What's new

Venkatesh Prasad vs Aaqib Javed

A

Ahmad Shah

Tape Ball Regular
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Runs
491
we have always compared great players
its time to compare two average players

this time its Aqib vs Prasad
there are many similarities between them
both are contemporary players
both were medium pacer
both were mediocre
both records in both format are amazingly similar
Prasad was famous Pakistan basher
Aqib was famous indian basher
venky vs aqib.jpg
 
Clearly Prasad was better, aquib's figures are terrible even after having great support bowlers
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
Clearly Prasad was better, aquib's figures are terrible even after having great support bowlers
Click to expand...

ofcourse no pak player can be better than indian player according to you

aqib is better in stats and that is good achievement when consider wasim and waqar always take bulk of the

wicket of opposition
 
Aaqib Javed was fantastic bowler, sadly for him Pakistan had even better bowlers back then. Had he was playing now, he probably would be leading the pack.
 
saeed5646 said:
aqib is better in stats and that is good achievement when consider wasim and waqar always take bulk of the

wicket of opposition
Click to expand...

If wasim and waqar took the bulk of the wickes then he should be averaging less, because wasim and waqar took out top batsmen of the other team and he only had to deal with tailenders, this makes case even worse because he averages 30/35+ against tailenders :yk
 
Aqib, a high mediocre bowler managed to keep his spot far longer than he should have ahead of much superior and more deserving bowlers.
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
We both are seeing the same stats but I am the only one who's analyzing the stats with proper context :srini
Click to expand...

To me stats are the same. Having watched both the players play from their debut till end, I would rank Aquib a touch higher, since he was still a match winner. Prasad was good in favourable conditions, and he was the main strike bowler along with Srinath. Aquib usually was a first change bowler, unless Waqar Wasim aren't playing. Aquib had skills with the new bowl and his reverse swing was exceptional. Yes, with the introduction of Shoaib Akhtar in the late 90s, his career kind of ended. But a good bowler nontheless. Take off the your indian hat for once and see the stats with "proper context". You would know what I am saying.
 
ahmedzee said:
To me stats are the same. Having watched both the players play from their debut till end, I would rank Aquib a touch higher, since he was still a match winner. Prasad was good in favourable conditions, and he was the main strike bowler along with Srinath. Aquib usually was a first change bowler, unless Waqar Wasim aren't playing. Aquib had skills with the new bowl and his reverse swing was exceptional. Yes, with the introduction of Shoaib Akhtar in the late 90s, his career kind of ended. But a good bowler nontheless. Take off the your indian hat for once and see the stats with "proper context". You would know what I am saying.
Click to expand...

In tests there isn't even a debate, prasad is better even by the stats

Let's talk about ODIs.

Prassad was part of a weak bowling line up ( he was part of the reason for the weakness :yk), he also had to open the bowling unlike aqib who came in after wasim and waqar, with the scorecard reading 2-3 wickets down with not many runs on the board. Now tell me who's got it easier? Aqib or prasad?

Bowlers always hunt in pairs, having a good bowling partner has a lot of impact on your own average. Take akhtar's example, he averaged around 20-21 till he was partnering wasim/waqar. After 2003-04 ( when wasim waqar retired) he averaged similar/worse than agarkar in odis. This alone demonstrates the impact of having a good bowling support.

Prasad is clearly the winner here because he managed to have almost similar stats as aqib despite being in a worse position than aquib.
Now that's how you do a proper analysis with PROPER context, now take off your green hat and green tinted glasses and order prasad's blue jersey from amazon :srini
 
Also one last point, Prasad managed to win 2 world cup matches against pakistan whereas aqib failed to do so against India

PRASAD WINS :srini
 
Javed had good avg against SL (20)

Javed had bad average against Aus(59), Eng(40) , NZ ( 62) , SA ( 36)

Grand total of 1 5-fer against SL

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

Prasad had good avg against Eng(25 ), Pak(19 ) , SA (27 )
Prasad had bad avg against Aus (46) , NZ ( 49) , SL( 47) , WI( 42)

Prasad had 7 5-fers. 3 against SA, one each against Eng, Pak, SL and WI

As a test bowler I will take Prasad.


