What's new

Was Javagal Srinath the best fast bowler from Asia between 1995-2001?

Indian_Supporter

Indian_Supporter

First Class Player
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Runs
2,862
A very underrated cricketer but according to me he was the best fast bowler from Asia in the period of 1995-2001.


Srinath new.jpg


Wkts = Highest
Avg = 2nd best
SR = Best
5-ers = Most

Discuss.
 
And Ahmed Shehzad > Sachin Tendulkar.

The amount of troll is too high here. If not trolling, then highly deluded.
 
I'm surprised. it seems he's had a good 5-6 years than anyone from SC. But why from 1995? Was he that poor in those period?
 
Was Srinath the best fast bowler from Asia for most of the 90's?

Just checked his record, he just has only one more 5fer in the remaining 30 tests. Real Shame could've been a very good career.
 
Its like saying Muhammad Yousuf was best Asian batsman from 2002-2007 because he has the best average, scored most centuries and scored second most number of runs, despite all of Sachin, Dravid, VVS, Ganguly, Sehwag, Sanga, Jayawardena, Inzi and Younis playing during that period.

That was Yousuf's best phase of the career while it wasn't for the others.

Same is the case here. 1995-2001 was best period of Srinath's career while rest of the pacers either had past their best phase or it was yet to come for them.

So what exactly are we achieving by comparing one player's high with other players' lows?


There are better ways to prove that he was the best Indian pacer ever.


Anyways, even considering that particular period, he still wasn't the best Asian pacer. It was Wasim.

Why?

Because Srinath had figures like 5/140, 5/114, 5/104 etc leaking runs at more than 4 rpo and others like 5/95, 4/130, 4/103, 4/92.

Such sort of figures don't win you matches. If you are going to pick a 5 wicket haul, it has to be picked cheaply like the one he did against Pakistan in Kolkatta match.

There is a reason Indian won only 7 of those 36 matches and lost 15 of them.
 
rooster said:
I'm surprised. it seems he's had a good 5-6 years than anyone from SC. But why from 1995? Was he that poor in those period?
Click to expand...
His stats id guess were very avge from the period either side hence the use of selective stats from 95-01
 
Srinath had more pace, but I wouldn't rank him along with Kapil. Kapil was more consistent and more skillful and had much more control (his outswingers were among the best in business). IMHO, Srinath was too "soft" for a paceman. He had no swagger or intimidation factor - he may be bowling at 145kph but the batsmen weren't unnerved when he bowled. He worried about hurting batsmen (which is a good thing in itself) but with that soft attitude you can never become the best.
 
Indian_Supporter said:
A very underrated cricketer but according to me he was the best fast bowler from Asia in the period of 1995-2001.


View attachment 59361


Wkts = Highest
Avg = 2nd best
SR = Best
5-ers = Most

Discuss.
Click to expand...


No from casual observing.

Reason, even in his purple patch, he was averaging about 28 which is on the high side for a fast bowler. I would like you to do a detailed analysis on Wasim and Srinath within this period as a comparative study so that the hypothesis can be observed properly.

Take in consideration the wickets taken (top 3, middle order, tail), the match situation, the results, first innings wickets, second innings wickets, 3rd innings wickets, 4th innings wicket, the impact, team wickets percentage along others. Also a country vs. country and home and away analysis in this will be good to go further in depth for that.

Have to give him for his impressive strike rate though.
 
No, Srinath was not the best fast bowler in the 90s. In fact he wasn't even a fast bowler. 80-85 mph does not make you a fast bowler
 
blind said:
No, Srinath was not the best fast bowler in the 90s. In fact he wasn't even a fast bowler. 80-85 mph does not make you a fast bowler
Click to expand...
Srinath was easily 90+MPH bowler in his prime.Was officialy the second fastest bowler of 1999 WC with a speed of 149.9 KPH that also after a shoulder OP.

But he was not the best fast bowler from SC in 90s.That would be Wasim Akram.
 
