[VIDEOS] How do you rate Shoaib Akhtar as a bowler?

[NishanKonar]

Colorful character. Furious pace but at times lack of control & craftmanship. Not to forget atrocious fitness. Lots of great vibes but very less. impact. Textbook example of Youtube / Reels bowler. Makes for great highlight packages but barring that 2002 Australia ODI series & the 2006 England series - never won a big series for his country

Lucky that he played for Pakistan where tolerance for ill discipline is generally on the higher side. If he played for say England / Australia / India - either he wud have changed himself or his career wud have been short-lived

Like Shahid Afridi - a very Pakistani sort of hero.

ps : Like Shahid Afridi - a very poor role model for upcoming young cricketers. Difficult to instill discipline & work ethic among young players when seniors behave like this

 

[NishanKonar]

I once read that Imran Khan created a culture of hard work & discipline. Never tolerated prima donnas. Never allowed trouble makers any leeway. Once made Wasim Akram run several laps bcoz he was late for training

Post Imran Khan those standards went down - partly bcoz his successor Wasim Akram was not a hard taskmaster and took things easy. Things kept drifting backwards. Ill discipline & prima donna culture set roots and ultimately u ended up with Shahid Afridi & Shoaib Akhtar - who took things to the other extreme

 

[shaz619]

At the speed he bowled at consistently, he should never have lasted as long as he did, who else besides Bret Lee from the 90’s onwards had a lengthy career as rapid quicks? The discipline stuff he deserves criticism, but for the injuries, the fact that he came back from so many was a miracle. Akhtar should be judged for what a pioneer of the sport he was because he was a global attraction who bought new fans to the sport & also relative to other quicks such as Shane Bond, Shaun Tait & Bret Lee, these fellas were a unique breed and it’s sad they were the last of their kind.

 

[NishanKonar]

At the speed he bowled at consistently, he should never have lasted as long as he did, who else besides Bret Lee from the 90’s onwards had a lengthy career as rapid quicks? The discipline stuff he deserves criticism, but for the injuries, the fact that he came back from so many was a miracle. Akhtar should be judged for what a pioneer of the sport he was because he was a global attraction who bought new fans to the sport & also relative to other quicks such as Shane Bond, Shaun Tait & Bret Lee, these fellas were a unique breed and it’s sad they were the last of their kind.

A bowler's primary job is to take wickets - not speed gun ratings. Brett Lee cut down his pace slightly to focus on swing & control bcoz in Australia they dont care about speedgun readings. They look at impact & wickets. Remember Shaun Tait - he was express pace but his career went no where coz of his inability to take wickets

It was different in Pakistan. That 100 mph became an obsession. So much so that at 1 point Shoaib wud look straight at the speed gun after his delivery stride. That obsession cost Pakistan dearly during the 2003 WC.

Again like I said Shoaib Akhtar lasted so long bcoz he was from Pakistan. Any other country - his career wud have had a different trajectory

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Shoaib belongs to a different category of bowler. He was not just a fast bowler he was express. There have been very few bowlers who belong in this category that have longevity. He should be compared alongside these bowlers, not alongside conventional quick bowlers. He will obviously fall short compared to them because he and the other express bowlers are a different breed entirely.

Let's view him against the other express bowlers in cricket history. An easy way to do ( but not 100% full proof) this is to look at bowlers who have bowled the fastest balls of all time. Shoaib was the most express of them all, but lets just group them together for now.

Fastest Bowlers (Test + ODI wickets only)​

• Shane Bond (NZ) – 156.4 kph | 87 Test + 147 ODI = 234 wickets
• Mohammad Sami (PAK) – 156.4 kph | 85 Test + 121 ODI = 206 wickets
• Mitchell Johnson (AUS) – 156.8 kph | 313 Test + 239 ODI = 552 wickets
• Fidel Edwards (WI) – 157.7 kph | 165 Test + 60 ODI = 225 wickets
• Andy Roberts (WI) – 159.5 kph | 202 Test + 87 ODI = 289 wickets
• Mitchell Starc (AUS) – 160.4 kph | 244 Test + 184 ODI = 428 wickets
• Jeff Thomson (AUS) – 160.6 kph | 200 Test + 55 ODI = 255 wickets
• Brett Lee (AUS) – 160.8 kph | 310 Test + 280 ODI = 590 wickets
• Shaun Tait (AUS) – 161.1 kph | 5 Test + 62 ODI = 67 wickets
• Shoaib Akhtar (PAK) – 161.3 kph | 178 Test + 247 ODI = 425 wickets

