Who was the better bowler between Wasim Akram and Richard Hadlee?

[Harsh Thakor]

The differerence between Wasim Akram and Richard Hadlee was like that of chalk and cheese.Such was the variation in their bowling styles.Hadlee was a perfect machine resembling a computer while Wasim was the ultimate exponent of wizardry like a magician.Hadlee displayed control at it's highest zenith while Wasim took bowling art to regions of the sublime.Wasim was more versatile and quicker ,Hadlee more accurate posessing more control.Wasim was more deceptive but Hadlee was a more intelligent reader of a great batsmen's weaknesses.Wasim was champion on flat panckaes while Hadlee was the ultimate man on green tops.In the end maybe even a whsiker did not seperate the 2 giants.


In Test cricket in terms of figures Hadlee was clearly ahead if you ***** strike rate,averages and no of 5/10 wkt.hauls.For a great part of his career Wasim's average and strike rate matched that of Hadlee but not the 5/10wkt.hauls.Wasim above all had the supporet of greats like Waqar.Mushtaq,Imran and Saqlain while Hadlee single-handedly bore the brunt of a weak pace attack.Hadlee had a better average in matches won.


In ODI's Wasim was clearly the winner.Arguably no paceman would ever surpass Wasim's strike rate in ODI's.502 scalps at around 23 is a phenomenal achievement.Hdalee was more economical but not as penetrative or volatile.

On merit of pure bowling skill Akram would rank the more complete bowler with his incredible variety and mastery of reverse swing.Viv Richards or Gavaskar would find facing Wasim a more daunting task than Hadlee.Hadlee benefited from playing a lot of his cricket on green top sin New Zealand and Australia and in seaming English conditions.Wasim captured half his scalps on flat sub-continent tracks.Wasim also bowled in era when effective headgear was introduced for batsmen and law on restriction of 2 bouncers an over enforced.More challenging to bowl to a Gavaskar or Viv Richards with a helmet.Maybe playing so much alongside another great like Waqar marginally reduced Wasim's total test scalps and best figures.With so may ODI's taking place I feel Wasim's era was the more challenging for a paceman.Wasim has a greater percentage of test scalps in wins but of course played for a considerably better team.Wasim in peak era from 1990-98 performed better in terms of average than stalwarts like Waqar ,Ambrose and Donald which is remarkable.Had

If I had a gun on my head even in pure test cricket I would chose Wasim Akram over Richard Hadlee as a pace bowler.Hadlee may take more wickets but I always feel Wasim would be the more lethal particularly on flat tracks tailor made for batsmen.In an all-time test xi by the slenderest of margins I would choose Wasim over Richard if I had to chose between the 2.Similar to picking Marshall over Mcgrath.Wasim virtually took bowling art to a higher dimension ,taking creativity to regions never traversed by Hadlee was just nosed by Imran in terms of bowling average in peak era while Marshal very marginally overshadowed him from 1983-91.No mean feat Wasim overshadowing Ambrose by margin of 5 runs in strike rate and edging Waqar in terms of bowling average .

COMPARITIVE FIGURES

Statistics compiled from S.Rajesh from cricinfo

WASIM AKRAM FIGURES

BEST TEST BOWLERS BETWEEN JAN 1990 AND DEC 1997 (QUAL: 150 WICKETS)
Bowler Tests Wickets Average Strike Rate 5WI/ 10WM
Wasim Akram 48 240 20.05 46.4 16/ 3
Curtly Ambrose 57 247 20.50 52.8 17/ 3
Waqar Younis 46 232 21.23 40.1 19/ 4
Allan Donald 36 171 23.27 48.8 9/ 2
Glenn McGrath 36 164 23.42 53.0 9/ 0
Shane Warne 62 289 24.08 62.9 12/ 3


AKRAM'S ODI CAREER
Period Matches Wickets Average Econ Rate 4+ Wkts
Till Dec 1991 107 143 23.97 3.84 5
Jan 1992 - Dec 1997 131 198 21.86 3.76 14
Jan 1998 Onwards 118 161 25.17 4.09 4
Career 356 502 23.52 3.89 23




RICHARD HADLEE FIGURES

BEST TEST BOWLERS BETWEEN JAN 1978 AND DEC 1988 (QUAL: 150 WICKETS)
Bowler Tests Wickets Average Strike Rate 5WI/ 10WM
Imran Khan 58 272 19.39 47.8 19/ 5
Richard Hadlee 60 330 19.57 48.4 32/ 8
Joel Garner 53 234 20.27 50.6 7/ 0
Malcolm Marshall 61 300 20.88 45.8 18/ 3


