Who was more impactful or better overall? Steve Waugh or Javed Miandad?

[Harsh Thakor]

Steve Waugh and Javed Miandad were both legends very similar in many ways.Both posessed the phenomenal determination of a soldier and craft to adjust on the worst wickets.Javed was the more talented,Waugh the more gritty.Both were masters in a crisis.


Where Steve overshadowed Javed was in captaincy being the most successful test captain of all time,winning 41 out of 57 tests.As a batsmen Steve had a considerably better record than Miandad overseas,particularly in West Indies and England.Javed outscored Waugh in New Zealand and on his home pitches.Steve had a considerably better average in wins but had the advantage of playing for a champion team from 1995.Still arguably Waugh contributed as much as Javed to make his team a world -beating side.Dubious umpiring in 1988 cost Javed's batting enabling Pakistan to win the unofficial test match world championship title.In world cups both were outstanding like Javed in 1992 and Steve in 1999.In ODI's I would always chose Javed as he was a superior manipulator and improviser and marginally better in the art of finishing a run chase.Javed was more of master of the turning and bouncing ball.On a fast wicket Miandad would be more of a scourge to oponents.The likes of Richard Hadlee or Deenis Lillee or even Viv Richards felt Miandad was more of a threat

Thus who was overall the better cricketer?Statistically Waugh would win but morally to me it was still Javed who niggled opponents more or looked at oponents more in their eyes.Thus by a whisker I would go for Javed who had more all-round batting ability.



STATISTICS BY S.RAJESH OF CRICINFO


STEVE WAUGH

During his peak years in Tests - from the beginning of 1993 to the end of his career - Waugh had a staggering average of 56.88, which was next only to Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid. After scoring only three centuries in his first 46 Tests, he scored 29 in his next 122. Of the 14 Man-of-the-Match awards he won in his career, 13 were during this period of his career. He was clearly a lesser force as a bowler, but that was a trade-off Australia would have happily accepted.

Best Test batsmen between Jan 1 1993 and Jan 6 2004 Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Sachin Tendulkar 91 8180 61.50 28/ 33
Rahul Dravid 75 6546 57.42 16/ 32
Steve Waugh 122 8761 56.88 29/ 37
Ricky Ponting 75 5821 55.97 20/ 21
Brian Lara 97 8873 53.77 24/ 40


Through much of the best part of his career, Waugh was a part of a very strong Australian side. It was a team that was very successful, and Waugh played his hand in those victories, averaging almost 70 in wins. Among batsmen with at least 4000 runs in wins, only three have a better average.

Waugh has also been a part of 86 Test triumphs, which is third in the all-time list, after Ricky Ponting and Shane Warne. In fact, the top eight players in the list are all Australians, which tells the story of their domination quite eloquently.

Highest Test batting averages in wins (Qual: 4000 runs) Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Don Bradman 30 4813 130.08 23/ 4
Inzamam-ul-Haq 49 4690 78.16 17/ 20
Kumar Sangakkara 42 4282 76.46 15/ 15
Steve Waugh 86 6460 69.46 25/ 25
Sachin Tendulkar 59 5393 69.14 20/ 20
Rahul Dravid 51 4557 65.10 12/ 22


In almost all the tables listed above, Waugh is at or near the top of the pile. However, there was one area of his game that was surprisingly poor - his record in fourth innings of Tests. For someone who relished a challenge and enjoyed batting when the odds were most stacked against his team, Waugh's fourth-innings stats are surprisingly poor. Given Australia's domination during most of his playing days and his position in the line-up, he didn't need to bat in the last innings of a Test that often, but on the few occasions when he was required, he didn't do a lot. In 31 fourth innings, he scored a mere 613 runs at an average barely touching 25, and scored only two fifties. Among batsmen who've scored at least 500 fourth-innings runs - and there are 92 of them in this list - Waugh's average of 25.54 is - hold your breath - the poorest of the lot. In those 31 Tests, Australia lost 13, and in those games Waugh scored only 170 runs. In the 29 matches they won, his average was 30.33. For some reason, batting in the fourth innings was one challenge Waugh could never master.

Lowest averages in fourth innings of Tests (Qual: 500 runs) Batsman Innings Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Steve Waugh 31 613 25.54 0/ 2
Marcus Trescothick 33 678 26.07 1/ 2
Virender Sehwag 25 570 27.14 0/ 4
Stephen Fleming 29 709 28.36 0/ 6
Dilip Vengsarkar 25 613 29.19 1/ 3


JAVED MIANDAD


Best Test batsmen between 1983 and 1989 (Qual: 3000 runs) Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Javed Miandad 53 4247 61.55 14/ 16
Allan Border 62 5168 60.09 14/ 27
Dilip Vengsarkar 51 3452 52.30 11/ 16
Gordon Greenidge 60 4257 48.37 12/ 15
Richie Richardson 45 3320 48.11 10/ 13
Martin Crowe 42 3107 47.80 10/ 11
Sunil Gavaskar 44 3038 46.03 9/ 14
Viv Richards 61 3720 45.92 11/ 20


Comparison of strike rates of top batsmen between 1975 and 1991 (Qual: 4000 runs) Batsman Matches Runs Average Strike rate % better than average SR for period (65.92)
Viv Richards 187 6721 47.00 90.20 36.83
Dean Jones 120 4690 48.85 75.07 13.88
Allan Border 228 5766 31.68 70.26 6.58
Javed Miandad 180 5795 41.69 68.16 3.39
Gordon Greenidge 128 5134 45.03 64.92 -1.51

.