Indian_Supporter said:
7 years is quite a big sample and not selective.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Wassim Akram and Waqar Younis had careers spanning over 15 years, Shoaib was at his peak from 2000 / 2001 onwards and even he had a career spanning over 10 years so how can you compare peak of your fast bowler (hence the term selective)?
 
With a test average of 30 and an ODI average of 28 I would say he wasn't even among the top three fast bowlers to come out of sub continent during 90s / 2000s
 
Good work OP, conveniently omitting half the 90s, and even going into the 00s. Srinath was a decent bowler, nothing more
 
the stats can be good.What is fortunate for him that he was an alone wicket taker in his team so he had maximum chance to pick up a wicket.what was the case with pakistan is that Pakistan had wasim, waqar,aqib,razzaq,saqlain,Mushtaq ahmad. So even they are bowling good they dont get the same opportunity as srrinath.
stats can be delusional.
 
Indian_Supporter said:
A very underrated cricketer but according to me he was the best fast bowler from Asia in the period of 1995-2001.


View attachment 59361


Wkts = Highest
Avg = 2nd best
SR = Best
5-ers = Most

Discuss.
Click to expand...

I thought 90's means whole 90's (1990-2000). As that time both Wasim & were aging & were on decline whereas Shoaib just started to blossom. So title is kind a mis-leading.
 
Ottoman said:
I thought 90's means whole 90's (1990-2000). As that time both Wasim & were aging & were on decline whereas Shoaib just started to blossom. So title is kind a mis-leading.
Click to expand...
While i agree with the rest of your post.Waqar and Srinath are pretty similar age and hence 1995 to 2001 Waqar wasnt aging more than srinath.
 
bond007 said:
the stats can be good.What is fortunate for him that he was an alone wicket taker in his team so he had maximum chance to pick up a wicket.what was the case with pakistan is that Pakistan had wasim, waqar,aqib,razzaq,saqlain,Mushtaq ahmad. So even they are bowling good they dont get the same opportunity as srrinath.
stats can be delusional.
Click to expand...

How can you say that, they also had Kumble & Prasad at that time.

But Question now is?

Srinath has best bowling figures from Asia, Kumble was at its peak. India had Sachin, Dravid Azhar ud din & Gangully as batsmen.

Then why didn't they win more test matches abroad?
 
No It was Wasim from 1995-2001 and Waqar before that for 6 years.Srinath was the best India had for sure much better than the ones we have now.The guy worked hard and most teenagers from India right now don't even know who he was.
 
He was not an express bowler but still a fairly decent hit the deck bowler.

That was it - for Indian standards he was world class but there were much better bowlers around the world when compared to other teams at that time so he was very low down the pecking order.
 
Srinath was the best Indian fast bowler that I have ever seen.

I politely disagree with [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] - I actually do think that Srinath was a better fast bowler than Kapil Dev - Kapil Dev was for most of his career a medium-fast swinger like Ian Botham.

The thing is, 1995-2001 is too wide a band.

From 1995-1998, Waqar Younis was the best of those bowlers. He wasn't as quick as previously, but in South Africa in 1997-98 it was remarkable that he had developed into a terrific new ball bowler, which had always been his weakness.

Waqar was probably born in 1966 like Wasim Akram, rather than his official birth year of late 1971. Which means that between 1999 and 2001 he was actually aged 33 to 35. Which explains why he declined so rapidly.

Wasim Akram was significantly taller than Waqar, which meant that as he entered cricketing old age he could still trouble batsmen with bounce and lift while Waqar lost his lift very early in his career - I never saw it again after the 1989-90 tour of Australia.

I would argue that from 1999-2001 it was actually Wasim Akram who was the best Asian quick.

Srinath looks good overall between 1995-2001 simply because he was very consistent, while Waqar and Wasim were in reality three years older and declined in quality during that time span.
 
Junaids said:
Srinath was the best Indian fast bowler that I have ever seen.

I politely disagree with [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] - I actually do think that Srinath was a better fast bowler than Kapil Dev - Kapil Dev was for most of his career a medium-fast swinger like Ian Botham.