BEST AVERAGES IN TEST WINS (QUAL: 150 WICKETS)
Bowler Tests Wickets Average Strike Rate 5WI/ 10WM
Richard Hadlee 22 173 13.06 33.5 17/ 8
Imran Khan 26 155 14.50 38.3 11/ 6
Muttiah Muralitharan 53 430 16.03 42.6 40/ 18
Malcolm Marshall 43 254 16.78 38.1 17/ 4


RICHARD HADLEE AS AN ODI BOWLER
Period ODIs Wickets Average Econ Rate Strike Rate
Till Dec 1981 34 38 27.89 3.31 50.5
Jan 1982 Onwards 81 120 19.55 3.30 35.5
Career 115 158 21.56 3.30 39.1
Among bowlers who took at least 100 ODI wickets till 1990, Hadlee averaged fourth, with only Joel Garner, Dennis Lillee and Michael Holding doing better. The last World Cup he played was in 1983, and he finished with an exceptional record in the tournament, conceding only 2.88 runs per over in 13 matches.


LOWEST BOWLING AVERAGES AMONG ODI BOWLERS TILL 1990 (QUAL: 100 WICKETS)
Bowler ODIs Wickets Average Econ Rate Strike Rate
Joel Garner 98 146 18.84 3.09 36.5
Dennis Lillee 63 103 20.82 3.58 34.8
Michael Holding 102 142 21.36 3.32 38.5
Richard Hadlee 115 158 21.56 3.30 39.1

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

This is easy actually
Akram for odi- my first name of pacer in any odi XI
Richard Hadlee for test- single handly won NEw Zealand so many matches.

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

Akram in ODIs and Hadlee in tests.

Some of Hadlee's stats in tests are mindblowing, especially his record in Australia: 77 wickets in 12 tests @ an average of 17, with 10 5fers! 10 5fers in 12 tests

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Akram in ODIs and Hadlee in tests.

Some of Hadlee's stats in tests are mindblowing, especially his record in Australia: 77 wickets in 12 tests @ an average of 17, with 10 5fers! 10 5fers in 12 tests

Study peak era.not only figures but competitivity of era and consider that greats like Lara,Tendulkar and Ponting had protective headgear unlike the 1980's.In peak era,unlike Hadlee Wasim had the best average.Anyway stats dont tell the story.***** conditions Wasim bowled in when he took 400 scalps and what opponents said about facing him.Great batsmen found Wasim more daunting than Hadlee.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

Study peak era.not only figures but competitivity of era and consider that greats like Lara,Tendulkar and Ponting had protective headgear unlike the 1980's.In peak era,unlike Hadlee Wasim had the best average.Anyway stats dont tell the story.***** conditions Wasim bowled in when he took 400 scalps and what opponents said about facing him.Great batsmen found Wasim more daunting than Hadlee.

Akram was the most complete bowler of all time, there is not a single thing which he can't do. But he under achieved big time.
Not having even 4 wicket per match and he never became number 1 for even brief period of time in test matches is a huge hole of his career If I am not wrong even his peak rating is less than 830.
Akram could have been the greatest test bowler of all time but sadly he is not even the top from Pakistan.

 

[ManFan]

Akram is overrated in Tests.

That's a harsh way of looking at someone with 400+ wickets.

Hadlee was supreme, in control and longevity. Plus, even without reverse swing, he averaged below 22 in Asia.

That is insane!

 

[Ab Fan]

Hadlee in tests, Akram in odis.

Overall, dunno.

 

[Godhelpma]

Akram in Odis and overall , while Hadlee in tests .
But Hadlee ‘s stats are inflated by bowling in favourable conditions , and being the lone wicket taking guy in team .

 

[Bewal Express]

Hadlee was a better bowler in tests and Akram in ODI cricket.

 

[Robert]

Akram in ODIs and Hadlee in tests.

Some of Hadlee's stats in tests are mindblowing, especially his record in Australia: 77 wickets in 12 tests @ an average of 17, with 10 5fers! 10 5fers in 12 tests

Bear in mind that he faced some really weak Australian sides in the mid eighties, shorn of Greg Chappell and the SAB tour rebels. Even England, who were dreadful from 1984 to 1990, managed to beat Australia home and away.