ODI Performance of overseas batsmen in Australia (1975-1991) Player Matches Innings Runs Average Strike rate 100s 50s
Viv Richards 73 67 2769 44.66 84.54 3 24
Desmond Haynes 76 75 2459 35.63 60.32 4 17
Gordon Greenidge 43 43 1731 43.27 64.51 3 12
John Wright 57 57 1541 27.51 53.78 0 12
Javed Miandad 45 44 1390 33.90 59.40 0 10
David Gower 42 41 1248 32.84 84.32 4 3


Best performers in World Cups (Qual: 1000 runs) Batsman Matches Runs Average Strike rate 100s/ 50s
Viv Richards 23 1013 63.31 85.05 3/ 5
Sachin Tendulkar 36 1796 57.93 88.21 4/ 13
Herschelle Gibbs 25 1067 56.15 87.38 2/ 8
Sourav Ganguly 21 1006 55.88 77.50 4/ 3
Mark Waugh 22 1004 52.84 83.73 4/ 4
Ricky Ponting 39 1537 48.03 81.06 4/ 6
Javed Miandad 33 1083 43.32 68.02 1/ 8

 

[Hitman]

There is no answer to this question. Both were extremely integral for their respective teams. Steve Waugh was a far better gentleman on the field though.

 

[Hasan123]

Very good compairson. I would go with Steve Waugh just.

 

[jeetu]

One of the most underrated Steve Waugh's contribution was in 1987 WC as A/R.

Players with 100 runs and 5 Wickets in 87 WC
[table=width: 600, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Runs [/td][td]Bat Av [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Bowl Av [/td][td]Ave Diff [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]M Azharuddin (INDIA) [/td][td]7 [/td][td]190 [/td][td]63.33 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]21.8 [/td][td]41.53 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SR Waugh (AUS) [/td][td]8 [/td][td]167 [/td][td]55.66 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]26.18 [/td][td]29.48 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Imran Khan (PAK) [/td][td]7 [/td][td]147 [/td][td]24.5 [/td][td]17 [/td][td]13.05 [/td][td]11.44 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev (INDIA) [/td][td]7 [/td][td]152 [/td][td]50.66 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]51.8 [/td][td]-1.13 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Border (AUS) [/td][td]8 [/td][td]183 [/td][td]22.87 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]27.66 [/td][td]-4.79 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MC Snedden (NZ) [/td][td]6 [/td][td]157 [/td][td]26.16 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]50.8 [/td][td]-24.63 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[Ab Fan]

Waugh due to captaincy as you said yourself.

 

[Robert]

I used to think of Miandad as the best ever batter from Asia and second only to Richards among players I have seen. Now I think of him a little less highly - average 39 against WI. 61 at home and 48 abroad, because he was immune to the lbw rule at home.

Waugh was pretty uniform in performance home and away and against all-comers. Plus he got 92 test wickets including three michelles.

Miandad was Imran’s tactical brain in the field which is a positive for him. Waugh won a lot of tests but did have a champion team.

So I’ll pick Tugga.

 

[KingKhanWC]

If Waugh played in the 80's he would avg 10 against the WI and around 30 overall.

Waugh was a better captain but its crazy to suggest he was a better batsmen.

 

[Robert]

If Waugh played in the 80's he would avg 10 against the WI and around 30 overall.

Waugh was a better captain but its crazy to suggest he was a better batsmen.

He did play in the eighties. He averaged 43 against all-comers and 41 against WI then.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

He did play in the eighties. He averaged 43 against all-comers and 41 against WI then.

Who would you rate a better batsmen?I still feel Miandad was the greater scourge in the eyes of bowlers and better against great pace and spin.

 

[Hitman]

I used to think of Miandad as the best ever batter from Asia and second only to Richards among players I have seen. Now I think of him a little less highly - average 39 against WI. 61 at home and 48 abroad, because he was immune to the lbw rule at home.

Waugh was pretty uniform in performance home and away and against all-comers. Plus he got 92 test wickets including three michelles.

Miandad was Imran’s tactical brain in the field which is a positive for him. Waugh won a lot of tests but did have a champion team.

So I’ll pick Tugga.

Average of 29 against the WI. Average of 61 at home (due to Pakistani umpires), and 45 away from home.

 

[Hitman]

If Waugh played in the 80's he would avg 10 against the WI and around 30 overall.

Waugh was a better captain but its crazy to suggest he was a better batsmen.

Do you even know when Steve Waugh made his debut? And do you know how difficult it was in the 90's for batsmen, an era where Steve Waugh had the second highest average after Sachin?

 

[PakLFC]

JM was the better batsman. No doubt abbot it at all.

 

[Robert]

Average of 29 against the WI. Average of 61 at home (due to Pakistani umpires), and 45 away from home.

Must have mistyped. Tah for correction. 29 against WI is a bit damning actually, when Gooch and Border averaged 40.

 

[Robert]

Who would you rate a better batsmen?I still feel Miandad was the greater scourge in the eyes of bowlers and better against great pace and spin.