Not a fool proof list ( you can probably add Marshall and Maybe Donald for a while) and in this list Johnson and Starc were probably not always express, but it gives a reasonable explanation as to his expected longevity and where he sits alongside other bowlers in the same category.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

At the speed he bowled at consistently, he should never have lasted as long as he did, who else besides Bret Lee from the 90’s onwards had a lengthy career as rapid quicks? The discipline stuff he deserves criticism, but for the injuries, the fact that he came back from so many was a miracle. Akhtar should be judged for what a pioneer of the sport he was because he was a global attraction who bought new fans to the sport & also relative to other quicks such as Shane Bond, Shaun Tait & Bret Lee, these fellas were a unique breed and it’s sad they were the last of their kind.

Yes I agree, I posted before seeing your post and you are spot on. These guys were on another level with speeds and thats probably the most you could get from them. They played in an era before rest and recovery and workload management, and in Shoaibs case you can add without physio and nutrition too.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

A bowler's primary job is to take wickets - not speed gun ratings. Brett Lee cut down his pace slightly to focus on swing & control bcoz in Australia they dont care about speedgun readings. They look at impact & wickets. Remember Shaun Tait - he was express pace but his career went no where coz of his inability to take wickets

It was different in Pakistan. That 100 mph became an obsession. So much so that at 1 point Shoaib wud look straight at the speed gun after his delivery stride. That obsession cost Pakistan dearly during the 2003 WC.

Again like I said Shoaib Akhtar lasted so long bcoz he was from Pakistan. Any other country - his career wud have had a different trajectory

Shoaib had the ability to take wickets though, he wasn't Shaun Tait.



This is the Asian bowlers who have taken over 150, wickets, Shoaib is up there with average and strike rate, and 5fers. Any Asian side would have chopped their hand off for him when he was playing. He is better than many on that list ( and I am not arguing he is elite tier)

and in ODI filtered by average



He is not an elite bowler but Countries barely have produced a bowler like him at the time and you are presenting scenarios where these countries would have thrown him out of the side and ended his career.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Sehwag and Akhtar were the two greatest entertainers. Not the best players in the world at that time or even in their teams but I’d turn on the TV every time they’d be playing.

 

[shaz619]

A bowler's primary job is to take wickets - not speed gun ratings. Brett Lee cut down his pace slightly to focus on swing & control bcoz in Australia they dont care about speedgun readings. They look at impact & wickets. Remember Shaun Tait - he was express pace but his career went no where coz of his inability to take wickets

It was different in Pakistan. That 100 mph became an obsession. So much so that at 1 point Shoaib wud look straight at the speed gun after his delivery stride. That obsession cost Pakistan dearly during the 2003 WC.

Again like I said Shoaib Akhtar lasted so long bcoz he was from Pakistan. Any other country - his career wud have had a different trajectory

That’s rubbish when there’s a reason you see a bowler like Mark Wood kept around for as long as England have kept him due to his unique attributes in this era & Akhtar was more skilled then him. Pakistan always had options when Akhtar was around but they picked him because he incited the fear of God in everybody who faced him, he made the team ahead of Waqar Younis and bowled alongside Asif & Amir, taking wickets is vital for sure but also creating pressure at the other end, and having a bowler who is willing to go full guns blazing when he was fit & healthy every single ball, it would be dumb not to pick a player like that. Shaun Tait & Shane Bond would have been kept around was it not for their injuries, you’re overlooking how difficult it was to sustain express pace and the fact Akhtar did it for as long as he was able to and very skilfully I may add, made him a very special bowler. Akhtar did adapt like Lee around 2007 or so, and yes you could argue he should have much earlier, but what’s the joy in that? There are no express pacers around now and in the late 90’s & 2000’s Akhtar was pure box-office and the game should thank him for that, we benefited from the entertainment at the expense of his longevity, but he had a lengthy career when you consider how he bowled.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Shoaib had the ability to take wickets though, he wasn't Shaun Tait.

View attachment 156975

This is the Asian bowlers who have taken over 150, wickets, Shoaib is up there with average and strike rate, and 5fers. Any Asian side would have chopped their hand off for him when he was playing. He is better than many on that list ( and I am not arguing he is elite tier)

and in ODI filtered by average

View attachment 156976

He is not an elite bowler but Countries barely have produced a bowler like him at the time and you are presenting scenarios where these countries would have thrown him out of the side and ended his career.