The thing is, 1995-2001 is too wide a band.

From 1995-1998, Waqar Younis was the best of those bowlers. He wasn't as quick as previously, but in South Africa in 1997-98 it was remarkable that he had developed into a terrific new ball bowler, which had always been his weakness.

Waqar was probably born in 1966 like Wasim Akram, rather than his official birth year of late 1971. Which means that between 1999 and 2001 he was actually aged 33 to 35. Which explains why he declined so rapidly.

Wasim Akram was significantly taller than Waqar, which meant that as he entered cricketing old age he could still trouble batsmen with bounce and lift while Waqar lost his lift very early in his career - I never saw it again after the 1989-90 tour of Australia.

I would argue that from 1999-2001 it was actually Wasim Akram who was the best Asian quick.

Srinath looks good overall between 1995-2001 simply because he was very consistent, while Waqar and Wasim were in reality three years older and declined in quality during that time span.
Click to expand...

Srinath was faster than Dev - not better. Speed is only one of the factors that make up a fast bowler. Thomson was very fast, but was he as good as other great bowlers of his era?

Kapil Dev is better than Srinath because he raised his game against tough opponents - Dev averages 23 in the WI at a time the WI were the best batting unit in the world, while Srinath averages 51 in Australia, the best batting unit of his era. Kapil Dev was a lone warrior compared to Srinath - even at home Kapil Dev did not have a very good support bowler like Srinath had in Kumble. Kapil Dev bowled a lot more accurately and his outswingers were impeccable. The WI batsmen found Kapil Dev one of the toughest bowlers to face - Kapil Dev was one of the few bowlers to trouble Viv Richards consistently. Srinath bowled incorrect lengths while playing away from India for much of his career - Srinath does not have impressive bowling averages against any strong batting team of his era (SA wasn't a strong batting side during the era of Srinath), please compare this with Kapil Dev.
 
Junaids said:
Srinath was the best Indian fast bowler that I have ever seen.

I politely disagree with [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] - I actually do think that Srinath was a better fast bowler than Kapil Dev - Kapil Dev was for most of his career a medium-fast swinger like Ian Botham.

The thing is, 1995-2001 is too wide a band.

From 1995-1998, Waqar Younis was the best of those bowlers. He wasn't as quick as previously, but in South Africa in 1997-98 it was remarkable that he had developed into a terrific new ball bowler, which had always been his weakness.

Waqar was probably born in 1966 like Wasim Akram, rather than his official birth year of late 1971. Which means that between 1999 and 2001 he was actually aged 33 to 35. Which explains why he declined so rapidly.

Wasim Akram was significantly taller than Waqar, which meant that as he entered cricketing old age he could still trouble batsmen with bounce and lift while Waqar lost his lift very early in his career - I never saw it again after the 1989-90 tour of Australia.

I would argue that from 1999-2001 it was actually Wasim Akram who was the best Asian quick.

Srinath looks good overall between 1995-2001 simply because he was very consistent, while Waqar and Wasim were in reality three years older and declined in quality during that time span.
Click to expand...
Bro if a bowler is top on the list for 7 years period across Asia, will you not consider him the most successful fast bowler in mid -late 90s from Asia?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
Indian_Supporter said:
Bro if a bowler is top on the list for 7 years period across Asia, will you not consider him the most successful fast bowler in mid -late 90s from Asia?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But he's not at the top of the list. He averaged 28 during that time while Wasim Akram averaged 25.

He was a very fine bowler - the best Indian quick bowler that I've ever seen. But "best Indian quick bowler" means that he was about the same quality as the Rahat Ali of the last 12 months, or the Wahab Riaz of the last 12 months.

Ultimately, Srinath averaged 28 at the peak of his career across those years and 30.49 overall. That's very good, but it's not special.
 
No to the question in OP but Srinath was a fine bowler who was bowled into ground by Azhar and Ganguly. But again he was the lone warrior in the pace department and the Indian skippers had no option.
 