Hitman’s figures convince me it is Waugh. I don’t think Miandad faced much top-line spin as Underwood and the Unholy Trinity were on the decline.

 

[Ab Fan]

Waugh is so underrated here. He debuted in 1985 and retired in 2004, which means he pretty much played in an era when bowling was at its all time peak. His career almost coincided with bowlers like Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock, Wasim, Waqar and Murali.

An average of 53 in 1990s and an away average of 55 definitely puts him in ATG tier and his captaincy when added puts him in the league of the very greatest players to have played the game.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Steve Waugh just by a whisker. 90s was by far the toughest decade in batting where only 3 batsmen averaged above 50, Waugh was 3rd behind Sachin and Lara. But can't go wrong with either picks, both were gutsy streetfighters who battled it out for their respective teams in times of crises.

 

[gazza619]

he was immune to the lbw rule at home.

A bit unfair to say that about Miandad only. In that era of home umpires almost every single great player was immune to the lbw rule at home.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Hitman’s figures convince me it is Waugh. I don’t think Miandad faced much top-line spin as Underwood and the Unholy Trinity were on the decline.

Even in ODI cricket?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

A bit unfair to say that about Miandad only. In that era of home umpires almost every single great player was immune to the lbw rule at home.

Totally with you.Quite unfair.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Steve Waugh just by a whisker. 90s was by far the toughest decade in batting where only 3 batsmen averaged above 50, Waugh was 3rd behind Sachin and Lara. But can't go wrong with either picks, both were gutsy streetfighters who battled it out for their respective teams in times of crises.

Never forget no restriction on number of bouncers in an over in Miandad era or as good headgear.Javed was a better player of the short ball or bouncer.

 

[gazza619]

Totally with you.Quite unfair.

Yes and when players toured abroad they would be on the receiving end of biased umpiring. So it would even out in the end.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Yes and when players toured abroad they would be on the receiving end of biased umpiring. So it would even out in the end.

who was the better in your view overall?

 

[Hasan123]

Do you even know when Steve Waugh made his debut? And do you know how difficult it was in the 90's for batsmen, an era where Steve Waugh had the second highest average after Sachin?

Some people don't see beyond there bias and green tinted glasses

 

[Justcrazy]

On ability to play spin , I would give Miandad edge

 

[Robert]

A bit unfair to say that about Miandad only. In that era of home umpires almost every single great player was immune to the lbw rule at home.

I disagree with this. Miandad in particular seemed to have a guardian angel at home.

David Gower, England's best of that era, averaging 40 at home and 50 away. Perhaps home umps were more likely to give him out?

 

[Last Monetarist]

I think it's Waugh. Miandad's record against the Windies counts against him.

I agree with Warne on Waugh's captaincy though.

 

[MenInG]

India: “The final frontier”, as described by Stephen Waugh. A cricket obsessed nation of one billion people that Australia had not conquered since Bill Lawry’s side won in 1969-70, claiming a 3-1 series victory.

But for Waugh’s men, arriving in late February 2001, this was their best chance. Fifteen straight victories and counting and a team that “covered all bases”, as Jim Maxwell says.

“The Australian team under Steve Waugh was a very formidable one having won 15 straight matches. Waugh himself said that India will be the final frontier for his team,” VVS Laxman tells foxsports.com.au from Ahmedabad.

A 16th would be achieved inside three days in Mumbai and it seemed likely that Australia’s 31-year drought in India would be ended.

“I can remember,” ABC broadcaster Maxwell quips, “I had had a few bets before the series on Australia winning 2-0, 3-0 and I just thought midway through that second Test it’s just a matter of getting in the queue, isn’t it?”

“You should never bet on anything that talks - that’s what Richie Benaud said.”

But not even the greatest team of the modern era, with Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne leading the attack and the Waugh brothers – Mark and Steve – together in the middle-order, with a wicket-keeper batsman who could do things the game had never seen, nor an opener who went to amass 550 runs in three Tests, could conquer India at home in 2001.

Here, foxsports.com.au looks back 20 years on in a four-part series on the tour that brought life back into Test cricket. A tour that brought colour and romance back into the five-day format, a tour that made the hairs on your back stand up and boys and girls, including myself, hug the radio in the lounge room every afternoon after school listening to Harbhajan Singh bowl with guile and drift and turn and bounce.

A series described by Adam Gilchrist as “up there amongst the greatest Test series” he played.

“Oh god yeah it’s up there,” he reflects, “that and the ‘05 Ashes were the two best series that I played in.

“Probably in regards to the quality of the cricket, the intensity, what was at stake and the public glare that was on the series and the focus and, funnily enough, they were about the only two series we lost in that era.”

Australia’s dramatic loss would ultimately drive Gilchrist’s focus and attention three years later when returning to India for the final time in the five-day version of the game. A series that would be Gilchrist’s most satisfying of his career.

Mark Waugh agrees, with his biggest disappointment that the series was only three Tests and not five like so often against England and the West Indies at the time.

“It was one of the best series I played in,” Waugh fondly recalls to foxsports.com.au.

“It was a shame it was only three Tests. We all loved playing England and the West Indies in five, but when you go to India it’s always something you remember and it was such a great series.”