He was an elite enforcer, I don't know why people tag him with Tait and Wood etc.

Shoaib was an intelligent bowler, unlike the other express pacers. He could swing the ball at pace , used angles and knew how to use reverse swing.

For me he is above Brett Lee in test cricket, even above Jeff Thomson. An average of 25 primarily playing in the subcontinent is elite tier.

 

[shariqnoor]

Pakistan would kill to have a bowler like him right now. He was a sight to behold. His spell against Australia in Colombo was the stuff of legends. I would always rate Shoaib ahead of Waqar. Waqar's only skill uptill 1998 was excessive reverse swing. Shoaib on the other hand didn't need reverse swing to get people out. He did it with speed, with conventional swing and occasionally with a masterful slower ball. A genuine match winner by all means.

 

[TheSultan]

A bowler's primary job is to take wickets - not speed gun ratings. Brett Lee cut down his pace slightly to focus on swing & control bcoz in Australia they dont care about speedgun readings. They look at impact & wickets. Remember Shaun Tait - he was express pace but his career went no where coz of his inability to take wickets

It was different in Pakistan. That 100 mph became an obsession. So much so that at 1 point Shoaib wud look straight at the speed gun after his delivery stride. That obsession cost Pakistan dearly during the 2003 WC.

Again like I said Shoaib Akhtar lasted so long bcoz he was from Pakistan. Any other country - his career wud have had a different trajectory

So someone with a a strike rate of 46 is not a wicket taker?

From the beginning the casuals tried to paint shoaib as all pace and no control. Absolute nonsense.

He was far from perfect and definitely had his primadonna moments, but he was a wicket taker as well as being the quickest with plenty of control

 

[Major]

Yaar yeh kya bongi hai?

Akhtar should had gotten his act together by 2007 and he would had played every tournament after that.

I was a big Afridi critic, but i appreciate that he had fixed himself somewhat and that helped him in winning the World T20 2009.

Hitting your coach, being caught with an STD, taking drugs, hitting your team mates. Guy was crazy, and destroyed his own career.

 

[charlie007]

Just from a bowling perspective, Shoaib was a delight to watch. He was all action! People switched off their TV sets to watch him bowl. He was an entertainer, he pulled crowds.
He was fast and furious and hurried batters like very few others. Once you go over 150, people don’t realize how quick that is. A rarity in cricket. Someone to remember.

 

[Ab Fan]

Express bowlers succeeding and having a full career is rare. But if you can’t play for your country for a decade and feature in many games, what is the point of being a cricketer. That’s your main goal to represent your country and have a proper career rather than playing 20-25 games.

Shoaib is a Pakistani great and one of the best express bowler of all time but won’t fall in true ATG category.

 

[NishanKonar]

So someone with a a strike rate of 46 is not a wicket taker?

From the beginning the casuals tried to paint shoaib as all pace and no control. Absolute nonsense.

He was far from perfect and definitely had his primadonna moments, but he was a wicket taker as well as being the quickest with plenty of control

I dont remember many test series where SHoaib had a big impact except for that 2006 England series and that 2002 Colombo test

Fast bowlers are defined by match winning performances in test cricket. Shoaib had too few instances in his resume. Great strike rate matter little if u cannot do it consistently and win matches / series for ur team

That's why I say Shoab is all vibes. Fast & furious. Fire & brimstone. But at the end of day not much real impact & results for his team

 

[The_KING]

People talk about Shoaib Akhtar as if he was just pace and nothing else. He had other skills besides his pace.

And he had good control as well. It's not like he was a spray gun like other express bowlers that we had recently, such as Wahab Riaz or Haris Rauf.

 

[TheSultan]

I dont remember many test series where SHoaib had a big impact except for that 2006 England series and that 2002 Colombo test

Fast bowlers are defined by match winning performances in test cricket. Shoaib had too few instances in his resume. Great strike rate matter little if u cannot do it consistently and win matches / series for ur team

That's why I say Shoab is all vibes. Fast & furious. Fire & brimstone. But at the end of day not much real impact & results for his team

Errmm Calcutta test 1999? NZ he single handedly won many games against, West Indies too. South Africa test 1998. Colombo spell that nearly turned around a lost game - as Steve Waugh said one of the greatest ever spells of fast bowling.