As an ODI bowler, I don't have to look at numbers. I will take Javed.
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
In tests there isn't even a debate, prasad is better even by the stats

Let's talk about ODIs.

Prassad was part of a weak bowling line up ( he was part of the reason for the weakness :yk), he also had to open the bowling unlike aqib who came in after wasim and waqar, with the scorecard reading 2-3 wickets down with not many runs on the board. Now tell me who's got it easier? Aqib or prasad?

Bowlers always hunt in pairs, having a good bowling partner has a lot of impact on your own average. Take akhtar's example, he averaged around 20-21 till he was partnering wasim/waqar. After 2003-04 ( when wasim waqar retired) he averaged similar/worse than agarkar in odis. This alone demonstrates the impact of having a good bowling support.

Prasad is clearly the winner here because he managed to have almost similar stats as aqib despite being in a worse position than aquib.
Now that's how you do a proper analysis with PROPER context, now take off your green hat and green tinted glasses and order prasad's blue jersey from amazon :srini
Click to expand...

How old are you? 10? You were probably not even planned when I saw both these players play. And are we really seeing the same stats? Aquib has better average. Yes, he was not picked as much in tests, but still has better average.

Also, if you want to talk about other pacers. Aquib played 92,93,96,97 without one of Waqar or Wasim, or both. And no, the score was not always 2/3 in 10 overs. Which world are you living in? That's why I said, those who have seen these players, are better judge, not 10 years olds like you. You can ask you dad though, he may agree with me.
 
ahmedzee said:
How old are you? 10? You were probably not even planned when I saw both these players play.
Click to expand...

Ah ad-hominem attacks, losing patience, lol typical when you are losing an argument :yk
ahmedzee said:
And are we really seeing the same stats? Aquib has better average. Yes, he was not picked as much in tests, but still has better average.
Click to expand...

Clearly, you need to by a new pair of specs because you can't see beyond the average. Do I have to spoon feed you everything? There is barely any difference in test average but prasad have picked nearly double the no. of wickets with 7 freaking fivers compared to aqib's puny little 1. Now tell me, are you even looking at the stats?
ahmedzee said:
Also, if you want to talk about other pacers. Aquib played 92,93,96,97 without one of Waqar or Wasim, or both. And no, the score was not always 2/3 in 10 overs. Which world are you living in? That's why I said, those who have seen these players, are better judge, not 10 years olds like you. You can ask you dad though, he may agree with me.
Click to expand...


You are the one who can't stop throwing kindergarten insults because you can't back up your silly argument. I gave an example as to how having a good bowling support can help you in terms average, clearly I didn't say score was always 2/3 down lol are you sure you are educated? I shouldn't have the need to explain such simple things. Now try read and completely understand my comment before replying because it is a waste of time spoonfeeding you every little thing
 
Last edited:
ToeCrusher2 said:
Ah ad-hominem attacks, losing patience, lol typical when you are losing an argument :yk


Clearly, you need to by a new pair of specs because you can't see beyond the average. Do I have to spoon feed you everything? There is barely any difference in test average but prasad have picked nearly double the no. of wickets with 7 freaking fivers compared to aqib's puny little 1. Now tell me, are you even looking at the stats?



You are the one who can't stop throwing kindergarten insults because you can't back up your silly argument. I gave an example as to how having a good bowling support can help you in terms average, clearly I didn't say score was always 2/3 down lol are you sure you are educated? I shouldn't have the need to explain such simple things. Now try read and completely understand my comment before replying because it is a waste of time spoonfeeding you every little thing
Click to expand...

I have got to agree with the guy you are trying to bash. It seems instead of him looking at this comparison with green tinted shades, it is you who is looking at it from very dark blue ones. I am pretty sure you are one those guys who would also agree to the "fact" that bhuvi is the akram of this generation.

What the other guy said is spot on. You will only understand the difference if you had watched these two in live matches. Prasad was good but Aqib was a complete bowler who could swing it both ways and reverse the ball as well.... and there is never a question about which of these two would have better pace.