Maxwell adds: “You also had to remember at that stage in 2001, there was quite a bit of feeling that Australia and India was going to supplant the Ashes as the main series because the Poms had been so hopeless.”

Poor old Michael Kasprowicz, the workhorse Queenslander, played just one Test on that tour. His efforts in the second Test, like in 2005 when he played the second and fourth Tests, would be losing ones.

“I had a starring role there as well,” the right-arm quick says sarcastically.

But he too would have revenge one day, having turned down a sensational code switch to rugby union following the 2001 series defeat, and the “lessons” learnt would be instrumental in Kasprowicz devising the plan for their return in 2004.

Even before the first ball, cricket was rocked on the eve of the series getting underway following the passing of Sir Donald Bradman in his Adelaide home.

“There were a lot of big things in that series, which had been started by the death of Bradman just before the first Test,” Maxwell says.

The game’s greatest batsman hadn’t toured India, but his death was felt across the land.

“Going into the restaurant, hotel workers were apologising to you like you’d lost a family member,” Gilchrist says.

The former Australian vice-captain remembers the morning he heard the news and wrote about it in a column for The Australian.

“It moved me to get up very early in the day to pen an article,” Gilchrist recalls.

“It made you realise how fortunate you were to be a part of that limited number of the club of Test cricketers. It made me quite reflective. It certainly struck a chord for me, but as for what it meant as going out and playing I don’t know that anyone used it for greater motivation.”

Laxman, too, says Bradman’s death was felt throughout his team.

“I still remember Sachin Tendulkar mentioning to all of us his experiences of sharing an entire day with him along with Shane Warne, and what a remarkable person he was and how witty he was,” Laxman says.

Australia and India would pay their respects by wearing black armbands and observing a minute’s silence on the morning of the first Test on Tuesday, 27 February.

Rather than taking their hats off though, Steve Waugh had asked the playing group whether they would like to wear their baggy green caps.

Everyone did except brother Mark and Warne.

“Steve Waugh threw the option to us as a team in the minute’s silence would we would like to leave on our baggy green caps, which would be our way of acknowledging in the most respectful manner the greatest batsman Australia has ever had, and statistically in the world, and so we did,” Gilchrist says.

“Although Warney [and Mark Waugh] didn’t, Warney chose not to. He thought that would be disrespectful, but the rest of us had our caps on.

“It’s very much every individual’s choice, but the majority of us thought that was a really nice mark of respect to the greatest to wear that cap.”

Once the action got underway, one person stood tall as wickets fell around him: Tendulkar.

The batsman that Bradman had said resembled him most, scored 76. India’s next highest batsman was wicket-keeper Naylan Mongia with 26 in their total of 176.

At 5-99, India’s total didn’t look as bad as first thought.

Then Gilchrist walked to the middle to join Matthew Hayden, who was trying to cement himself at the top of the order having only recently made his way back into the side after years of dominating domestic cricket.

Having watched the Waugh brothers and Ricky Ponting get out trying to defend the slow bowlers with men around the bat, Gilchrist took a different approach.

“It was pretty daunting, pretty intimidating,” Gilchrist reflects.

“I’d played a bit of one day cricket over there in Pakistan and Sri Lanka, but that was my first baptism into the cauldron of subcontinental Test cricket and we were on the back foot and men were in and around the bat and the ball was doing everything that you had learned and legend had passed on and it was exactly that.”

But it allowed the explosive left-hander to do what he does best.

“It seemed to work out nicely that India were on the ascendancy as it allowed me to counter punch and thinking there was nothing to lose at 5-99, so we might as well fire a shot,” he says.

“I had a pretty good ally in Matthew Hayden, who had done a mountain of homework leading into that series to come up with a game-plan that suited him and he executed that to go on to dominate that series.

“We counterpunched and we wrestled momentum back and we stunned India like thieves in the night and they hardly even knew that they had been pickpocketed; momentum had gone our way and all of a sudden we found ourselves in a really nice position.”

From the brink of first-innings capitulation, Gilchrist and Hayden put on 197 for the sixth wicket, with the wicket-keeper blasting 122 from 112 deliveries. Hayden, meanwhile, swept and lunged forward to the pitch of the ball with precision to make 119 off 172 before he was caught behind off veteran quick Javagal Srinath.

But it was Gilchrist’s innings that changed the course of the match.

His innings was described by Waugh as “amazing”, as it sent Australia on their way to a dominant first Test victory as the tourists bowled India out for 219 with Tendulkar again top-scoring (65).

Requiring just 47, Hayden and Michael Slater made light work of the chase as Australia secured a 10-wicket win.

Gilchrist was named player of the match, as Australia made it 16 straight.

“It was a really significant breakthrough innings from a mindset point of view that you could get some runs in India,” Gilchrist said.

“But that was challenged immediately in the next couple of games.

“And technically it was an innings that was against everything that you’re supposed to do playing spin bowling. I was slog sweeping out of the rough against the spin, trying to take bowlers on to parts of the ground that you probably shouldn’t, but we needed to do something different because what we were doing wasn’t working. It paid off that day and it is one of the innings that I reflect on that brings a great deal of joy; it was a really important innings in the context of the game, but ultimately my batting on that series, as the stats show, I didn’t fire another shot on that series and leaves a bit of a sour taste in the mouth.”