A prime example of why you should never go by stats alone.

How many big batsmen of that era rates him?
 
cricketjoshila said:
Srinath was easily 90+MPH bowler in his prime.Was officialy the second fastest bowler of 1999 WC with a speed of 149.9 KPH that also after a shoulder OP.

But he was not the best fast bowler from SC in 90s.That would be Wasim Akram.
Click to expand...

IndianWillow said:
He was pretty fast during his peak, capable of hitting 95mph and more. He wasn't a low 80s bowler during the 90s.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/111878.html
Click to expand...

if you mean 90+ every 20-30 deliveries then sorry to say I don't count them as fast bowlers. They are more like hiccups bowlers to be honest
 
Not a chance.

Indian_Supporter said:
Have not seen Kapil Paaji play but I rate Srinath better than him. Very underrated by Indians mostly.
Click to expand...

He is underrated by almost everybody tbh, one of my favourite Indian players.

blind said:
No, Srinath was not the best fast bowler in the 90s. In fact he wasn't even a fast bowler. 80-85 mph does not make you a fast bowler
Click to expand...

Nah, he was pretty fast. And he had a moustache which automatically makes him cool.
 
Junaids said:
But he's not at the top of the list. He averaged 28 during that time while Wasim Akram averaged 25.

He was a very fine bowler - the best Indian quick bowler that I've ever seen. But "best Indian quick bowler" means that he was about the same quality as the Rahat Ali of the last 12 months, or the Wahab Riaz of the last 12 months.

Ultimately, Srinath averaged 28 at the peak of his career across those years and 30.49 overall. That's very good, but it's not special.
Click to expand...

Come on man, Rahat Ali? That's just ridiculous.
 
Yes.. Lara and Pointing used to get sleepless nights at the prospect of facing Sirinath..
 
Syed1 said:
Yes.. Lara and Pointing used to get sleepless nights at the prospect of facing Sirinath..
Click to expand...

I just had a look and Srinath only got Ponting once and Lara only twice in test matches.

So I checked the stats for Wasim. He got Ponting once and Lara twice. :yk2

Waqar got each of them three times FWIW. :waqar
 
Last edited:
Syed1 said:
Yes.. Lara and Pointing used to get sleepless nights at the prospect of facing Sirinath..
Click to expand...
In India they both had nightmares facing any Indian bowler. Why single out Srinath?

Lara avgs 33 and Ponting with his glorious avg of 21 in India.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
Indian_Supporter said:
In India they both had nightmares facing any Indian bowler. Why single out Srinath?

Lara avgs 33 and Ponting with his glorious avg of 21 in India.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

24 avg, and 14 Test matches woow a bigger sample.
in ODIs 47 avg, but why you will discuss this.

and Srinath in Australia against Aus , 8 matches 20 wickets in Test and 11 matches 12 wickets in ODIs,
 
blind said:
if you mean 90+ every 20-30 deliveries then sorry to say I don't count them as fast bowlers. They are more like hiccups bowlers to be honest
Click to expand...

He was consistently 90+ for a three or four years. Srinath would have become a more successful bowler had he got his lengths right while bowling outside SC. He used to bowl an awful lot of short pitch deliveries. The problem is batsmen from countries like Australia are born and brought up on bouncy wickets and they are not intimidated by these deliveries. They know how to leave them, or hook and pull them. Result - he averaged 51 on bouncy Aussie wickets - Ishantish looking stats! The commentators of those days used to mention this from time to time. Srinath would have purchased at least 50 more wickets in his career if he had learned to bowl fuller outside India - he learnt the trick later in his career, but then it can't undo the damage he had caused to himself. Srinath at peak was a terrifying bowler, but due to the reason I mentioned earlier his pace did not yield him more wickets.
 
#GreenRoars said:
24 avg, and 14 Test matches woow a bigger sample.
in ODIs 47 avg, but why you will discuss this.

and Srinath in Australia against Aus , 8 matches 20 wickets in Test and 11 matches 12 wickets in ODIs,
Click to expand...
24 avg in 14 test matches is pretty poor bro, which ever angle you look into it.