Even half injured he bowled one innings vs SA in 2007 that pretty much won the game.

Even in the Karachi test of 2006 Asif credits Shoaib assisting his own performance because he’d scared the Indian batsmen to death at the other end.

There are many examples of his ODI exploits and moreover, I don’t really care for these nerdy stats games.

If you don’t rate him that’s all good mate, I don’t really care

 

[TheSultan]

People talk about Shoaib Akhtar as if he was just pace and nothing else. He had other skills besides his pace.

And he had good control as well. It's not like he was a spray gun like other express bowlers that we had recently, such as Wahab Riaz or Haris Rauf.

Perfectly said.

 

[BreadPakoda]

People talk about Shoaib Akhtar as if he was just pace and nothing else. He had other skills besides his pace.

And he had good control as well. It's not like he was a spray gun like other express bowlers that we had recently, such as Wahab Riaz or Haris Rauf.

He had a deceptive slower ball too. 150kph followed by a 110kph easily played with the minds of the batsmen.

 

[shaz619]

Shoaib had the ability to take wickets though, he wasn't Shaun Tait.

View attachment 156975

This is the Asian bowlers who have taken over 150, wickets, Shoaib is up there with average and strike rate, and 5fers. Any Asian side would have chopped their hand off for him when he was playing. He is better than many on that list ( and I am not arguing he is elite tier)

and in ODI filtered by average

View attachment 156976

He is not an elite bowler but Countries barely have produced a bowler like him at the time and you are presenting scenarios where these countries would have thrown him out of the side and ended his career.

POTW

@MenInG

This post just further vindicates my own opinion that he was an ATG among the small group of bowlers who were genuinely express because the numbers back him up as well. Akhtar was the complete package & despite the off-field stuff, and I don’t count the injuries against him because he shouldn’t have played about half as many games as he did, what balances the scales for me was how he was a pioneer for the asian superstar as we transitioned into the modern era of cricket, the last truly great asian quick who had global appeal and he created so many new cricket fans, I wouldn’t be posting on this forum today if it was not for Shoaib Akhtar, just think of his appeal among all the casual followers; he was truly one off a kind and even his worst critics from across the border will deep down admit that; do you remember that charity game he played in the US, 90% Indian fans were on their feet for him chanting his name. Ultimately, entertainment and sports growth should be a huge part of the game. For the similar reasons I consider Amir Khan a Hall of Famer.

 

[BreadPakoda]

POTW

@MenInG

This post just further vindicates my own opinion that he was an ATG among the small group of bowlers who were genuinely express because the numbers back him up as well. Akhtar was the complete package & despite the off-field stuff, and I don’t count the injuries against him because he shouldn’t have played about half as many games as he did, what balances the scales for me was how he was a pioneer for the asian superstar as we transitioned into the modern era of cricket, the last truly great asian quick who had global appeal and he created so many new cricket fans, I wouldn’t be posting on this forum today if it was not for Shoaib Akhtar, just think of his appeal among all the casual followers; he was truly one off a kind and even his worst critics from across the border will deep down admit that; do you remember that charity game he played in the US, 90% Indian fans were on their feet for him chanting his name. Ultimately, entertainment and sports growth should be a huge part of the game. For the similar reasons I consider Amir Khan a Hall of Famer.

Trolling obviously won’t stop from either side, but reality is that most Indians loved / love Akhtar. I had his and Dravid’s poster on my bedroom wall growing up.

 

[Markhor]

I've been critical of Shoaib over some of his embarrassing conduct during and even after his playing career. That said, sport essentially is a form of real life soap opera. We manufacture heroes and villains. We live vicariously through the personalities, riding their ups and downs as if they were our own.

You can certainly poke holes in Shoaib's record. However sometimes cricket just isn't that deep. For many fans - Shoaib entertained them, hooked them onto cricket and that's all that matters to them.

Was Rahul Dravid a better Test batsman than Virender Sehwag ? Most purists would say yes. Now ask the same question to many casual fans who don't have Statsguru permanently glued to their hand, and most will probably answer Sehwag. Why ? The likelihood is he entertained them more. Sehwag's 309 in Multan is far more recalled than Dravid's 270 in a crunch decider in Rawalpindi.