For India though, they had been left disappointed but not broken.

“We prepared really well under John Wright, our coach, and Sourav [Ganguly], who had just taken over as the Indian team captain,” Laxman said.

“But we were a little disappointed that things didn’t go our way in Mumbai. We thought that we put up a good fight and were in the game until Gilchrist came and took the game away from us with a hundred, and we didn’t bat well in the second innings.

“We were disappointed the way the result of the match turned out to be, but I still remember very vividly that after the match, once we went back to the hotel, we had a team meeting and talked over the result, what we all did was talk about the positives and the number of sessions we won in that Test match, so we didn’t totally lose our morale after that loss.”

The ease at which Australia won the first Test would ultimately play a role in what would take place a week later when they would meet at Eden Gardens in Calcutta.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricke...n/news-story/a4fd7eff5fbdde2c7ae8cb76471c484f

 

[Spin Master]

No comparison at all. Javed Miandad hands down.

 

[moghul]

Never made sense to me randomly comparing two cricketers.

 

[topspin]

Must have mistyped. Tah for correction. 29 against WI is a bit damning actually, when Gooch and Border averaged 40.

Truth of the matter is, Miandad is overrated. He didn't have the best technique. His home average was inflated because he benefitted from having Pakistani umpires who refused to give him out lbw. That average of 29 against WI sums it up really. His average in Australia wasn't great either.

English rate him highly because his record in England was very good.

I would say Miandad was at best a borderline ATG as there is a case for one to say he just misses out on ATG status as well.

 

[topspin]

I would take Steve Waugh over Miandad any day of the week.

 

[gazza619]

I would obviously naturally be biased in favour of Miandad.

Both were legends in my book. Miandad was a complete package though. A fantastic ODI player and would have been a big buy in T20s as well.

Steve Waugh has had the tag of being slightly selfish, not sure if true or not.

 

[RajBan]

Waugh is just a legend. Nothing to take away from Miandad , he will be one of the best to play the game from Pakistan but Waugh is an ATG when considered as an overall package - batsman, all-rounder, captain.

 

[Ab Fan]

Tier 1:- Tendulkar, Viv, Lara, Sobers

Tier 1.5:- Gavaskar, Ponting, Chappell

Tier 2:- Kallis, S Waugh, Miandad, Dravid, Sangakkara

So, both same level. But Steve Waugh gets an edge on overall front considering his captaincy and bowling.

 

[Justcrazy]

Miandad was better batsman , I do not think there is any doubt.

 

[Justcrazy]

Tier 1:- Tendulkar, Viv, Lara, Sobers

Tier 1.5:- Gavaskar, Ponting, Chappell

Tier 2:- Kallis, S Waugh, Miandad, Dravid, Sangakkara

So, both same level. But Steve Waugh gets an edge on overall front considering his captaincy and bowling.

We judging as a pure batsman , not as part time bowler.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Miandad was better batsman , I do not think there is any doubt.

Nah, there are plenty of doubts as far as test cricket is concerned. Miandad is clearly ahead in limited overs cricket.

Both were geniuses, but Waugh's record during the 90s can't be sniffed at, especially his knack of stepping up under pressure. Miandad's away record and poor average against the West Indies counts against him.

This is a very difficult question to ponder if the argument centres around which of the two would one be willing to ask to bat for one's life. I'd probably go for Waugh, but that's cause I saw him at his peak whereas with Miandad I only caught the last few years.

 

[Napa]

A bit unfair to say that about Miandad only. In that era of home umpires almost every single great player was immune to the lbw rule at home.

I disagree with this. Miandad in particular seemed to have a guardian angel at home.

David Gower, England's best of that era, averaging 40 at home and 50 away. Perhaps home umps were more likely to give him out?

Also Gavaskar from the pre-neutral umpires era averaged more abroad than at home.

 

[Justcrazy]

Nah, there are plenty of doubts as far as test cricket is concerned. Miandad is clearly ahead in limited overs cricket.

Both were geniuses, but Waugh's record during the 90s can't be sniffed at, especially his knack of stepping up under pressure. Miandad's away record and poor average against the West Indies counts against him.

This is a very difficult question to ponder if the argument centres around which of the two would one be willing to ask to bat for one's life. I'd probably go for Waugh, but that's cause I saw him at his peak whereas with Miandad I only caught the last few years.

I doubt if a poll is added here , Miandad would be comfortably ahead.

 

[Last Monetarist]

I doubt if a poll is added here , Miandad would be comfortably ahead.

Poll added.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Purely as a batsman Mindad was better if you include all formats. Although Steve Waugh probably played one of the greatest ODI knocks of all time.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

IMO,
After Imran Khan, the greatest “cricketer” ever born was none other than Steve Waugh!

He was EVERYWHERE to create an absolutely devastating and decisive impact on the opposition.

Be it with the ball, with the bat, with the fielding, with the intelligence, with game awareness, with great leadership skills, with elite professionalism or with having an absolute nerves of steel, you name it, and no one comes even close.

This guy was something else.

Again,
In my opinion, THE GREATEST “CRICKETER” ever born after IK.