Anyway lets stick to topic, this thread is not about Ponting. I was just reply to the other poster who brought Ponting and Lara in discussion.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
yeah exactly how Mohammad Yousuf was better than Tendulkar from 2001 to 2007. Younis Khan was also better than Tendulkar in Tests during 2005-2011.
 
Indian_Supporter said:
24 avg in 14 test matches is pretty poor bro, which ever angle you look into it.

Anyway lets stick to topic, this thread is not about Ponting. I was just reply to the other poster who brought Ponting and Lara in discussion.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If you read the entire line you would realize that post was actually about Sirinath.


Point being that Lara and Pointing or any batsman in the world would much rather face Sirinath than Wasim, Waqar, Akhtar...
 
IndianWillow said:
He was consistently 90+ for a three or four years. Srinath would have become a more successful bowler had he got his lengths right while bowling outside SC. He used to bowl an awful lot of short pitch deliveries. The problem is batsmen from countries like Australia are born and brought up on bouncy wickets and they are not intimidated by these deliveries. They know how to leave them, or hook and pull them. Result - he averaged 51 on bouncy Aussie wickets - Ishantish looking stats! The commentators of those days used to mention this from time to time. Srinath would have purchased at least 50 more wickets in his career if he had learned to bowl fuller outside India - he learnt the trick later in his career, but then it can't undo the damage he had caused to himself. Srinath at peak was a terrifying bowler, but due to the reason I mentioned earlier his pace did not yield him more wickets.
Click to expand...

He wasn't quick. He had the height advantage which he didn't get the benefit he should have gotten. He was quick here and there but not as a full timer. Most of his wickets were due to the extra bounce he generated because of his height

 
No. Even in the timeframe OP mentioned, Wasim was clearly the better bowler. Srinath was a good bowler no doubt but the 2 W's are ATG's and among the top 10 fast bowlers of all
time. :)
 
Nope. Wasim and Waqar were better. Srinath isn't underrated, he is rated as he was. Not close to being a great bowler, not even during his peak.
 
I remember in one of the interviews, Ijaz Ahmed once said that him, Inzi, Saeed Anwar and Amir Sohail used to smack Srinath all around the ground, and he was the easiest bowler. Infact, Prasad was tougher. They also said that when Srinath was on, they made sure that last few balls of his should be dealt in a way that Azharuddin sees it as if Srinath would get a wicket. They purposely used to portray that they are in difficulty, just so that Srinath isn't taken away from the attack, and they could again smack him further more.

This interview sums it up. Good troll though OP.
 
Nah, Wasim was better than Srinath in that duration.
 
ahmedzee said:
I remember in one of the interviews, Ijaz Ahmed once said that him, Inzi, Saeed Anwar and Amir Sohail used to smack Srinath all around the ground, and he was the easiest bowler. Infact, Prasad was tougher. They also said that when Srinath was on, they made sure that last few balls of his should be dealt in a way that Azharuddin sees it as if Srinath would get a wicket. They purposely used to portray that they are in difficulty, just so that Srinath isn't taken away from the attack, and they could again smack him further more.

This interview sums it up. Good troll though OP.
Click to expand...

idk why but this made me lol :))
 
Lol what a joke of thread.
Sri Nath is not fit enough to tie the laces of Wasim and Waqar. In fact, Vass was a better bowler than Srinath.
 
Clearly he has the second best average in that group. Srinath bowled some terrific spells during that time..
 
Srinath I thought was a very good, very dangerous bowler.

I always worried about our batsmen when he was bowling.

Having said that, those stats are deceptive.

Wasim was clearly a suprerior bowler over that period, I don't care if he was old.

It'd be interesting to see how their rankings measured up during that time.
 
What a ridiculous thread. A totally arbitrary period is selected. 95-01? Seriously? Either talk about full decade. If you want to talk about second half of 90s, talk about 95-99. Why 95-01? One good reason apart from the fact that it coincided with Srinath's peak.
 
