Would you swap Imran Khan for Sachin Tendulkar?

[ziggy]

Well would you? or for anyone of our other greats

 

[Mamoon]

Not Imran, but I'd swap all our batting greats in a second.

Hanif, Zaheer, Miandad, Inzamam, Yousuf, Younis etc are nothing compared to Tendulkar.

He has the strongest case of being the best batsman to ever live, along with Bradman.

 

[amax]

No,not with our top fast bowlers.

 

[akheR]

No, and I think it depends on the cricketing culture of both nations, Pak preferring fast bowlers, and a genuine strike bowler is always more important than a good batsman in the Test format, so I'd take the double Ws and perhaps even before SRT.

 

[Major]

Why not swap him for Kallis, who avgs more and could bowl....


OP you need to understand that Tendulkar and Imran are complete different players. Tendulkar cannot provide the kind of bowling that Imran could, plus the captaincy is an advantage.

 

[talha3]

Probably anyone except Imran.

 

[Mamoon]

No, and I think it depends on the cricketing culture of both nations, Pak preferring fast bowlers, and a genuine strike bowler is always more important than a good batsman in the Test format, so I'd take the double Ws and perhaps even before SRT.

What have we achieved in Test cricket that India hasn't?

Since strike bowlers are more important than good batsmen?

 

[AZ]

what an absolutely revolting suggestion.

 

[Buffet]

I think such questions are not fair. Fans of any country take pride in their best cricketers. Swapping them is not only about their skills and standing in history of cricket. On top of that , IK is also rated high up there. If you add that with pride etc, then the answer of most fans is obvious.

 

[Robert]

Well would you? or for anyone of our other greats

I'd take Imran ahead of anyone else ever, except Bradman and Sobers.

 

[akheR]

What have we achieved in Test cricket that India hasn't?

Since strike bowlers are more important than good batsmen?

The overall Test W/L ratio shows that we had more than decent batsmen and more than decent bowlers, in the latter dept. India lacked some juice.

 

[zaid65]

Despite being a big Imran Khan fan, I would made this deal.

Lack of batting talent is always an issues with Pakistani team and we are always good in producing the bowling talent. Having a Sachin in Pakistan could have make us produce more batting talent for next generations. On the other hand, country is rich in bowing resources and could have found another fast bowler easily. Sachin is once in a life time talent.

Imran Khan could have solved India's long last bowling issue and this trade could have served both the countries in well direction.

 

[Mamoon]

overall W/L ratio doesn't portray the true picture.

We started winning matches soon after we formed our team unlike India.

In the modern era, what special have we achieved. let's not go back to fifties and sixties because the likes of Wasim, Waqar and Akhtar weren't even born then.

India won in England which we can do so in our dreams only.

They were the only team to show steel to Waugh's Australia while we were the ultimate punching bags.

So much for having strike bowlers.

 

[srh]

Despite being a big Imran Khan fan, I would made this deal.

Lack of batting talent is always an issues with Pakistani team and we are always good in producing the bowling talent. Having a Sachin in Pakistan could have make us produce more batting talent for next generations. On the other hand, country is rich in bowing resources and could have found another fast bowler easily. Sachin is once in a life time talent.

Imran Khan could have solved India's long last bowling issue and this trade could have served both the countries in well direction.

If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.

 

[akheR]

overall W/L ratio doesn't portray the true picture.

We started winning matches soon after we formed our team unlike India.

In the modern era, what special have we achieved. let's not go back to fifties and sixties because the likes of Wasim, Waqar and Akhtar weren't even born then.

India won in England which we can do so in our dreams only.

They were the only team to show steel to Waugh's Australia while we were the ultimate punching bags.

So much for having strike bowlers.

Why not ? Fazal Mahmood single handedly won us our first Test in England in our first tour there (1954, two years after getting our Test status), in what was one of the earliest upsets in Test cricket, as we went on to level the series 1-1 (4) against a cricketing powerhouse

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/62776.html

An ATG fast bowler is a better bet in Test cricket than an ATG batsman, that's just how I see it, you can talk about the India vs Australia in the 2000s like I could go on about Pak vs WI in the 80s, what remains a fact is the overall Test W/L, which shows that Pak has been a good team throughout history, probably a bit because of our batsmen (the likes of , Zaheer Abbas, ...) but where we got the edge over India was our pace battery.