Now if you have a quick peek at statsguru, you would notice that out of 22 matches Aqib played, 10 were in Pak (so you can imagine the back breaking stuff since Pak wickets are hardly conducive to conventional swing). Out of 33 matches that prasad played, 11 were in India (and he has only got one fiver in those 11) and rest of his wickets were on wickets that were not flat by any stretch of imagination.... but yes it would be hard to imagine they were anything different to these roads that yoh see these days.

Again both were good bowlers but Aqib was a notch above Prasad due to his more complete skill set.
 
NoBallZombie said:
I have got to agree with the guy you are trying to bash. It seems instead of him looking at this comparison with green tinted shades, it is you who is looking at it from very dark blue ones. I am pretty sure you are one those guys who would also agree to the "fact" that bhuvi is the akram of this generation.

What the other guy said is spot on. You will only understand the difference if you had watched these two in live matches. Prasad was good but Aqib was a complete bowler who could swing it both ways and reverse the ball as well.... and there is never a question about which of these two would have better pace.

Now if you have a quick peek at statsguru, you would notice that out of 22 matches Aqib played, 10 were in Pak (so you can imagine the back breaking stuff since Pak wickets are hardly conducive to conventional swing). Out of 33 matches that prasad played, 11 were in India (and he has only got one fiver in those 11) and rest of his wickets were on wickets that were not flat by any stretch of imagination.... but yes it would be hard to imagine they were anything different to these roads that yoh see these days.

Again both were good bowlers but Aqib was a notch above Prasad due to his more complete skill set.
Click to expand...

Trying countering my points instead of useless personal attacks which add nothing to the discussion and stop making wrong assumptions ( I watched both of them live). There is not even a debate when it comes to test cricket, prasad is clearly better based on stats as well as performance. The only debate is in the ODIs where they have very similar stats and I have already posted my argument as to why prasad is better when seen under proper context. Now try answering the post instead of trying to guess my age or the tint of my glasses :yk. Ad hominem attacks only shows your weakness, try replying to the post and not the poster :srini
 
Last edited:
I jave watched both of them play live with no bias Aquib was way better. Prasad would get wickets when batsmen charged at him. other wise he wasnt the wicket taking option
 
Venky for me. Srinath and Prasad bowled most of the time without a competent 3rd seamer. He was a very good ODI bowler as well, not given enough credit.
 
Did Prasad ever get 7 wickets against Pakistan in an ODI match? For quite a while that was record breaking spell by Aqib
 
Oh Aqib's hatrick wicket was the demigod of cricket himself, who had no idea how to play a hatrick delivery Looooool
 
The_Odd_One said:
Aaqib is a World Cup winner who bowled beautifully in 92 WC.

Who is this Prasad guy?
Click to expand...

The reason for Pakistan NOT winning world cup 1996. The almost unbeatable team that Pakistan had, with batting legends starting from Saeed Anwar, javed miandad, inzi and bowling spearheaded by waqar younis.... The only threat was SL.

Though Prasad took crucial wickets which eventually led to India winning the match.
 
Lol

the sad thing is Prasad is probably among india's top 3-4 pace bowlers ever whereas Aqib might not even break top 10 :))
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
Trying countering my points instead of useless personal attacks which add nothing to the discussion and stop making wrong assumptions ( I watched both of them live). There is not even a debate when it comes to test cricket, prasad is clearly better based on stats as well as performance. The only debate is in the ODIs where they have very similar stats and I have already posted my argument as to why prasad is better when seen under proper context. Now try answering the post instead of trying to guess my age or the tint of my glasses :yk. Ad hominem attacks only shows your weakness, try replying to the post and not the poster :srini
Click to expand...

The only stat you see is the number of fifers prasad has taken, and i already answered that. You still need to change those glasses though
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
Masha allah look at those stats :yk2 a bowling average of 9 and economy of 3.69 with most wickets in Indo-Pak matches in world cup Prasad pwns aqib :srini
Click to expand...

So when are we seeing a thread comparing prasad with akram and waqar? These stats definitely mean he was better than all asian bowlers.
 