Kakar said:
What a ridiculous thread. A totally arbitrary period is selected. 95-01? Seriously? Either talk about full decade. If you want to talk about second half of 90s, talk about 95-99. Why 95-01? One good reason apart from the fact that it coincided with Srinath's peak.
Click to expand...
People still talks about Waqar's peak which lasted for 4 years. What wrong if I highlighted Srinath's peak which is 7 years? And for people who says I am trolling, check the stats again posted in OP. In a span of 7 years, he is only behind Wasim in avg. and better in all other aspects than any other bowler in Asia. Surely worth hyping considering the general concensus that Indians do not produce fast bowlers.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
For the years mentioned, it seems he was slightly better than Wasim and Waqar. Overall, he may not be anywhere close to them, but for those 7 straight years, it does appear that he was up there with them (maybe even better).
 
Indian_Supporter said:
People still talks about Waqar's peak which lasted for 4 years. What wrong if I highlighted Srinath's peak which is 7 years? And for people who says I am trolling, check the stats again posted in OP. In a span of 7 years, he is only behind Wasim in avg. and better in all other aspects than any other bowler in Asia. Surely worth hyping considering the general concensus that Indians do not produce fast bowlers.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Waqars peak is highlighted because it was something extra ordinary in overall cricketing terms, it was the beginning of his career, the wkts per match, his strike rate and avge were something relatively unseen in the modern age

Theres a world of differene why that is talked about and not srinaths
 
I think Pakistani fans may find this thread a lot more acceptable if it was titled "Wasim and Waqar were no better than Srinath from 1995-2001".
 
Zaz said:
Waqars peak is highlighted because it was something extra ordinary in overall cricketing terms, it was the beginning of his career, the wkts per match, his strike rate and avge were something relatively unseen in the modern age

Theres a world of differene why that is talked about and not srinaths
Click to expand...
Correct and no one denies Waqar's greatness in those years. He was truely a champion bowler. The problem is when people start to mock if we discuss peak of other bowlers.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
ahmedzee said:
I remember in one of the interviews, Ijaz Ahmed once said that him, Inzi, Saeed Anwar and Amir Sohail used to smack Srinath all around the ground, and he was the easiest bowler. Infact, Prasad was tougher. They also said that when Srinath was on, they made sure that last few balls of his should be dealt in a way that Azharuddin sees it as if Srinath would get a wicket. They purposely used to portray that they are in difficulty, just so that Srinath isn't taken away from the attack, and they could again smack him further more.

This interview sums it up. Good troll though OP.
Click to expand...

Post of the Thread for me :))
 
ahmedzee said:
I remember in one of the interviews, Ijaz Ahmed once said that him, Inzi, Saeed Anwar and Amir Sohail used to smack Srinath all around the ground, and he was the easiest bowler. Infact, Prasad was tougher. They also said that when Srinath was on, they made sure that last few balls of his should be dealt in a way that Azharuddin sees it as if Srinath would get a wicket. They purposely used to portray that they are in difficulty, just so that Srinath isn't taken away from the attack, and they could again smack him further more.

This interview sums it up. Good troll though OP.
Click to expand...

Srinath played just three test matches versus Pakistan and averaged 20 in those three matches, taking two five wicket hauls (including an 8/86) in three tests. Hardly looks like a bowler who could be smacked all around. In any case that smacking all around strategy was a failure for Pakistan as seen by his averages.

If they were talking of ODIs, Srinath wasn't anything exceptional in ODIs but you cannot plan these kind of strategies against ODI bowlers because of bowler's quota of 10 overs. Bowlers would be taken off attack from time to time whether they are leaking runs or not. Blocking a bowler deliberately to give the opposing captain a false sense of security could be a bad strategy in ODIs.
 
ahmedzee said:
I remember in one of the interviews, Ijaz Ahmed once said that him, Inzi, Saeed Anwar and Amir Sohail used to smack Srinath all around the ground, and he was the easiest bowler. Infact, Prasad was tougher. They also said that when Srinath was on, they made sure that last few balls of his should be dealt in a way that Azharuddin sees it as if Srinath would get a wicket. They purposely used to portray that they are in difficulty, just so that Srinath isn't taken away from the attack, and they could again smack him further more.