Cricket literature when England and Australia dominated world cricket sometimes reads like a Jane Austen novel. The cover drives were smoother than silk, the leg glances more beautiful than the perfumes of Arabia...

Now we've gone to the other extreme where, and I say this without offence to our Indian posters, alongside India's rise in the global game is this algorithmisation of cricket discourse. Every player has their numbers sliced and diced to the nth degree. And I say this as someone who likes a stat (if relevant) and admire the work of companies like CricViz.

We need to have a more nuanced approach as fans and appreciate there isn't a right or wrong way to view the game.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

I've been critical of Shoaib over some of his embarrassing conduct during and even after his playing career. That said, sport essentially is a form of real life soap opera. We manufacture heroes and villains. We live vicariously through the personalities, riding their ups and downs as if they were our own.

You can certainly poke holes in Shoaib's record. However sometimes cricket just isn't that deep. For many fans - Shoaib entertained them, hooked them onto cricket and that's all that matters to them.

Was Rahul Dravid a better Test batsman than Virender Sehwag ? Most purists would say yes. Now ask the same question to many casual fans who don't have Statsguru permanently glued to their hand, and most will probably answer Sehwag. Why ? The likelihood is he entertained them more. Sehwag's 309 in Multan is far more recalled than Dravid's 270 in a crunch decider in Rawalpindi.

Cricket literature when England and Australia dominated world cricket sometimes reads like a Jane Austen novel. The cover drives were smoother than silk, the leg glances more beautiful than the perfumes of Arabia...

Now we've gone to the other extreme where, and I say this without offence to our Indian posters, alongside India's rise in the global game is this algorithmisation of cricket discourse. Every player has their numbers sliced and diced to the nth degree. And I say this as someone who likes a stat (if relevant) and admire the work of companies like CricViz.

We need to have a more nuanced approach as fans and appreciate there isn't a right or wrong way to view the game.

Thread is about how you rate a player though.

 

[shaz619]

I've been critical of Shoaib over some of his embarrassing conduct during and even after his playing career. That said, sport essentially is a form of real life soap opera. We manufacture heroes and villains. We live vicariously through the personalities, riding their ups and downs as if they were our own.

You can certainly poke holes in Shoaib's record. However sometimes cricket just isn't that deep. For many fans - Shoaib entertained them, hooked them onto cricket and that's all that matters to them.

Was Rahul Dravid a better Test batsman than Virender Sehwag ? Most purists would say yes. Now ask the same question to many casual fans who don't have Statsguru permanently glued to their hand, and most will probably answer Sehwag. Why ? The likelihood is he entertained them more. Sehwag's 309 in Multan is far more recalled than Dravid's 270 in a crunch decider in Rawalpindi.

Cricket literature when England and Australia dominated world cricket sometimes reads like a Jane Austen novel. The cover drives were smoother than silk, the leg glances more beautiful than the perfumes of Arabia...

Now we've gone to the other extreme where, and I say this without offence to our Indian posters, alongside India's rise in the global game is this algorithmisation of cricket discourse. Every player has their numbers sliced and diced to the nth degree. And I say this as someone who likes a stat (if relevant) and admire the work of companies like CricViz.

We need to have a more nuanced approach as fans and appreciate there isn't a right or wrong way to view the game.

Great post, sport should also be measured by how it makes you feel, and numbers seldom capture that, but those feelings are immortal, and will live much longer in the memories then who is the phantom great.

My first post on PP back in 2010 ironically was for an essay competition which I entered, I wrote about Shoaib Akhtar and Eden Gardens, it was called Eye Of The Tiger

@The Bald Eagle Not sure if you can pull it from somewhere as it has been archived ever since

 

[sweep_shot]

Some of my favorite Shoaib Akthar moments:

1) His 5-fer against Steve Waugh's ATG Australia in Colombo. That was breathtaking.

2) His performance against England in 2005 1st Test.

3) His performance against India in 1999.

4) His debut Test series (I believe he got a 5-fer against South Africa in South Africa).

 

[Savak]

This was the last time Shoaib consistently bowled fast and express in his test career in January 2006. After that his fitness was never the same.

 

[TheSultan]

Akhtar should had gotten his act together by 2007 and he would had played every tournament after that.

I was a big Afridi critic, but i appreciate that he had fixed himself somewhat and that helped him in winning the World T20 2009.

Hitting your coach, being caught with an STD, taking drugs, hitting your team mates. Guy was crazy, and destroyed his own career.