Aqib made his debut I think at least 5 years before Prasad. He lived in an era wherein pitches were bowling friendly and 250 was a reasonable score to defend 90% times, also 220-230 was okayish at least 30-40% times! Prasad had to deal with the start of batting domination era (when 300 started to become within reach) and had to deal with the onslaughts of guys like Jayasuriya, Afridi, Gilchrist, etc. Prasad would have had better stats had he made debut along with Aqib and would have played lot more matches finishing with even impressive stats. India actually had bowlers way more weaker than Prasad in the past (People like Prabhakar, Chethan Sharma, etc) This is how you should analyze players!

Prasad actually made his debut very late (even though he is elder to Aqib actually) because India had the culture of playing on slow tracks and spinner based team. Kapil & Prabhakar blocked all others (including Srinath) regardless of their skills (because it was felt in default & myth that India cannot produce medium pacers better than those!) Being a support bowler Aqib could have achieved much more, but he could not keep up his place during the batting dominant era even though he was younger than Prasad (Prasad at least fought hard & had some success at times!)

If you think that Prasad was a hopeless bowler, could not have made into other teams that time, played in Indian team only because India had scarcity of seam bowlers, then you are wrong! Prasad would have complemented other teams well actually! All those teams had fast/seam bowlers, this man would have brought that variety to their attack by exploiting the new ball at least on bowling friendly pitches... Even Pakistan would have loved to have in their team (honestly). Prasad was over-burdened in the Indian team and had to play all the roles (handling power play, middle overs, slog overs, etc) along with only Srinath & Kumble. Aqib did not have that headache, batsmen were saving their wickets when he used to bowl. Actually he even got chance to feature in Playing XI only when either of Waqar, Wasim were injured!

Yes (before I am attacked) I have definitely watched both these players bowl very much! I know how Aqib used to bash Indian batting line up (which was totally dependent on Tendulkar! Azhar was the only other TOP quality player who used to get tangled with his own issues as everyone knows!) Prasad lived in a promising/refreshing era where we started winning more matches with reasonably good team comprising of Ganguly, Dravid, Kumble, Srinath, etc.

So it is bias & prejudice in PP when Indian bowlers are sidelined even when they compared to average & below average Pakistan players. What happens if we apply the same logic if we tell every average Indian batsmen is superior to Pakistani counterpart, just because India has better batting culture than Pakistan just like how they have in bowling? (Say Vinod Kambli was superior to Salim Malik based on test stats?)
 
Aqib wins hands down and YES the stats (all of them, including the number of wickets taken) back him up..

No argument.
 
it really is blind nationalism.
Used to be a little annoying but slowly becoming quiet amusing.
 
Slog said:
Lol

the sad thing is Prasad is probably among india's top 3-4 pace bowlers ever whereas Aqib might not even break top 10 :))
Click to expand...

Oh look, both bowlers made the list of top 10 pace bowlers from their country, and guess what, both of them are the 9th best bowlers produced by their country :yk2

prasadvaqib.jpg
 
Slog said:
do same for tests

dont care for odis
Click to expand...

Do the same for test? but why :yk, prasad pwns aqib in test cricket, the only debate is in the odis.
Also both players have less than 100 test wickets, so both players don't make the cut. And Prasad is clearly the superior bowler out of the two in test cricket so it would be no surprise if prasad ranks higher for his country than aqib, who is a nobody in test cricket. At least prasad has 7 fifers in test cricket :srini
 
Aqib played in an era where Waqar and Wasim(and formerly Imran) were taking 5-fors for fun...
That's why he has less wickets.
 
can someone post aqib record against India. I guess aqib has four or five match winning five wickets haul against India
 
Prasad did his stuff in places like England, South Africa against tougher batsmen and was very highly regarded by International Commentators! Aqib relished on Sharjah and poor Indian batting line up (attack & pressurize Sachin, everyone will fall off... This was the mantra found out by most top teams including Pakistan which even Sri Lanka exploited later until the Indian batting became formidable and Indian cricket became professional!) Virender Sehwag would have murdered this Aqib guy if he bowled these length balls on the stumps and wide outside! (Ask Shoaib Akther & even Wasim)
 
RamLakhan said:
Prasad did his stuff in places like England, South Africa against tougher batsmen and was very highly regarded by International Commentators! Aqib relished on Sharjah and poor Indian batting line up (attack & pressurize Sachin, everyone will fall off... This was the mantra found out by most top teams including Pakistan which even Sri Lanka exploited later until the Indian batting became formidable and Indian cricket became professional!) Virender Sehwag would have murdered this Aqib guy if he bowled these length balls on the stumps and wide outside! (Ask Shoaib Akther & even Wasim)
Click to expand...