 

[WebGuru]

India won in England which we can do so in our dreams only.

We drawn the first Test series we played against England in England in 1954 and also won 3 consecutive Test series against England in England from 1987 to 1996 and drawn 4th in 2001.

 

[Mamoon]

If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.

Imran didn't give birth to them, their parents did.

Sure he worked a lot on them but you can only polish a diamond, not a turd.

Same Imran failed to groom Aaqib Javed.

Wasim and Waqar were exceptionally gifted bowlers who would have been successful with or without Imran but the latter helped them groom quicker.

Its funny how Mr. perfect Imran gets to take credit over every good thing that has happened to Pakistan.

 

[zaid65]

If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.

I would still make this deal.

Look what Sachin gave to India. They used to be below mediocre team and now they are world beater and best part of Sachin is his durability. How mnay players you have seen playing game for this long with same amount of consistency and hunger?

 

[lilFlip]

Without seeing any stats etc. No!

I won't swap him for any other player!

 

[Mamoon]

Why not ? Fazal Mahmood single handedly won us our first Test in England in our first tour there (1954, two years after getting our Test status), in what was one of the earliest upsets in Test cricket, as we went on to level the series 1-1 (4) against a cricketing powerhouse

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/62776.html

An ATG fast bowler is a better bet in Test cricket than an ATG batsman, that's just how I see it, you can talk about the India vs Australia in the 2000s like I could go on about Pak vs WI in the 80s, what remains a fact is the overall Test W/L, which shows that Pak has been a good team throughout history, probably a bit because of our batsmen (the likes of , Zaheer Abbas, ...) but where we got the edge over India was our pace battery.

You mentioned modern era bowlers like Wasim, Waqar, Akhtar etc in comparison to modern era batsmen like India and that is why I mentioned the fact that all these strike bowlers didn't provide us with an upper hand compared to India's batting powered team.

They have achieved a lot more in the modern era compared to us.

 

[Mamoon]

We drawn the first Test series we played against England in England in 1954 and also won 3 consecutive Test series against England in England from 1987 to 1996 and drawn 4th in 2001.

Yeah but like I said, I was referring to the modern era.

 

[Buffet]

The overall Test W/L ratio shows that we had more than decent batsmen and more than decent bowlers, in the latter dept. India lacked some juice.

I think this table is not depicting accurate picture. India and Pakistan should share all records before partition. I will also exclude Zim/BD. Here is more accurate picture from 1948 when both countries were playing under two separate flags.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...1948;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Clearly, Pakistan( W/L = 0.96 -- 5th best) has done better than India( W/L = 0.75 -- 6th best).

 

[WebGuru]

Its funny how Mr. perfect Imran gets to take credit over every good thing that has happened to Pakistan.

Maybe you can ask this question to those retired pakistani cricketers or even cricketers from other countries like Ian Chappel, Boycott etc who played with Imran that why on earth they still praise him? not only for his own bowling/batting skills but for his captaincy, for giving chances to talented youngsters and polishing their skills etc

 

[akheR]

You mentioned modern era bowlers like Wasim, Waqar, Akhtar etc in comparison to modern era batsmen like India and that is why I mentioned the fact that all these strike bowlers didn't provide us with an upper hand compared to India's batting powered team.

They have achieved a lot more in the modern era compared to us.

Wasim and Waqar were bowlers of the 90s, what was Pakistan's record home/away in Tests and ODIs back then ?

And forget about team performances. Instinctively, if you had to think over making a Test XI right now, what would you take, an ATG bowler (who, optionally, could bat, as we talk about Immy) or an ATG batsman ?

 

[amax]

An ATG fast bowler is a better bet in Test cricket than an ATG batsman, that's just how I see it, you can talk about the India vs Australia in the 2000s like I could go on about Pak vs WI in the 80s, what remains a fact is the overall Test W/L, which shows that Pak has been a good team throughout history, probably a bit because of our batsmen (the likes of , Zaheer Abbas, ...) but where we got the edge over India was our pace battery.