Why are you so worried about “hitting your team mate” when the actual team mate he hit still speaks glowingly of shoaib?

Some of our new generation of fans really need to man up a bit

 

[NishanKonar]

I've been critical of Shoaib over some of his embarrassing conduct during and even after his playing career. That said, sport essentially is a form of real life soap opera. We manufacture heroes and villains. We live vicariously through the personalities, riding their ups and downs as if they were our own.

You can certainly poke holes in Shoaib's record. However sometimes cricket just isn't that deep. For many fans - Shoaib entertained them, hooked them onto cricket and that's all that matters to them.

Was Rahul Dravid a better Test batsman than Virender Sehwag ? Most purists would say yes. Now ask the same question to many casual fans who don't have Statsguru permanently glued to their hand, and most will probably answer Sehwag. Why ? The likelihood is he entertained them more. Sehwag's 309 in Multan is far more recalled than Dravid's 270 in a crunch decider in Rawalpindi.

Cricket literature when England and Australia dominated world cricket sometimes reads like a Jane Austen novel. The cover drives were smoother than silk, the leg glances more beautiful than the perfumes of Arabia...

Now we've gone to the other extreme where, and I say this without offence to our Indian posters, alongside India's rise in the global game is this algorithmisation of cricket discourse. Every player has their numbers sliced and diced to the nth degree. And I say this as someone who likes a stat (if relevant) and admire the work of companies like CricViz.

We need to have a more nuanced approach as fans and appreciate there isn't a right or wrong way to view the game.

The thing is England & Australia rate cricketers on the basis of results / impact. That's why Australia has always dominated world cricket. They don't really care about nuances / vibes. When Shane Warne did something naughty - he got sacked a VC and faced disciplinary action. They did not give him any leeway just bcoz he was great bowler. Ian Botham got sacked as well for disciplinary action in the mid 80s even though he was their best cricketer at that time

This obsession with personality / vibes is a uniquely South Asian phenomenon. Also explains why India / Pakistan produce so many selfish cricketers / prima donnas who play for themselves - not the team

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Great post, sport should also be measured by how it makes you feel, and numbers seldom capture that, but those feelings are immortal, and will live much longer in the memories then who is the phantom great.

My first post on PP back in 2010 ironically was for an essay competition which I entered, I wrote about Shoaib Akhtar and Eden Gardens, it was called Eye Of The Tiger

@The Bald Eagle Not sure if you can pull it from somewhere as it has been archived ever since

Sorry brother, couldn't find it in archives

 

[Major]

Why are you so worried about “hitting your team mate” when the actual team mate he hit still speaks glowingly of shoaib?

Some of our new generation of fans really need to man up a bit

Where did Bob Woolmer praise Akthar after he even hit him?

Just because someone praises him that means all is ok? His hitting of Asif lead to him being kicked out of an ICC tournament that jeopardised us especially considering the context of Woolmers death and what happened during the world cup 2007 (ODI). They had to bring in an inexperience Tanvir in.

This guy was damaging the image of Pakistan and it was insulting back than,.

 

[Rana]

Where did Bob Woolmer praise Akthar after he even hit him?

Just because someone praises him that means all is ok? His hitting of Asif lead to him being kicked out of an ICC tournament that jeopardised us especially considering the context of Woolmers death and what happened during the world cup 2007 (ODI). They had to bring in an inexperience Tanvir in.

This guy was damaging the image of Pakistan and it was insulting back than,.

Oho

Chalo let’s all cry about Shoaib hitting Asif, but Asif and Shoaib still rate each other highly

But let’s cry and bring down Shoaib

 

[Major]

I've been critical of Shoaib over some of his embarrassing conduct during and even after his playing career. That said, sport essentially is a form of real life soap opera. We manufacture heroes and villains. We live vicariously through the personalities, riding their ups and downs as if they were our own.

You can certainly poke holes in Shoaib's record. However sometimes cricket just isn't that deep. For many fans - Shoaib entertained them, hooked them onto cricket and that's all that matters to them.

Was Rahul Dravid a better Test batsman than Virender Sehwag ? Most purists would say yes. Now ask the same question to many casual fans who don't have Statsguru permanently glued to their hand, and most will probably answer Sehwag. Why ? The likelihood is he entertained them more. Sehwag's 309 in Multan is far more recalled than Dravid's 270 in a crunch decider in Rawalpindi.