So getting out Azharuddin Siddhu and Tendulkar was an easy feat? That means you are probably saying Sehwag was better than all 3 of these including tendu

A guy who averages 34 :))
 
Also how a bowler like Aqib got wickets against a team like India? Who supposedly only were flat track bullies is the question.... the guy beat India in conditions which suited them, he took wickets at their home, and at Sharjah. Flat track bullies get powned at their own game
 
Last edited by a moderator:
waleed88 said:
Also how a bowler like Aqib got wickets against a team like India? Who supposedly only were flat track bullies is the question.... the guy beat India in conditions which suited them, he took wickets at their home, and at Sharjah. Flat track bullies get powned at their own game
Click to expand...

As if India wins against Pakistan only on flat pitches! Sportive pitch on CT Finals would have changed the tides... Pakistan needs flat pitches more than India to take advantage of less effective Indian bowlers... (even in the past)

And back then I would heads down agree that we had a weak/bizarre team, no question about that! Thanks to the legacy of Azharuddin who was responsible for that after a nice pillar laid by Kapil Dev! He couldn't do what Dhoni & Kohli did after Ganguly's foundation. Instead he took the team to deep slumps! We were following cricket just for the love of the game (and the great man Sachin Tendulkar, work horses like Srinath, Kumble) and not really because of our team's performance! Things changed after Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, Dhoni, Yuvaraj, Sehwag, etc, came into existence...
 
Ahmad Shah said:
we have always compared great players
its time to compare two average players

this time its Aqib vs Prasad
there are many similarities between them
both are contemporary players
both were medium pacer
both were mediocre
both records in both format are amazingly similar
Prasad was famous Pakistan basher
Aqib was famous indian basher
View attachment 76495
Click to expand...



All those guys claiming victory for Prasad in Test, they only have to look at the number of balls bowled by the two in all their tests to figure out why Aaqib's wickets look much lower! Prasad also opened the attack with the new ball which was his only forte while Aaqib rarely opened the bowling. Aaqib was excellent with new ball but not bad after that as well because of his economy and reverse swing expertise as well.

Aaqib bowled a mammoth 3123 balls less than Prasad in tests despite having played only 11 tests less, this explains why Prasad has 96 wickets to show for while Aaqib had only managed 54.

If you include the effect of the two greats bowling with the new ball before he could bowl, lack of helpful wickets (since about half of his tests were Pak and I think couple more in India and Sri Lanka), and Pakistani fielding (renowned for being one of the worst in terms of dropped catches)...you can clearly see why Aaqib's test stats are not worse than Prasad as being claimed. Infact, he could have had much superior stats if he had played for a weak bowling attack like that of India!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Monsee said:
All those guys claiming victory for Prasad in Test, they only have to look at the number of balls bowled by the two in all their tests to figure out why Aaqib's wickets look much lower! Prasad also opened the attack with the new ball which was his only forte while Aaqib rarely opened the bowling. Aaqib was excellent with new ball but not bad after that as well because of his economy and reverse swing expertise as well.

Aaqib bowled a mammoth 3123 balls less than Prasad in tests despite having played only 11 tests less, this explains why Prasad has 96 wickets to show for while Aaqib had only managed 54.

If you include the effect of the two greats bowling with the new ball before he could bowl, lack of helpful wickets (since about half of his tests were Pak and I think couple more in India and Sri Lanka), and Pakistani fielding (renowned for being one of the worst in terms of dropped catches)...you can clearly see why Aaqib's test stats are not worse than Prasad as being claimed. Infact, he could have had much superior stats if he had played for a weak bowling attack like that of India!
Click to expand...

