Is Pathan more talented than Akram was at his early phase?

[vandemataram]

I'm just curious to know that. Imran Khan rates Pathan very highly and he even said that Pathan has impressed him more than Akram had impressed him when Akram started his career.Even Akram himself is all praise for Indian paceman Irfan Pathan and rated the left-arm seamer as a better player than what he himself was during the early phase of his career.

"The talent is very much there. He is a better bowler than what I was at his age. He knows what is happening around him and he has many years to further improve himself."


If that is the case then Pathan might well go on and will become as successful in future as Akram was, with some hard work.

 

[Top_Cat]

I think Akram may be giving Pathan a bit too much credit. I mean, Pathan is a really good bowler in the making but even early on in his career, Akram was truly devastating. It must happen when you get older because I doubt Akram would have said the same thing at the same age about Pathan.

 

[Camel56]

What absolute rubbish. Pathan has nothing on Akram and im tipping he never will.

 

[from_da_lost_di]

will u take "H.e.l.l no " for an answer ??

 

[bryce]

Akram in his first 7 Tests:
37 runs@7.40
26 wickets@22.11

Pathan in his 7 Tests to date:
178 runs@25.42
18 wickets@43.11
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Akram in his first 27 ODI's:
64 runs@8.00
35 wickets@20.80, RPO: 3.70

Pathan is his 27 ODI's to date:
209 runs@17.41
46 wickets@25.97, RPO: 4.98

 

[Jono]

No, not really. But Pathan is still very talented, and deserves the praise he gets in my opinion. The praise is just exaggerated a bit

 

[Bouncer]

About 15 Yrs ago, some guy was really being waited for his Debute and was suppose to be Next Bradman for sure, what happen to him?

 

[Camel56]

About 15 Yrs ago, some guy was really being waited for his Debute and was suppose to be Next Bradman for sure, what happen to him?

Im the next Bradman!

 

[Camel56]

Rather, In 15years time they'll be saying Bradman was the last Camel!

 

[C_C]

bactrian or arabian ?

 

[C_C]

comparing records is erroneous IMO...
for one, Akram played the weak NZ team for his debut whereas Irfan has played 4 of his 7 against one of the best batting lineups in history of cricket....
I've watched tapes of Akram from his early days.
Who is more talented ? it all depends on what yuo define talent to be......IMO, Irfan is no more talented than akram at a similar age but no less either.

One thing Akram has over Irfan is pace. akram was sigificantly quicker. He also had a far deadlier bouncer and yorker.
Pathan has a better line and length, movement and has a slight edge in variety..

 

[C_C]

comparing records is erroneous IMO...
for one, Akram played the weak NZ team for his debut whereas Irfan has played 4 of his 7 against one of the best batting lineups in history of cricket.... For two, Akram had the great Imran Khan to mentor him.....Pathan has whom? the 'not test class' Zaheer Khan ?!
I've watched tapes of Akram from his early days.
Who is more talented ? it all depends on what yuo define talent to be......IMO, Irfan is no more talented than akram at a similar age but no less either.

One thing Akram has over Irfan is pace. akram was sigificantly quicker. He also had a far deadlier bouncer and yorker.
Pathan has a better line and length, movement and has a slight edge in variety..

 

[Top_Cat]

for one, Akram played the weak NZ team for his debut whereas Irfan has played 4 of his 7 against one of the best batting lineups in history of cricket....

Errr, that 'weak' NZ team (containing such obviously 'average' cricketers as Ian Smith, Richard Hadlee, John Wright, Martin and Jeff Crowe, Lance Cairns and the like) won that 3-Test series 2-0............

Akram had the great Imran Khan to mentor him.....Pathan has whom? the 'not test class' Zaheer Khan ?!

Errrr, aside from coaching from Akram himself, Pathan is also a graduate of the Lillee fast bowling school. There was no such thing in place when Akram came through.

One thing Akram has over Irfan is pace. akram was sigificantly quicker. He also had a far deadlier bouncer and yorker.
Pathan has a better line and length, movement and has a slight edge in variety..

Surely you jest! I can certainly agree with the line-and-length (remember Akram bowled the most wides in the 1992 WC as well as took the most wickets) but as far as movement and variety goes, I think not. Akram damn near invented the lethality associated with spearing the ball in from around the wicket. Even in the early days he had swing both ways, a near-unplayable, spitting leg-cutter as well as bouncers/yorkers. Pathan's stock ball generally moves in the air away from the right-handed batsman and, well, that's about it. On a regular basis, he doesn't move the ball anywhere near as much in the air or off the deck as Wasim did.

 

[Sanz]

Years ago Great John Mcenroe told about Lendl "He has as much talent in his body as I have in my little finger"

I guess same can be said about Akram and Irfan. Whoever says that Akram Played a weak NZ team forgets that the NZ team Akram played had a great batting line up which included one of the best batsman of that era Martin Crowe, his brother, current Indian coach John Wright, Jermey Coney, A world Class All rounder in Hadlee.

Please dont start such threads. Its really embarrasing going through this again and again.

 

[Sanz]

Errr, that 'weak' NZ team (containing such obviously 'average' cricketers as Ian Smith, Richard Hadlee, John Wright, Martin and Jeff Crowe, Lance Cairns and the like) won that 3-Test series 2-0............

Hey I typed before you and forgot to hit the 'Submit' Button.

 

[viktor]

Years ago Great John Mcenroe told about Lendl "He has as much talent in his body as I have in my little finger"

By the same analogy, Pathan should be more successful than Akram.

 

[Sanz]

lol..I dont think so.

 

[masterblaster]

Talent is nothing much when it comes to success. It helps get you off the ground as a young player, but talent wont make you into a champion. Pathan needs to keep reinventing his craft as a bowler and even if he does the half of what Wasim did, i'm sure India will be pretty happy with that.

Irfan Pathan made be talented, but we will see in the coming years if he has the same amount of cricketing brain, tact and if he works as hard as Wasim Akram did.

Wasim was a champion, Irfan is still a talented rookie at best.

 

[Deja moo]

Errrr, aside from coaching from Akram himself, Pathan is also a graduate of the Lillee fast bowling school. There was no such thing in place when Akram came through.



.

While I agree with your other points , I have to disagree with this one . Lillee might have been a great bowler , but he hasnt shown himself to be a coach who has groomed excellent fast bowlers...It could be a problem with the new guys themselves , but still look at the awe-inspiring list of disciples.......Zaheer , Nehra, Brett Lee , Bracken (?)...

 

[Arjun]

His bowling is nothing special- with a bowling average of 43, he's a weak link in the bowling attack. He needs to score at least 20 more runs than he usually gets, given his style of bowling- relies a lot on swing, even when there isn't any. He is a decent bowler, but is not the right choice as a specialist bowler. There are better bowlers in India than Irfan Pathan, for the new ball.

And do we have to have so many Akram comparisons? Some say he shouldn't even be compared to lesser players like Flintoff, Klusener and Cairns, but why Akram?