I would say Hadlee and Wasim were about equal with the ball.

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

Bear in mind that he faced some really weak Australian sides in the mid eighties, shorn of Greg Chappell and the SAB tour rebels. Even England, who were dreadful from 1984 to 1990, managed to beat Australia home and away.

I would say Hadlee and Wasim were about equal with the ball.

I agre that the 80s Aus lineup was weak but 10 5fers in 12 tests is insane regardless of strength of opposition.

 

[last_knight]

Akram is overrated in Tests.

That's a harsh way of looking at someone with 400+ wickets.

Hadlee was supreme, in control and longevity. Plus, even without reverse swing, he averaged below 22 in Asia.

That is insane!

Diabetes, my lord, is a devastating condition and Akram is underrated because ppl don't weigh his achievements in prospect to diabetes.

 

[ManFan]

Diabetes, my lord, is a devastating condition and Akram is underrated because ppl don't weigh his achievements in prospect to diabetes.

He was diagnosed with diabetes in 97'.

For him to play Tests, that would require 15+ insulin injections as he took 3 for one days worth of Test cricket. That's a lot since my Dad only recently started taking 2 and its a massive burden on him.

Considering that he achieved his peak in 89-90' AUS, he was very lazy in Tests from 90' to 97'. That's not to say he was ineffective as most of the times he played on dead pitches but his best bowling figures in Tests are 7/119.

That says it all, in that, it doesn't really say much about his ability and impact in Test cricket.

 

[Hitman]

Hadlee in Tests, Akram in ODI's. Some people might not be a fan of Hadlee's style of bowling since he was a metronome. But no one can argue that he yielded supreme results as a bowler in Tests.

Regardless, rating one of them ahead of the other doesn't mean the gap is huge. Both are genuine ATG's and the gap between them is minuscule.

 

[WildSwing]

Hadlee in tests

Akram in odis

Overall Hadlee

 

[last_knight]

He was diagnosed with diabetes in 97'.

For him to play Tests, that would require 15+ insulin injections as he took 3 for one days worth of Test cricket. That's a lot since my Dad only recently started taking 2 and its a massive burden on him.

Considering that he achieved his peak in 89-90' AUS, he was very lazy in Tests from 90' to 97'. That's not to say he was ineffective as most of the times he played on dead pitches but his best bowling figures in Tests are 7/119.

That says it all, in that, it doesn't really say much about his ability and impact in Test cricket.

Was diagnosed in 97 but probably had diabetes few years before diagnosis. And Akram continued to remain match-fit during these grey years when he probably had diabetes and wasn't on pills/insulin. That itself is a victory.

 

[Buffet]

I will take Hadlee.

 

[Justcrazy]

In test Haddle , but in OD wasim by a big margin.

 

[PakLFC]

Hadlee for me. He bowled at better quality batsman as well without a classy partner helping him out. Hadlee also had much better line and length then Waz who was often all over the place. Waz although at his prime was faster, no doubt about it. I much prefer good line and length over raw pace. Hadlee was past his prime when one day Cricket in coloured clothing really hit off, he was also a much better batsman then Waz.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Hadlee easily. Akram is massively overrated in tests. He isn't even anuwhere as good as Imran, Hadlee was better than Imran.

 

[Robert]

I agre that the 80s Aus lineup was weak but 10 5fers in 12 tests is insane regardless of strength of opposition.

Pretty similar to Botham’s first twelve tests in which he took 70 wickets at 17 each, striking every 41 balls. And that was with Willis and Underwood in the team to take wickets.

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

Pretty similar to Botham’s first twelve tests in which he took 70 wickets at 17 each, striking every 41 balls. And that was with Willis and Underwood in the team to take wickets.

True, and that Botham run is acknowledged as one of the great peaks isn't it?

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

Wasim, overall.
Hadlee test.

 

[Hasan123]

I'll take Wasim overall.

 

[andy0204]

Bear in mind that he faced some really weak Australian sides in the mid eighties, shorn of Greg Chappell and the SAB tour rebels. Even England, who were dreadful from 1984 to 1990, managed to beat Australia home and away.