Balls effecting the number of wickets? yes, they would if their Strike rates were apart...after bowling thousands of balls..their strike rate differs by 1 ball...which is nothing considering their mediocre striker rates of early 70s. Next logic please.
 
IgnitedMind said:
Balls effecting the number of wickets? yes, they would if their Strike rates were apart...after bowling thousands of balls..their strike rate differs by 1 ball...which is nothing considering their mediocre striker rates of early 70s. Next logic please.
Click to expand...



I have watched both bowl and can make the call without looking at the stats, have you or any of your Indian friends even seen them bowl live?

Most Indian fans are just looking at the number of wickets and making that call in Tests when Aaqib has the better average, and SR and even economy is not worse either; how in the heck do you suggest then Indian fans telling us Prasad was better, is it because of his off spin prowess then?
 
I think Prasad was just a better bowler. He lacked in pace and swing but was still quite tricky and had a decent slower ball. In tests, he had a number of memorable spells in test cricket.

My memories of Aqib Javed were that he didnt appear as anything remarkable. He lacked any appreciable swing or pace or guile. He simply seemed to just bowl the same type of delivery in and out.

Having said that, I would pick Aqib for ODIs, he just seemed to perform better in that format for some reason.
 
Monsee said:
I have watched both bowl and can make the call without looking at the stats, have you or any of your Indian friends even seen them bowl live?

Most Indian fans are just looking at the number of wickets and making that call in Tests when Aaqib has the better average, and SR and even economy is not worse either; how in the heck do you suggest then Indian fans telling us Prasad was better, is it because of his off spin prowess then?
Click to expand...

Have also watched Mudassar Nazar bowl. Have you?
 
Rightarmfast said:
Have also watched Mudassar Nazar bowl. Have you?
Click to expand...


And your point is? Although,m I must say on helpful pitches even Mudassar could outbowl Prasad, such was Prasad's dependence on conditions, having the new ball etc.:yasir
 
Monsee said:
And your point is? Although,m I must say on helpful pitches even Mudassar could outbowl Prasad, such was Prasad's dependence on conditions, having the new ball etc.:yasir
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. Doesnt look like you have either watched Aaqib or Prasad, let alone Mudassar!
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
Ah ad-hominem attacks, losing patience, lol typical when you are losing an argument :yk


Clearly, you need to by a new pair of specs because you can't see beyond the average. Do I have to spoon feed you everything? There is barely any difference in test average but prasad have picked nearly double the no. of wickets with 7 freaking fivers compared to aqib's puny little 1. Now tell me, are you even looking at the stats?



You are the one who can't stop throwing kindergarten insults because you can't back up your silly argument. I gave an example as to how having a good bowling support can help you in terms average, clearly I didn't say score was always 2/3 down lol are you sure you are educated? I shouldn't have the need to explain such simple things. Now try read and completely understand my comment before replying because it is a waste of time spoonfeeding you every little thing
Click to expand...


My exact response below from NoBallZombie :)

I have seen both the players live in Sharjah, back in the days. Prasad was a punching bag whereas Aquib is a World Cup winner. Infact Aquib has a killer record against India. I was there when he took 7/37 against India. I watched him live when he took those 5fers against India in India.

Not to discredit prasad, he was good in helpful conditions only. In the subcontinent pitches, when he is not getting wickets and is getting hammers, only go to ball he had was the leg cutter. I still give him 100% for trying as he was one of the nice guys and hard working guys in the team. But the talent was short I believe. I would infact compare him to Atta-ur-Rehman from the 90s, rather than Aquib. Kids like you just see stats these days. There is a massive difference between such stats and seeing players live. Though in terms of stats, your argument is fail as well (Aquib has a better average and economy).

NoBallZombie said:
I have got to agree with the guy you are trying to bash. It seems instead of him looking at this comparison with green tinted shades, it is you who is looking at it from very dark blue ones. I am pretty sure you are one those guys who would also agree to the "fact" that bhuvi is the akram of this generation.