 

[Spin Master]

Tier 1:- Tendulkar, Viv, Lara, Sobers

Tier 1.5:- Gavaskar, Ponting, Chappell

Tier 2:- Kallis, S Waugh, Miandad, Dravid, Sangakkara

So, both same level. But Steve Waugh gets an edge on overall front considering his captaincy and bowling.

Kallis in my opinion is the best all rounder of all time and you are putting him in Tier 3. Wow.

And it's a blasphemy (not for Indians) to put Viv & Tendulkar in the same tier. There is/was no batsman like Viv.

 

[gazza619]

IMO,
After Imran Khan, the greatest “cricketer” ever born was none other than Steve Waugh!

He was EVERYWHERE to create an absolutely devastating and decisive impact on the opposition.

Be it with the ball, with the bat, with the fielding, with the intelligence, with game awareness, with great leadership skills, with elite professionalism or with having an absolute nerves of steel, you name it, and no one comes even close.

This guy was something else.

Again,
In my opinion, THE GREATEST “CRICKETER” ever born after IK.

Not being unfair here to Waugh but it does help when you are playing in a team where pretty much the whole 15 member squad are ATGs?

 

[MesonK]

I would call them incomparable because of generation gap, they never faced same opposition at their respective peaks. Javed batted in a more fragile batting lineup of Pakistan in 80s while Waugh had to face wrath of 2WW's, WI's and SAfrican attacks 90s.

Btw Lol at few Indians trying to use backdoor ways to put Gavaskar tiers ahead of Javed. Few more pages on this thread and we may find Pujara placed above both Javed and Waugh

 

[PakPremi]

Miandad easily as a batsman in any format. Steve Waugh was just dogged but Miandad was craftsman. Miandad received no more favours from home umpires that batsmen from other countries. I have seen batsmen get away with plumb lbws time and time again from all countries. One particular series was England's batsmen Gatting and Botham against Pakistan. West Indies atta k of 80s was also more fearsome as a unit than in 90s. Miandad was often the Lone fighter in Pak fragile batting team in overseas conditions.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Not being unfair here to Waugh but it does help when you are playing in a team where pretty much the whole 15 member squad are ATGs?

Waugh played in some fairly poor to decent Australian sides till 1997. His performances in that period were exceptional. That team truly become legendary by the end of Mark Taylor's captaincy stint.

 

[Ab Fan]

Kallis in my opinion is the best all rounder of all time and you are putting him in Tier 3. Wow.

And it's a blasphemy (not for Indians) to put Viv & Tendulkar in the same tier. There is/was no batsman like Viv.

It is a batsman list.

Viv averages 50 in tests, Tendulkar averages 53. Viv didn't faced his own country's pace attack while Tendulkar faced bowling attack everywhere.

 

[Titan24]

Waugh was one of the best captains in history but, in batting especially in ODIs I dont see much comparison. In ODIs one just cant compare both how hard one tries and in tests Waugh in my opinion misses out big time on lack of big innings but, was nevertheless a quality bat in his peak.

In tests taking into account an important indicator in my opinion no of 200s (Big innings), Miandad has scored 6 which are the 9th most in history of test cricket while Waugh scored just one and played around 40 more matches. Also Waugh has one of the lowest 4th innings test averages in history of cricket as the stats in OP show.

While Steve Waugh was a top test batsman and a outstanding leader and I was a fan but Miandad takes it purely as a batsman by some distance if we consider both the formats and ability to play big test innings.

In ODIs Miandad was one of the best in his era with an avg of 41 while Steve Waugh averaged 32 so I am really missing the comparison in the format.

If captaincy is a big parameter in terms impact in the comparison then Waugh would definitely easily take the game away from some top players in the era in subcontinent as well as from SENA countries.

 

[burger_uno]

there is an aussie legend who is in the same league as miandad and that legend is not steve waugh.

border rather than waugh is the aussie equivalent of miandad. and i would rate border ahead of s.w. it was a.b. who singlehandedly flew the flag of aussie side which was in doldrums for most of the 80s after retirement of lillie, marsh and chappel in tandem. the groundwork that a.b. laid contributed to the emergence of the great aussie side of the 90s. due to packer driven player absence, a.b. had to take charge pretty much from the start of his career. from that point on, he continued to perform at a very high level despite inconsistent support from others. unlike a.b, s.w. was a passenger during the early part of his career. s.w's performance went up to the next level when he figured out what it would take to succeed at the highest level. he then put in the hard yards to get there. his task was made easier due to emergence of a number of world class players in the aussie team from late 80's/early 90s. These players, more often than not, put opposition on the backfoot which eased pressure on s.w. s.w. got opportunity to find his feet due to lack of competition for places at that time. more than likely he would not have the same chances had he debuted 10 years later.

i also think s.w's saintly post retirement reputation overlooks some of his dirty deeds. under his captaincy, aussies took sledging to the next ugly level. waugh himself was capable of playing dirty when it suited him. his claiming of the the lara dropped catch at the critical juncture during the famous 1995 series became a huge talking point. the series outcome could have been completely different if lara had lived to fight another day. in comparison, border enjoyed an unblemished reputation and its hard to imagine his team resorting to sledging.