+1, It took Sachin 14 years to win a test(2002) and 18 years(2007) to win a series outside subcontinent, despite performing exceptionally well throughout that period.

 

[salahudin]

Yeah but like I said, I was referring to the modern era.

Which modern era are you talking about? Am sure India just got whitewashed in England a few years ago

 

[Buffet]

Yeah but like I said, I was referring to the modern era.

Which modern era are you talking about?

Well, since we are talking about ATG bowlers Vs ATG batsmen making a difference so we can take records after Gavskar/IK debuted. India/Pakistan didn't have any ATG bowler or batsman before that.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...1971;spanval2=span;template=results;type=team

Pakistan( W/L - 1.03) has still done slightly better than India ( W/L - 0.92) in winning matches but you may be right about over all picture of wining test series.

• India played 102 Test series - Won 39
• Pakistan Played 101 Test Series - Won 38

I may have one or two series wrong here and there due to quickly scanning it but over all they seems comparable in winning test series.

 

[testcricketisbest]

Till 1947 both india and pakistan had same team so all loses which are added to indian account also are part of record for pakistan.

I would swap imran khan for tendulkar in heart beat, imran khan had is most success in pakistan with home umpiring and was ok in other countries .

If IK was such a great captain what was he doing in 1983 world cup and 1987 world cup where weaker teams than pakistan won world cups.

It was akram inzi javed who played more important role in 1992 world cup than IK but like Dhoni in 2011 he got the most credit.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

One word : NEVER!

 

[Buffet]

Till 1947 both india and pakistan had same team so all loses which are added to indian account also are part of record for pakistan.

I would swap imran khan for tendulkar in heart beat, imran khan had is most success in pakistan with home umpiring and was ok in other countries .

If IK was such a great captain what was he doing in 1983 world cup and 1987 world cup where weaker teams than pakistan won world cups.

IK surely has one of the best records at home but he was more than 'ok' while playing away. He averaged 25.76 at SR of 59.2. That's a very good record while playing away.

 

[akheR]

I would swap imran khan for tendulkar in heart beat, imran khan had is most success in pakistan with home umpiring and was ok in other countries .

If IK was such a great captain what was he doing in 1983 world cup and 1987 world cup where weaker teams than pakistan won world cups.

It was akram inzi javed who played more important role in 1992 world cup than IK but like Dhoni in 2011 he got the most credit.

Imran Khan has the best peak average in history of cricket, when he took +150 wickets @ -15, and a overall career average of 22.

His "worst" away average is 28 (some don't even have that for career average) and it's in India, I guess we can't blame the Indian umpires who of course are paragons of moral integrity, especially when it comes to Pakistan.
All the rest he averages 25 or under, his overall away average being 200 wickets @ 25.

In 1987 WC, he was the second highest wicket taker with 17 wickets @ 13 (Craig McDermott took 18 scalps @ 18).

About the 1992 WC (when he was more of a batsman - averaged +50 for the last years of his Test career), during the final against England in 1992, he came at #3 (only fourth time in his career) in order to rescue a Pakistan team languishing on 2-24, and built a worthy partnership with Javed Miandad (he made 72, highest score of the match) to take his team to a total of 249 - considering that Pakistan won by 22 runs, I'd say the knock was as valuable as Wasim Akram's all round show and Aaquib Javed's economical spell.

If you don't want to have a cricketer who, as Test captain, averaged +50 with the bat and -20 with the ball, that's your own loss.