I would say Hadlee and Wasim were about equal with the ball.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/37224.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=1;home_or_away=2;opposition=2;orderby=default;season=1972%2F73;season=1973;season=1973%2F74;season=1975%2F76;season=1976%2F77;season=1977%2F78;season=1978;season=1978%2F79;season=1979%2F80;season=1980%2F81;season=1981%2F82;season=1982%2F83;season=1983;spanmax1=05+Jul+1983;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
this is the stats where hadlee and chappell played together and hadlee dismissed chappell six times.
Everytime i saw you in hadlees thread you always seem critical to him.

 

[Robert]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/37224.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=1;home_or_away=2;opposition=2;orderby=default;season=1972%2F73;season=1973;season=1973%2F74;season=1975%2F76;season=1976%2F77;season=1977%2F78;season=1978;season=1978%2F79;season=1979%2F80;season=1980%2F81;season=1981%2F82;season=1982%2F83;season=1983;spanmax1=05+Jul+1983;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
this is the stats where hadlee and chappell played together and hadlee dismissed chappell six times.
Everytime i saw you in hadlees thread you always seem critical to him.

Critical of him. Though really I am critical of the over-reliance on context-devoid stats in this place. I saw a lot of Sir Richard for Notts and NZ and he was excellent. He was like a spinner in that he bowled four leg-cutters per over, then a couple of other types of delivery - swing ball, or yorker, or faster bouncer. He got a lot of lift from his very smooth action which he copied from his hero Lillee.

If he had a weakness it was that hyper aggressive batters could get inside his head and knock him out of his groove, but this didn’t happen often. His book is revealing on the psychological processes he applied to improve his consistency. Perhaps the most single-minded of cricketers.

 

[andy0204]

Critical of him. Though really I am critical of the over-reliance on context-devoid stats in this place. I saw a lot of Sir Richard for Notts and NZ and he was excellent. He was like a spinner in that he bowled four leg-cutters per over, then a couple of other types of delivery - swing ball, or yorker, or faster bouncer. He got a lot of lift from his very smooth action which he copied from his hero Lillee.

If he had a weakness it was that hyper aggressive batters could get inside his head and knock him out of his groove, but this didn’t happen often. His book is revealing on the psychological processes he applied to improve his consistency. Perhaps the most single-minded of cricketers.

Stats do matter most of the times only in rare cases it doesnt matter.

 

[Kianig89]

Wasim Akram any day all day a complete bowler for all conditions flat wockets grassy wickets seam swing reverse swing open the bowling 1st change round the wicket over the wicket 1 slip 3 slips any type of field he is your man not to mention he was a good to very good category captain infact Akram was a dream bowler

Like in football you say a complete player holding role box to box player on the wings false nine poacher all in one :zidane

 

[Robert]

Stats do matter most of the times only in rare cases it doesnt matter.

I disagree. I saw Wasim bowl at Gooch who scored a hundred. Wasim beat him enough to get him out twenty times, and ended up with no wickets. Someone looking at the stats thirty years on will say that Wasim bowled badly and Gooch mastered him. But Wasim bowled brilliantly that day.

Another time I saw Botham take 5-40. Thirty years on someone will say Botham bowled well that day, but he bowled tripe, rank long-hops that should have been pulled for four but instead they took wickets.

 

[Justcrazy]

Haddle was very steady consistent bowler , but Akram could produce magical balls , even on flat pitches , he could suddenly produce a jaffer .

 

[Pakistanian]

Akram by a country mile

 

[QalandarFan]

Wasim Akram for me hands down! Greatest bowler to lace a pair of boots.

 

[Zhasan]

Hands down Hadlee, man carried a mediocre team and their limited bowling reserves on his lone shoulders, plus was highest wicket taker with one of the best averages ever when he retired and single handedly blew sides away to win his side test matches and series, something Wasim could never manage.

Wasim was carried by Imran in the earlier part of his and later relied on Waqar, Mushtaq, Saqlain and even Shoaib to carry him. Took higher percentage of lower order wickets then his contemporaries and never managed to take 10 wickets against the best sides of his era to take Pakistan to victory.

Plus Wasim was a convicted match fixer, his stats and record should come with a huge asterisk and can never be taken on face value.

 

[Zhasan]

I disagree. I saw Wasim bowl at Gooch who scored a hundred. Wasim beat him enough to get him out twenty times, and ended up with no wickets. Someone looking at the stats thirty years on will say that Wasim bowled badly and Gooch mastered him. But Wasim bowled brilliantly that day.