now to miandad, his appearance was game changer for pak. miandad was from the wrong side of the tracks. his approach was different from that of other pakistani batsmen who were more talented but lacked steel. players like zaheer abbas and asif iqbal were easier on the eye but they lacked self belief and killer instinct. county cricket was the ipl of that time and pakistani players played in a manner expected of an english gent because those players wanted county contracts. miandad did not buy that which is why the english cricketing press/establishment did not look too kindly upon him. did not matter to miandad. he played to win and his desire to succeed took his career and the team to next level. obviously having imran in the team was a big plus. together, the two legends put pakistan on pathway to success. their achievements enabled cricket to expand beyond narrow heartland while inspiring the golden generation of the 90s.

as for maindad's career, it is right there with the best - without any blemishes or holes. miandad learnt his cricket on dead/matted karachi wickets where he faced pacers who barely touched 80mph. from there, he had to face the likes of holding, roberts and garner without a helmet. adjustment took time. he also made things difficult by refusing to wear a helmet for the longest time until he got seriously injured during an exhibition in india. he compensated for his lack of performance against w.i. by scoring back to back 100s in w.i. in 1988. this contribution enabled pak to draw a series in w.i. which none of his great batting rivals managed to accomplish. cricket is a team game and individual records only matter when they lead to team success.

i can also understand why indians would downplay miandad's accomplishments. miandad was to india what kohli currently is to pakistan. due to kohli's performances against pakistan, pakistani players have already lost the mental battle when they step on to the field against india. miandad had the similar impact on india. plus unlike kohli, miandad beat india in india in both test as well as odi.

overall miandad had the game to adapt to any situation as demonstrated by his test and odi record. for example, miandad played 21 odis against w.i. in australia while avg 38. around 17 years after debut, miandad scored a run a ball 60 against marshall and amborse in a match where rameez got 100 from 150 balls. miandad topped this by scoring 50 in the next match which resulted in a pak victory. just for illustration, border odi avg against w.i. at home is below 30.

like border, miandad was the mainstay of pakistani line-up in an era where rameez managed to play over 50 test matches while scoring two centuries. but more than his batting, it was his attitude which drove pak cricket to its highest point. players like that come once in a generation and pak cricket will forever be in the debt of the legend.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Not being unfair here to Waugh but it does help when you are playing in a team where pretty much the whole 15 member squad are ATGs?

And that’s why I stated “great leadership skills”. How intimidating and powerful of an impact one needs to have to effectively command an entire squad of legends for almost a decade?

But more over, in many instances whether it was with the ball or bat or with the fielding, it was Waugh who made the difference while all those legends were left looking at him.

Personally, I can’t stress enough to say how great of a cricketer he was!

 

[Mamoon]

Waugh was one of the best captains in history but, in batting especially in ODIs I dont see much comparison. In ODIs one just cant compare both how hard one tries and in tests Waugh in my opinion misses out big time on lack of big innings but, was nevertheless a quality bat in his peak.

In tests taking into account an important indicator in my opinion no of 200s (Big innings), Miandad has scored 6 which are the 9th most in history of test cricket while Waugh scored just one and played around 40 more matches. Also Waugh has one of the lowest 4th innings test averages in history of cricket as the stats in OP show.

While Steve Waugh was a top test batsman and a outstanding leader and I was a fan but Miandad takes it purely as a batsman by some distance if we consider both the formats and ability to play big test innings.

In ODIs Miandad was one of the best in his era with an avg of 41 while Steve Waugh averaged 32 so I am really missing the comparison in the format.

If captaincy is a big parameter in terms impact in the comparison then Waugh would definitely easily take the game away from some top players in the era in subcontinent as well as from SENA countries.

Waugh was the first batsman in history to score a 150+ against every Test team. It is an achievement worth mentioning when talking about the lack of 200+ scores by Waugh.

Overall, I would pick Miandad but purely in Test cricket, it is certainly close. Waugh was the third best Test batsman of the 90’s after Tendulkar and Lara and he was the glue that held the batting for Australia in some very weak periods.

I personally do not put much stock into 4th innings averages and I believe it is any overrated metric because the vast majority of Test matches are decided in the first two innings.

A batsman who consistently scores in the first innings will put his team in a match-winning position more often than someone who fails in the first innings and then turns up in the fourth innings, which is often too late.

A batsman who averages 60 in the first innings and 35 in the fourth innings is going to win more matches for his team than someone who averages 35 in the first innings and 60 in the fourth innings.

You score big in the first innings and your chances of losing the match are diminished considerably.

 

[Mamoon]

Waugh came into his own as Test batsman from 1993 onwards and during this period, he scored runs at almost an average of 70 in the first and second innings of a Test match.

This clearly illustrates how influential he was and how many matches he set up for Australia by scoring big in their first innings.

A batsman who regularly goes big in the first innings and takes the team to 400+ is one of the biggest match-winners that you can possibly have.

It is interesting to note that while Miandad has a very high first innings average, his second innings average drops to 40s which suggests that he did not respond well to scoreboard pressure.

Steve Smith averages 87 in the first innings and 60 in the second innings, which solidifies his status as the greatest Test batsman since Bradman. A true match-winner in the format. Unbelievable batsman.

Miandad’s fourth innings average is actually better by Shoaib Malik of all people, which reinforces the idea that fourth innings runs and records are often worthy of being overlooked because the match is often done and dusted by that point.