 

[amax]

I would swap imran khan for tendulkar in heart beat, imran khan had is most success in pakistan

that home which because of dead pitches and hostile weather was considered graveyard for fast bowling, where all other countries in the region are struggling to produce just 1 fast bowler of note. He kick started a tradition when it was considered that Asians cannot bowl fast because of physique, weather etc etc. On the other hand Sachin played mostly on pitches favoring batting in a region where traditionally only batting was considered as cricket (btw I am not devaluing his great achievements)

 

[akheR]

that home which because of dead pitches and hostile weather was considered graveyard for fast bowling, where all other countries in the region are struggling to produce just 1 fast bowler of note. He kick started a tradition when it was considered that Asians cannot bowl fast because of physique, weather etc etc. On the other hand Sachin played mostly on pitches favoring batting in a region where traditionally only batting was considered as cricket (I am not devaluing his great achievements)

Forget about him, Immy has more wickets away than @ home, so much for "biased umpiring", and as if being on Pakistan's flat chappatis was every fast bowler's wet dream.
Also, when you try to sustain a long career on such pitches even if like Imran Khan or Wasim Akram (and unlike Vicky) you get your average right (generally no more under 25 though), it still screw your SR (which depends on your express pace in such conditions, unlike pitches in other countries where you can "afford" to keep a low SR by mechanic line & length strategy even after losing your venomous pace.)

 

[Bilal7]

Nope, not at all. Not only was Imran a superior cricketer to Tendulker, he was also the means through which Waqar, Wasim, Inzi, etc were groomed into legends.

 

[Bilal7]

Till 1947 both india and pakistan had same team so all loses which are added to indian account also are part of record for pakistan.

I would swap imran khan for tendulkar in heart beat, imran khan had is most success in pakistan with home umpiring and was ok in other countries .

If IK was such a great captain what was he doing in 1983 world cup and 1987 world cup where weaker teams than pakistan won world cups.

It was akram inzi javed who played more important role in 1992 world cup than IK but like Dhoni in 2011 he got the most credit.

There was no Pakistan back then, there was only India. The losses are thus correctly stamped onto India's W/L ratio.

 

[par]

Why would anybody want to swap a bowling all rounder with a batsman in the first place?

 

[tempus123]

There was no Pakistan back then, there was only India. The losses are thus correctly stamped onto India's W/L ratio.

What a good logic !!!

How about Fazal Mehmood then ? He was an Indian becasue he started playing FC cricket before 1947 ?

 

[tempus123]

Nope, not at all. Not only was Imran a superior cricketer to Tendulker, he was also the means through which Waqar, Wasim, Inzi, etc were groomed into legends.

superior cricketer ? I understand your reluctance to do so, but I hope it's your personal opinion about who is a superior cricketer and not a fact.

 

[akheR]

What a good logic !!!

How about Fazal Mehmood then ? He was an Indian becasue he started playing FC cricket before 1947 ?

claim Gul Mohammad, Amir Elahi or the first Test captain, AH Kardar, as much as you want but did Fazal Mehmood play for I-N-D-I-A, the national squad ? No. In fact, he refused India's offer in 1947 and his first Test match came against India, in India - talk of symbols.

Also, was too good as a fast bowler to be claimed by India.

(I hope you're not about to derail the thread as you usually do.)

 

[tempus123]

claim Gul Mohammad, Amir Elahi or the first Test captain, AH Kardar, as much as you want but did Fazal Mehmood play for I-N-D-I-A, the national squad ? No. In fact, he refused India's offer in 1947 and his first Test match came against India, in India - talk of symbols.

Also, was too good as a fast bowler to be claimed by India.

(I hope you're not about to derail the thread as you usually do.)

Sorry, but you need to develop the skill of reading the post in the context.. my reply was in the context..

When you groom yourself in a country playing FC cricket there, the grooming should be credited to the country.. you separate yourself from the losses, but happily take the players.

As always, you people like to have it both ways. And funny you call me a derailer, when you make a comment like "too good a fast bowler to be claimed by India".

 

[tempus123]

+1, It took Sachin 14 years to win a test(2002) and 18 years(2007) to win a series outside subcontinent, despite performing exceptionally well throughout that period.

Bowlers are more important in Test matches winning. Batsmen can only setup the match or save it. Even Kumble was a better match winner than all of the Indian batsmen in India.

 

[testcricketisbest]

Imran Khan has the best peak average in history of cricket, when he took +150 wickets @ -15, and a overall career average of 22.

His "worst" away average is 28 (some don't even have that for career average) and it's in India, I guess we can't blame the Indian umpires who of course are paragons of moral integrity, especially when it comes to Pakistan.
All the rest he averages 25 or under, his overall away average being 200 wickets @ 25.