What the other guy said is spot on. You will only understand the difference if you had watched these two in live matches. Prasad was good but Aqib was a complete bowler who could swing it both ways and reverse the ball as well.... and there is never a question about which of these two would have better pace.

Now if you have a quick peek at statsguru, you would notice that out of 22 matches Aqib played, 10 were in Pak (so you can imagine the back breaking stuff since Pak wickets are hardly conducive to conventional swing). Out of 33 matches that prasad played, 11 were in India (and he has only got one fiver in those 11) and rest of his wickets were on wickets that were not flat by any stretch of imagination.... but yes it would be hard to imagine they were anything different to these roads that yoh see these days.

Again both were good bowlers but Aqib was a notch above Prasad due to his more complete skill set.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Prasad was a bowler who inspired hope in millions of cricket lovers around the world.

"If he can play international cricket, why can't I?"
 
Third_Umpire said:
Prasad was a bowler who inspired hope in millions of cricket lovers around the world.

"If he can play international cricket, why can't I?"
Click to expand...



LOL, summed it up
/EOT please close it now before Parosiites shame themselves any further
 
Rightarmfast said:
Exactly my point. Doesnt look like you have either watched Aaqib or Prasad, let alone Mudassar!
Click to expand...



This actually means you have no clue about Mudassar's exploits in tests in England: look up Lords 1982, Golden Arm, and all his wickets against a pretty good English batting lineup!
 
Monsee said:
This actually means you have no clue about Mudassar's exploits in tests in England: look up Lords 1982, Golden Arm, and all his wickets against a pretty good English batting lineup!
Click to expand...

And may I suggest you go and have a look at Venky's and Aqib's bowling again? Coz it looks like you need to refresh your memory quite a bit
 
The point is both Aaqib and Prasad were mediocre bowlers but Aaqib's 10-25-2 and an amazing catch of Gooch in the 92 World Cup final trumps everything that Prasad has ever achieved as a cricketer.
 
The_Odd_One said:
The point is both Aaqib and Prasad were mediocre bowlers but Aaqib's 10-25-2 and an amazing catch of Gooch in the 92 World Cup final trumps everything that Prasad has ever achieved as a cricketer.
Click to expand...

By u r own logic Zaheer, srishanth, munaf have achieved more than waqar
 
sachin100 said:
By u r own logic Zaheer, srishanth, munaf have achieved more than waqar
Click to expand...

Aaqib was much better..no doubt..dont think stats do justice.

The slower ball he bowled in that 92 world cup to greatbatch was one of the key moments in that high pressure match..Prasad didnt do anything like that..
 
sachin100 said:
By u r own logic Zaheer, srishanth, munaf have achieved more than waqar
Click to expand...

No, because there's a massive difference in averages between Waqar and the bowlers you mentioned. Someone who averages 32 cannot be better than one who averages 23.
 
Failed Comparison Aqib was a WC winner and had a completely different role than Prasad who was consistantly mediocre

Its like comparing a Real Madrid striker with Derby County striker
 
The_Odd_One said:
No, because there's a massive difference in averages between Waqar and the bowlers you mentioned. Someone who averages 32 cannot be better than one who averages 23.
Click to expand...

Okay but by your logic hayden, Gambhir and Steve Smith are better ODI batsmen than brian lara, aren't they? :srini
 
ToeCrusher2 said:
Okay but by your logic hayden, Gambhir and Steve Smith are better ODI batsmen than brian lara, aren't they? :srini
Click to expand...

No, both Gambhir and Smith are not better than Lara in ODIs.

I think you do not know how good an ODI batsman Lara was in ODIs in the 90s. At one point (I think in 1998), he averaged 47. Gambhir never even crossed 42 despite playing in a much batting friendly era.

Lara's highest rating points were 908, while peak Gambhir could manage 722 only. There is a massive difference in class and quality between Lara and Gambhir.

Smith has never been #1 ODI batsman and his highest rating points have been 740. Though, he has won a world cup (in the easiest of batting conditions) but overall he is noway near Lara in ODIs yet..
 
Kianig89 said:
Failed Comparison Aqib was a WC winner and had a completely different role than Prasad who was consistantly mediocre

Its like comparing a Real Madrid striker with Derby County striker
Click to expand...