Another time I saw Botham take 5-40. Thirty years on someone will say Botham bowled well that day, but he bowled tripe, rank long-hops that should have been pulled for four but instead they took wickets.

Stats do tell part of the story, Botham's atrocious average speaks for itself, hence cannot be considered an all time great bowler, unlike his two contemporaries, Imran and Hadlee.

Similarly Akram's inability to dominate the best of his era (something his mentor Imran consistently did throughout his career), slightly high average, high percentage of lower order wickets and lack of 10-wicket hauls against top teams in winning causes, puts him in the second tier of all time bowlers.

 

[Robert]

Stats do tell part of the story, Botham's atrocious average speaks for itself, hence cannot be considered an all time great bowler, unlike his two contemporaries, Imran and Hadlee.

Similarly Akram's inability to dominate the best of his era (something his mentor Imran consistently did throughout his career), slightly high average, high percentage of lower order wickets and lack of 10-wicket hauls against top teams in winning causes, puts him in the second tier of all time bowlers.

28 is hardly atrocious, it’s Anderson/Broad territory. Four bowlers averaging 28 will win you a lot of tests. Botham kept being picked long after he stopped being effective in tests, and that messed his figures up. He was a very good test bowler who was a great all-rounder, and he held the test wicket record for a while.

I agree with your Wasim point.

 

[Junaids]

Pretty much equal in Tests.

Hadlee was a slower version of Dennis Lillee.

Wasim Akram was basically a clone of Alan Davidson: identical to Davo as a bowler but not as good with the bat.

 

[MMHS]

I’ll take Wasim for Test and ODI definitely. Stats actually doesn’t tell what was Wasim Akram at peak. RJH was outstanding in Australia, but no one can match Wasim Akram of MCG 1991 - got 11 and at least 11 more were dropped of his bowling. Richie Benaud had seen everyone since WW2 from Bedsar to Marshall (it was 1991, so not Ambi, MAC & Donald yet) and played against Truman, Wes Hall, Statham, Fazal ... on that MCG Test for judging MoM, his pick was Wasim and he justified with one comment - in my lifetime a had never seen a bowler bowling so many unplayable balls in one game.

Aussies normally don’t praise foreigners (cricketers), and least said about Ian Chappell is better - he was asked about the best fast bowler. His response was - best I have played against - John Snow; best I have seen DK Lillee. With a pause he did mention that at his peak Wasim Akram probably is as good as it can be.

Between 1989 to 1996, Wasim was undoubtedly the best fast bowler of the world before diabetics caught him and he himself also allowed few other people catching him outside cricket. His last greatness was probably 1997 WSC - simply unplayable and he made teams grovel chasing scores like 170!!! Even in 2001, his 11 wickets at Antigua was a master piece of skill, guile and cunningness, mixed with pace variation and cutters.

 

[Romali_rotti]

I will take Wasim, because he was just more exciting to watch....

 

[big_gamer007]

Wasim was the better bowler.. He is arguably the best bowler to have ever played the game. However for all the talent he had he couldn't perform to the level he should have.. That's why people will rate few bowlers above him because of performances

However as far as bowling skills go Wasim was the best bowler to have ever played the game..

 

[topspin]

Pretty much equal in Tests.

Hadlee was a slower version of Dennis Lillee.

Wasim Akram was basically a clone of Alan Davidson: identical to Davo as a bowler but not as good with the bat.

With all due respect to the Aussie, he's a nobody compared to Wasim Akram. But I don't blame you, if I was a member of the old era hype brigade, I would also say the same.

 

[Ab Fan]

I will pick Wasim but Hadlee was a legend himself. Both right up there as the top five bowlers of all-time.

In no particular order, 10 names:-

Aus:-

McGrath
Lillee

SA:-

Steyn
Donald

NZ:-

Hadlee

Pak:-

Wasim
Imran

WI:-

Marshall
Ambrose

Eng:-

Barnes

 

[andy0204]

I will pick Wasim but Hadlee was a legend himself. Both right up there as the top five bowlers of all-time.

In no particular order, 10 names:-

Aus:-

McGrath
Lillee

SA:-

Steyn
Donald

NZ:-

Hadlee

Pak:-

Wasim
Imran

WI:-

Marshall
Ambrose

Eng:-

Barnes

No doubt barnes was the greatest but bob willis was greatest bowler for england in last 40 years