 

[Titan24]

Waugh was the first batsman in history to score a 150+ against every Test team. It is an achievement worth mentioning when talking about the lack of 200+ scores by Waugh.

Overall, I would pick Miandad but purely in Test cricket, it is certainly close. Waugh was the third best Test batsman of the 90’s after Tendulkar and Lara and he was the glue that held the batting for Australia in some very weak periods.

I personally do not put much stock into 4th innings averages and I believe it is any overrated metric because the vast majority of Test matches are decided in the first two innings.

A batsman who consistently scores in the first innings will put his team in a match-winning position more often than someone who fails in the first innings and then turns up in the fourth innings, which is often too late.

A batsman who averages 60 in the first innings and 35 in the fourth innings is going to win more matches for his team than someone who averages 35 in the first innings and 60 in the fourth innings.

You score big in the first innings and your chances of losing the match are diminished considerably.

Fair points raised. Waugh was without a doubt a top test batsman and I agree that if we talk about tests alone than its quite close.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Steve Waugh was more impactful.. in most of the conditions around the world.
Miandad was also very gritty.. .so a close call.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A fantastic leader and a terrific batter — we look back at the career of Steve Waugh on <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICCHallOfFame?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ICCHallOfFame</a>, on his birthday &#55357;&#56399;<br><br>More &#55357;&#56573;️ <a href="https://t.co/hnbn7WSLsa">https://t.co/hnbn7WSLsa</a> <a href="https://t.co/1kDAJ8AbWW">pic.twitter.com/1kDAJ8AbWW</a></p>— ICC (@ICC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ICC/status/1400044601793302528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 2, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Majid Khan]

Waugh came into his own as Test batsman from 1993 onwards and during this period, he scored runs at almost an average of 70 in the first and second innings of a Test match.

This clearly illustrates how influential he was and how many matches he set up for Australia by scoring big in their first innings.

A batsman who regularly goes big in the first innings and takes the team to 400+ is one of the biggest match-winners that you can possibly have.

It is interesting to note that while Miandad has a very high first innings average, his second innings average drops to 40s which suggests that he did not respond well to scoreboard pressure.

Steve Smith averages 87 in the first innings and 60 in the second innings, which solidifies his status as the greatest Test batsman since Bradman. A true match-winner in the format. Unbelievable batsman.

Miandad’s fourth innings average is actually better by Shoaib Malik of all people, which reinforces the idea that fourth innings runs and records are often worthy of being overlooked because the match is often done and dusted by that point.

Not sure I agree about the argument that Miandad’s or for that matter any batsman having lower second innings average necessarily just being related to how well they handle pressure. An even bigger factor when it comes to batting in second innings in test matches back then especially would be spinning / turning wickets like those Miandad would have played most his cricket on in late 70s/80s era , It was almost expected that teams would score considerably less in 2nd innings on most occasions, on a worn out pitch with ball turning square. And also depends on the type of batsman, for example Miandad would often play differently with the tail and lower order batsmen freeing himself to play shots or take risky singles/twos to get the strike which would make him easier to dismiss in a situation like that , then someone like Shoaib Malik who was content mostly to be the guy ‘not out’ at the end , letting tailenders face the heat and boost his own average walking away with a nothing special 33 not out.

Waugh and Miandad were both fine batsmen and about as mentally tough as they come.

 

[cricket4all]

I would definitely go for Javed in terms of mental strength, reading the game and his ‘ mind games / psychology / banter’ with the opposition.

Viv Richards once said if he’d have to choose one batsman to bat for his life it would be Javed Miandad.

Steve Waugh wasn’t too far behind and a better leader and captain who could soak up the pressure.

 

[Golden arm]

I used to think of Miandad as the best ever batter from Asia and second only to Richards among players I have seen. Now I think of him a little less highly - average 39 against WI. 61 at home and 48 abroad, because he was immune to the lbw rule at home.

Waugh was pretty uniform in performance home and away and against all-comers. Plus he got 92 test wickets including three michelles.

Miandad was Imran’s tactical brain in the field which is a positive for him. Waugh won a lot of tests but did have a champion team.

So I’ll pick Tugga.

You are ignoring Australian umpires bias here
They were super biased
I remember comment from late Bob Wooler when he coached Pakistan
He commented and I quoted the Australian umpires favoured their home team 22 to 9 in grey decisions which means they were more likely to favour australians 3x than home team

Do you remember Justin Langer when the umpire didn't budge where as that nick was heard even by the spectators and ultimately Pakistan lost the game

The moral is neutral umpiring has changed the status of decision making all over the world

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

This is a very hard comparison. Well done OP.

I can't tell who is better. Both played all kinds of mean bowling line ups and both played in top teams.

Both had difficulties against some teams - Miandad averaged 30 against WI's great attack and Waugh averaged 33 against Pakistan's attack. Miandad also averaged 29 against Zimbabwe

Both suffer from the problem that if they were prettier batsmen, they would be ranked much higher by pundits - even though they averaged 50+ in an era with some of the meanest bowling in history.

 

[Ab Fan]

Steve Waugh. His career coincided with the greatest pace bowlers the game has ever seen.

Moreover, he was a great leader, more than just a part timer and a really tough competitor on field. He is basically Kallis level as cricketer and that puts him a tier ahead of Miandad perhaps.