In 1987 WC, he was the second highest wicket taker with 17 wickets @ 13 (Craig McDermott took 18 scalps @ 18).

About the 1992 WC (when he was more of a batsman - averaged +50 for the last years of his Test career), during the final against England in 1992, he came at #3 (only fourth time in his career) in order to rescue a Pakistan team languishing on 2-24, and built a worthy partnership with Javed Miandad (he made 72, highest score of the match) to take his team to a total of 249 - considering that Pakistan won by 22 runs, I'd say the knock was as valuable as Wasim Akram's all round show and Aaquib Javed's economical spell.

If you don't want to have a cricketer who, as Test captain, averaged +50 with the bat and -20 with the ball, that's your own loss.

Was sexy too.

I am fine with goat batsman of modern era and I would never swap with a player who took ten years to establish himself remotely as a viable player then his career took off that too in pakistan which is highly questionable as admitted by himself.

Ik is great but no way he is in discussion with sachin who is one of best ever to play this game.

 

[akheR]

I am fine with goat batsman of modern era and I would never swap with a player who took ten years to establish himself remotely as a viable player then his career took off that too in pakistan which is highly questionable as admitted by himself.

Ik is great but no way he is in discussion with sachin who is one of best ever to play this game.

Yes, and for me SRT doesn't come into the picture when we discuss Imran Khan, it's simply a difference of perspectives and, perhaps, perception.

By the way, being the "GOAT batsman of modern era" is an oxymoron, but that wouldn't be the first anomaly in your post.

 

[amax]

Bowlers are more important in Test matches winning. Batsmen can only setup the match or save it. Even Kumble was a better match winner than all of the Indian batsmen in India.

exactly for all sachin wins there was some Kumble, Sirinath, Zaheer doing the thankless job.

 

[hur rizvi]

No way...

 

[tempus123]

exactly for all sachin wins there was some Kumble, Sirinath, Zaheer doing the thankless job.

Kumble was the biggest Test match winner for India in home conditions.. probably the greatest ever..

He was pathetic away from home, but later started getting good overseas.

 

[crickster_92]

Sachin was the better batsman, Imran was the better cricketer

I would never ever swap Imran for Sachin

 

[Fahdi]

I would take Sachin without a moments hesitation but not in place of Imran. I would have him in place of any of our batting greats.

 

[pungi]

where exactly do you swap/trade players? Olx or craiglist? The only 2 places i know where swapping is allowed are - IPL and PP. Both are entertaining places.

 

[silent ischemia]

Probably anyone except Imran.

No no no. Not even akram, waqar and shoaib. And I rank akram above imran

 

[silent ischemia]

Sachin was the better batsman, Imran was the better cricketer

I would never ever swap Imran for Sachin

Here you go again, that batsman/cricketer saga I once mentioned. You are absolutely right mate. 10 on 10

 

[Couch Cricketer]

Despite being a big Imran Khan fan, I would made this deal.

Lack of batting talent is always an issues with Pakistani team and we are always good in producing the bowling talent. Having a Sachin in Pakistan could have make us produce more batting talent for next generations. On the other hand, country is rich in bowing resources and could have found another fast bowler easily. Sachin is once in a life time talent.

Imran Khan could have solved India's long last bowling issue and this trade could have served both the countries in well direction.

Imran was the major reason we got other great bowlers like Wasim, Waqar and Akhter. Every Kid wanted to be IK and that the reason we had such a large number of bowlers coming up. I would not swap Imran as that would mean loosing players like Waqar and Wasim. And after that we got players like Junaid Khan and Aamer who wanted to be like Wasim Akram.
Removing IK from our history is like removing fast bowling from Pakistan cricket. IK is the major reason of our producing great bowlers over the years.

 

[Pete Rose]

Absolutely not.
This is not with disrespect to Sachin.
India's golden run needs to be put in context: they became better travelers abroad ever since that breakthrough tour of Australia in 2004 (when the fab 4 really counted). Up till that point, Tendulkar had played a decade of cricket, and while he inspired his country, he could not inspire his team to wins. All of the recent performances started in the second decade of his career

Imran (and mushtaq prior to him) , on the other hand, developed a culture of winning matches and the results showed in Pakistan's test rankings.