This interview sums it up. Good troll though OP.
Click to expand...

I dont why but this post made me laugh :)), lets see if someone here is bullshi*ing...

Srinath vs Pak in Test:

filtered 3 66 49 11.00 0 17 8/86 20.64 2 0 0

Ijaz vs India in Test:

Filtered 4 56 17 8.00 :))) 0 - - - - 6 0 -


If you talking ODI's Srinath avg's 30 vs Pakistan which is not bad for a bowler who plays most of his games on those flat wickets.
 
Romali_rotti said:
I dont why but this post made me laugh :)), lets see if someone here is bullshi*ing...

Srinath vs Pak in Test:

filtered 3 66 49 11.00 0 17 8/86 20.64 2 0 0

Ijaz vs India in Test:

Filtered 4 56 17 8.00 :))) 0 - - - - 6 0 -


If you talking ODI's Srinath avg's 30 vs Pakistan which is not bad for a bowler who plays most of his games on those flat wickets.
Click to expand...

Look mate, this just goes to show how great Ijaz was at pretending he couldn't play Srinath. Committed wholeheartedly to the performance to such an extent that he got out cheaply as well, that's method acting of which De Niro would be jealous.
 
IndianWillow said:
Srinath played just three test matches versus Pakistan and averaged 20 in those three matches, taking two five wicket hauls (including an 8/86) in three tests. Hardly looks like a bowler who could be smacked all around. In any case that smacking all around strategy was a failure for Pakistan as seen by his averages.

If they were talking of ODIs, Srinath wasn't anything exceptional in ODIs but you cannot plan these kind of strategies against ODI bowlers because of bowler's quota of 10 overs. Bowlers would be taken off attack from time to time whether they are leaking runs or not. Blocking a bowler deliberately to give the opposing captain a false sense of security could be a bad strategy in ODIs.
Click to expand...

Romali_rotti said:
I dont why but this post made me laugh :)), lets see if someone here is bullshi*ing...

Srinath vs Pak in Test:

filtered 3 66 49 11.00 0 17 8/86 20.64 2 0 0

Ijaz vs India in Test:

Filtered 4 56 17 8.00 :))) 0 - - - - 6 0 -


If you talking ODI's Srinath avg's 30 vs Pakistan which is not bad for a bowler who plays most of his games on those flat wickets.
Click to expand...

he was talking about ODIs
 
Srinath shouldn't be insulted just because a thread like this is made.The guy played his heart with all his limitations.Rotator-cuff injury also took a toll on him.
 
Wasim past his peak >>> Srinath at his peak

This thread was started by a stats bully who holds very little knowledge of the game. Stats alone say very little about the greats of the game.
 
theAfridian said:
Wasim past his peak >>> Srinath at his peak

This thread was started by a stats bully who holds very little knowledge of the game. Stats alone say very little about the greats of the game.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that period was selected to make Srinath look better but there was nothing wrong with the comparison here. Srinath's best years got compared with the worst years of Wasim and naturally they appear comparable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Asad T
[VIDEO] Salman Ali Agha's reaction as Afghanistan is labelled "second best team in Asia"
Replies
66
Views
2K
jnaveen1980
J
RedwoodOriginal
Who is your favorite batter and bowler?
Replies
7
Views
284
YousafTheBeast
YousafTheBeast
FearlessRoar
[VIDEOS] Will O'Rourke: New Zealand’s tall fast bowler
Replies
1
Views
689
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
20
Views
2K
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
Cricket Warrior
"My focus was only on playing the match today": Haris Rauf
Replies
37
Views
2K
Obaidd
Obaidd
Back
Top