Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
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 evenbefore SRT.
![]()
Well would you? or for anyone of our other greats
What have we achieved in Test cricket that India hasn't?
Since strike bowlers are more important than good batsmen?
If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.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.
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.
India won in England which we can do so in our dreams only.
If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.
If there was no Imran Khan then there was no Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and co.
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.
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.
![]()
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.
![]()
Its funny how Mr. perfect Imran gets to take credit over every good thing that has happened to Pakistan.
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.
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.
Yeah but like I said, I was referring to the modern era.
Yeah but like I said, I was referring to the modern era.
Which modern era are you talking about?
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.
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.
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 (I am not devaluing his great achievements)
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.
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.
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.)
+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.
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.
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.
Probably anyone except Imran.
Sachin was the better batsman, Imran was the better cricketer
I would never ever swap Imran for Sachin
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.
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
No no no. Not even akram, waqar and shoaib. And I rank akram above imran
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.
I rate Imran a notch above Sachin since the latter was a bowling all-rounder and a better match-winner.
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.
I would not. Although Tendulkar was the better batsman but he was not a match winner.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.
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).
No way Imran is irreplacable, best cricketer in the world and the second name on the ATG 11 after Donald Bradman.
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.
Well then why exactly did Imran not make it to Cricinfo's All Time XI?
Which bowling allrounder did they pick ?
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
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+ ?