Imran's impact on Pakistan's cricket also explains the importance of the right role models: Pakistan cricket is currently in shambles because the role models are guys like Akhar (tampering, chucking, doping) and Afridi (serial under-performer) and Yousuf (fight publicly against your board, captain, ex and current team mates)...to name a a few.

 

[silent ischemia]

Absolutely not.
This is not with disrespect to Sachin.
India's golden run needs to be put in context: they became better travelers abroad ever since that breakthrough tour of Australia in 2004 (when the fab 4 really counted). Up till that point, Tendulkar had played a decade of cricket, and while he inspired his country, he could not inspire his team to wins. All of the recent performances started in the second decade of his career

Imran (and mushtaq prior to him) , on the other hand, developed a culture of winning matches and the results showed in Pakistan's test rankings.

Imran's impact on Pakistan's cricket also explains the importance of the right role models: Pakistan cricket is currently in shambles because the role models are guys like Akhar (tampering, chucking, doping) and Afridi (serial under-performer) and Yousuf (fight publicly against your board, captain, ex and current team mates)...to name a a few.

At the moment there is but one role model viz Misbah

 

[Pete Rose]

At the moment there is but one role model viz Misbah

I like him and respect the badly needed stability he brings.
However, his ability to inspire has its limits as well - cant see a team fighting for a cause under the banner of "stablility"

 

[battler]

No no no. Not even akram, waqar and shoaib. And I rank akram above imran

Lol at not swaping him for shoaib!! U sure won't make a good businessman!

 

[Crazy_K]

This is like asking a person whether they doubted god existed, it would be sacrilege in this environment to say yes.

 

[Singham]

Thanks but no thanks. Player like sachin is once in a hundred years.

 

[Bilal7]

Bowlers are more important in Test matches winning. Batsmen can only setup the match or save it. Even Kumble was a better match winner than all of the Indian batsmen in India.

superior cricketer ? I understand your reluctance to do so, but I hope it's your personal opinion about who is a superior cricketer and not a fact.

Like you have said it yourself. I rate Imran a notch above Sachin since the latter was a bowling all-rounder and a better match-winner.

 

[Pete Rose]

I rate Imran a notch above Sachin since the latter was a bowling all-rounder and a better match-winner.

and a better captain

 

[menace2society]

Tendulkar was a selfish batsmen and a failed captain.

Imran was a leader, bowler and batsmen.

 

[ads101]

I wouldn't but Tendulkar is the cricketer who has given more worth.

Imran Khan himself is a more valuable cricketer. All rounder, ATG bowler, ATG captain. Tendulkar though arguably better in his one discipline than any of Imran's, isn't by much and not enough to trump the total combined worth.

The big difference though is Imran played 88 tests. Tendulkar has played more than twice the no. of tests, and more than two and half times the no. of ODIs (not to mention in ODIs tendulkar was probably the better player). That means he was useful to his country for a lot longer, and his positive effects of grooming and giving experience to youngsters was over so many more games, involved in more wins/successes for his country.

Imran is the better player, I would pick him over Tendulkar in an all time XI if had to choose. But I think Tendulkar has contributed more to Indian cricket than Imran to Pakistani cricket.

 

[mithun_minhas]

Its hard man.

I would still keep Tendu. Because of him, we got the likes of Kohli and many other batting talents who idolized him.

Would India have produced a Wasim or Waqar if Imran was an Indian? I doubt it. Even if we produced, our batting would have stayed like the one in 90's.

 

[Inswinger]

Hell no.

 

[Hitman]

No Indian fan would swipe Sachin for anyone, likewise no Pakistani fan would swipe Imran Khan for anyone.

 

[Robert]

Would India have produced a Wasim or Waqar if Imran was an Indian? I doubt it. Even if we produced, our batting would have stayed like the one in 90's.

If Imran was Indian he would only have bowled at 80 mph like Kapil Dev, so no.

Instead of W&W, India would have produced Chetan Sharma instead.