So was Balwinder Sandhu.
 
The_Odd_One said:
No, both Gambhir and Smith are not better than Lara in ODIs.

I think you do not know how good an ODI batsman Lara was in ODIs in the 90s. At one point (I think in 1998), he averaged 47. Gambhir never even crossed 42 despite playing in a much batting friendly era.

Lara's highest rating points were 908, while peak Gambhir could manage 722 only. There is a massive difference in class and quality between Lara and Gambhir.

Smith has never been #1 ODI batsman and his highest rating points have been 740. Though, he has won a world cup (in the easiest of batting conditions) but overall he is noway near Lara in ODIs yet..
Click to expand...

You keep changing goalposts, I know how good a batsman lara was, I was just showing you how wrong your logic was :yk2

You used the same logic to deduce that aqib was better than prasad but then if we apply the same logic to batsmen then gambhir and smith are indeed better than lara in odis :srini
 
Last edited:
ToeCrusher2 said:
You keep changing goalposts, I know how good a batsman lara was, I was just showing you how wrong your logic was :yk2

You used the same logic to deduce that aqib was better than prasad but then if we apply the same logic to batsmen then gambhir and smith are indeed better than lara in odis :srini
Click to expand...

You clearly did not understand any of my posts. Let me make it easier for you.

Both Aaqib and Prasad were mediocre bowlers and will never be mentioned in any discussion of the great bowlers of the past. However, one thing that separates Aaqib from Prasad is the World cup winning performance. 40-50 years later, even Indians will barely remember Prasad. However, Aaqib will not be forgotten by Pakistanis due to his great all-round performance in the 92 world cup.

Anybody who has watched that final will know that how crucial were the wickets of Stewart (England's best batsman in 92 in all formats) and Fairbrother (scored 62 at 88 SR) in that match. He also took a really good catch of Gooch who was a well-set batsman. Aaqib played a huge role in winning that world cup. He bowled consistently well in all the matches and Pakistan never missed Waqar Younis who was the top bowler in the world at that time.

This said, if you compare Aaqib with let's say Srinath, I will pick Srinath. The reason is simple, Srinath was a far superior bowler. So, even if he did not win a world cup, it does not matter because overall he was a better bowler. By same logic, Ganguly is a better ODI batsman than Sehwag, Waqar is a better ODI bowler than Zaheer, etc.

Philander winning a test series in Australia does not make him a better test bowler than Wasim Akram. However, if you compare Philander with Akhtar then you can use that series to call Philander better than Akhtar.

I hope you do get the point.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This moment is etched forever in every cricket fan's minds. Perfect time to take everyone in a rewind!!! Happy Birthday Venkatesh Prasad! <a href="https://t.co/53tudIiSA4">pic.twitter.com/53tudIiSA4</a></p>— BCCI (@BCCI) <a href="https://twitter.com/BCCI/status/1158246800014245888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 5, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Happy birthday to Venkatesh Prasad

Born: August 5, 1969 (age 53 years), Bengaluru, India
 
In terms of skills, Aaqib wins easily.

In terms of accomplishments and stats, Prasad wins.

In other words, Prasad maximized his chances better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Now is the perfect time to compare Babar Azam, Mohammad Rizwan, and Shaheen Shah Afridi with the greats of the past
Replies
68
Views
971
SportsWarrior
S
BouncerGuy
"Whether it's a youngster or a senior player, the best option available should play for Pakistan right now": Aaqib Javed
Replies
2
Views
503
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
BouncerGuy
“We are not completely writing Babar Azam and Mohammad Rizwan off, but only those who perform deserve to play": Aaqib Javed
Replies
10
Views
926
AZulfi
AZulfi
FearlessRoar
Will hosting a successful ICC Champions Trophy 2025 rekindle Pakistan's love for cricket?
Replies
1
Views
305
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
The Bald Eagle
"We're confident in our pace attack—Shaheen, Naseem, and Haris are among the best": Aaqib Javed
2
Replies
120
Views
5K
Xoib
X
Back
Top