn't performed against the best"? I just don't get it. He has.

Why not simply look at facts rather than opinions to see which batting sides were the top ones when Wasim and Steyn played?

Top 4 batting sides when Wasim Played - Runs per wicket


.
.

Top 4 batting sides when Steyn played -- Runs per wicket


Wasim got to play 3 out of 4 of them. He averages 25.76 against Aus, 28.86 against India, 21.26 against SL.

Steyn got to play 3 out of 4 as well. He averages 27.13 against Aus, 20.93 against Ind & 23.45 against SL.

-----------------------------

So taken together Steyn has actually very well against the top 3 batting sides of their careers. It's also obvious here that top batting sides are making more runs per wickets and still Steyn has done well. So argument about Steyn not doing well against top batting sides is clearly wrong and made up. It should have been obvious to anyone watching cricket seriously but if they missed it then it should be obvious now. Adjust Steyn's figure for inflated runs/wicket by top batting sides and then you get even better picture.

And about WI during Wasim career , lol. WI was 7th best side in batting when you take runs per wicket. Right now they are 8th best side. Guess what, in both periods, they scored 30 runs per wicket. That's what matters if we are going to take raw stats of bowlers against WI in two different periods and try to compare those two raw stats. Being a good team is not same as having a good batting.

Any other clutching to straw arguments left in favor of Wasim here?

 

[Stallion__]

Last thing, most of Wasim's players, from Ambrose to Donald, from Ganguly to Ponting, rate him best or most skill fast bowler they have ever seen despite many other bowlers having superior record. Think over it, there must be a reason for that!

contemporaries*

[MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] Great post

Thanks mate

Links not working. If anyone wants them he can ask for them.