 

[srh]

I would take Sachin without a moments hesitation but not in place of Imran. I would have him in place of any of our batting greats.

I would not. Although Tendulkar was the better batsman but he was not a match winner.

 

[silent ischemia]

I would not. Although Tendulkar was the better batsman but he was not a match winner.

Well well well not again. It has been a debate for 24 years now. Even Imran once triggered the debate when he said inzi is a match winner but not SRT. Anyways my opinion is that sachin is a true match winner , a true champion and once in a millennium type of a sportsman.

 

[Buffet]

Tendulkar though arguably better in his one discipline than any of Imran's..

The big difference though is Imran played 88 tests. Tendulkar has played more than twice the no. of tests, and more than two and half times the no. of ODIs (not to mention in ODIs tendulkar was probably the better player).

This sums it up in short. SRT will figure in top 5 batsmen lists lot more frequently than IK will figure in top 5 bowler. Then there is small issue of playing more than twice tests while contributing with their main skills. In ODI, there is a larger gap. SRT is a default choice in world XI and he is in league of his own as an opener.

This gap gets balanced by IK being an all rounder and a much better captain. How much and towards which player is subjective. Let history decide where they stand when we look after 10-15 years later because aura of some great players gets exaggerated after they retire and for some it goes in other direction. In case of SRT, he was rated high up there when he was only half way in his career.

Looking at everything, I won't say that IK had less influence on Pakistan when compared to SRT on India. Amount of cricket is surely a factor but that's not the only one. I rate both high up there and as I said earlier, majority of fans of both players have too many good memories/pride attached to think of swapping them. Interesting to note that some posters still gave reasonable arguments for swapping IK with SRT.

 

[Statistics375]

I would not trade Imran with Sachin, solely because Imran offers more than Sachin.


This is not a valid comparison anyway you can not compare a bowling allrounder and a Batsman.

 

[Haroon786]

No way Imran is irreplacable, best cricketer in the world and the second name on the ATG 11 after Donald Bradman.

 

[Hitman]

No way Imran is irreplacable, best cricketer in the world and the second name on the ATG 11 after Donald Bradman.

Well then why exactly did Imran not make it to Cricinfo's All Time XI? And why exactly was he rated below Sachin in this list made in 2001, just half way through Sachin's career, while Imran completed his career?

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/16644-espn-s-legends-cricket.html

 

[Haroon786]

As for the longevity debate most fast bowlers do not last to 88 tests and only a few have managed to get 100 tests.

 

[mithun_minhas]

If Imran was Indian he would only have bowled at 80 mph like Kapil Dev, so no.

Instead of W&W, India would have produced Chetan Sharma instead.

Exactly.

Even Tendu would have been an overrated scrub had he been a Pakistani.

That is why I said, even though it may seem tempting, I would never trade Tendu for Wasim or Imran or anyone.

 

[Haroon786]

Well then why exactly did Imran not make it to Cricinfo's All Time XI?

Which bowling allrounder did they pick ?

 

[Khaseer]

Nope.

 

[Hitman]

Which bowling allrounder did they pick ?

Garry Sobers was picked, and rightly so. Forget that, what about this part -

And why exactly was he rated below Sachin in this list made in 2001, just half way through Sachin's career, while Imran completed his career?

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/16644-espn-s-legends-cricket.html

 

[Haroon786]

Garry Sobers was picked, and rightly so. Forget that, what about this part -

That is based on opinion, Imran did more than Sachin in tests. As for Sobers as the bowling allrounder, do you really want some averaging 30+ ?

 

[Hitman]

That is based on opinion, Imran did more than Sachin in tests. As for Sobers as the bowling allrounder, do you really want some averaging 30+ ?

The opinion of those 25 highly qualified cricketing greats and experts hold farrrrrrrrrrrrr more weight-age than your biased opinion. Not to mention, the cricketing world pays respect to that list, while nobody cares about your opinion.

 

[kinventor]

Never! Historicaly we have been better team and we all know Tendu test record in 90's against Pakistan despite tendu never facing WW in their prime . But i will change it in ODI's, because tendu is greatest in limited overs.