Cricket literature when England and Australia dominated world cricket sometimes reads like a Jane Austen novel. The cover drives were smoother than silk, the leg glances more beautiful than the perfumes of Arabia...

Now we've gone to the other extreme where, and I say this without offence to our Indian posters, alongside India's rise in the global game is this algorithmisation of cricket discourse. Every player has their numbers sliced and diced to the nth degree. And I say this as someone who likes a stat (if relevant) and admire the work of companies like CricViz.

We need to have a more nuanced approach as fans and appreciate there isn't a right or wrong way to view the game.

Afridi also entertained. But atleast, for the sake of his country Afridi got his act together and showed that by directly winning the World T20 of 2009.

After what happened during the World Cup of 2007, Akhtar should had mellowed down. Especially since he was once caught hitting Woolmer. But he even made his death about himself where he made the statement that Thank God i wasnt their or they would label me as the killer. And than the whole Asif fiasco takes place, than a couple of more bannings by 2009 and even a fight with Nasim Ashraf before the IPL.

The only time he mellowed down was after the 2010 fixing saga.

Point is, he could had added value to Pakistan by winning an ICC tournament but he did not. And even if he didnt, fair enough, but than to sit on TV judge all the cricketer while you yourself have not won any icc trophy really reflects bad. And he calls himself a legend and puts his name along side Waqar and Wasim.

 

[Major]

Oho

Chalo let’s all cry about Shoaib hitting Asif, but Asif and Shoaib still rate each other highly

But let’s cry and bring down Shoaib

I dont have to cry. His fans can cry because Akhtar has never won any ICC trophy.

 

[Rana]

I dont have to cry. His fans can cry because Akhtar has never won any ICC trophy.

Pakistan were robbed from an ICC trophy because of someone who you are an ardent fan of.

 

[AZulfi]

Shoaib Akhtar was an exciting bowler to watch because of his extreme pace and smooth action. However, missed too many games due to injuries and disciplinary issues. If only he had a good head on his shoulder. 'Actor' helped Pakistan to some good wins against Australia in ODIs (2002 series in Australia, which Pak won 2-1 under Waqar's captaincy) and against South Africa and New Zealand in tests.

Imran Khan told Shoaib Akhtar straight that, despite possessing sheer talent and pace, he underachieved in his career. His bowling stats are still pretty decent. Just did not play enough games.

This was one of his most memorable spells: 5-25 in 2002

The great Bill Lawry. What a commentator!

 

[TheSultan]

Where did Bob Woolmer praise Akthar after he even hit him?

Just because someone praises him that means all is ok? His hitting of Asif lead to him being kicked out of an ICC tournament that jeopardised us especially considering the context of Woolmers death and what happened during the world cup 2007 (ODI). They had to bring in an inexperience Tanvir in.

This guy was damaging the image of Pakistan and it was insulting back than,.

Who’s talking about Bob Woolmer? You said team-mate!

Even so, there’s no evidence he hit woolmer. He had a disagreement with him. Bob was a grown up, he could look after himself.

There’s always a bit of argie bargie in the dressing room. Has everyone forgot about the altercation in West Indies between Younis khan and Afridi in the ahem shower?

Seriously you need to live in the real world. People move on. Grow a thicker skin. Professional sport is not for angels or the faint of heart.

 

[Barragan]

He could have been the

He had pace, wicked bouncer, excellent slower ball, swung the new and old ball

He let himself down massively with his poor attitude

 

[BreadPakoda]

He could have been the

He had pace, wicked bouncer, excellent slower ball, swung the new and old ball

He let himself down massively with his poor attitude

Match fitness was a big factor too. But it wasn’t in his hands and he did whatever he could (took pain injections, played even in pain).

 

[Major]

Who’s talking about Bob Woolmer? You said team-mate!

Even so, there’s no evidence he hit woolmer. He had a disagreement with him. Bob was a grown up, he could look after himself.

There’s always a bit of argie bargie in the dressing room. Has everyone forgot about the altercation in West Indies between Younis khan and Afridi in the ahem shower?

Seriously you need to live in the real world. People move on. Grow a thicker skin. Professional sport is not for angels or the faint of heart.

lol you can keep on denying it. It was well known this guy with his STD did hit Woolmer.

Nice try defending hitting someone.

There are laws that can make one bankruptc if you lay a finger, so hitting someone is not normal.