Shoaib Akthar Vs Brett Lee

[Precambrian]

Who's the better bowler?

No reference to "off-field" activities. Let the comparisons be purely on-field, I mean err, while the match is on.

Akthar for me.

 

[aussie]

Akhtar in test by a big margin. Lee in ODI's but not by much.

 

[four_or_six]

At his very best, Akhtar. I would have Lee in my team though as he's more consistent. Also can field.

 

[kingkallis]

Akhtar > Lee

Lee betters Akhtar when it comes to consistency though!

 

[haroon510]

Voted for Lee considering his current form

but at his best shoaib was more aggrassive, destractive and effective..

 

[The Sean]

Which Shoaib Akhtar is showing up? The answer to that question would have a heavy influence on which bowler I'd want in my team.

 

[_Ed_]

Shoaib in Tests, Lee in ODIs.

 

[pup11]

Lee by a mile, Akthar really is a shock bowler, when everything clicks for him he can destroy a team, but Lee is consistent and hard-working and a fast-bowler with a lot of heart, and i would take a quick like him every time over an enigmatic and inconsistent bowler like Akthar.

 

[Matt79]

Who's the better bowler?

No reference to "off-field" activities. Let the comparisons be purely on-field, I mean err, while the match is on.

Akthar for me.

That qualification makes any comparison meaningless IMO. I'd take Lee because he'll actually be on the field most of the time, making his performances better in on-field terms than the absent Shoaib.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Basically, if I could have had one play for me over a long period of time, it would be Lee. Because I know what I'd get, I could create plans; whilst with Shoaib the temprementalness would drive me insane. He may win me some games, but too many games where he gives me not enough or doesn't make it on the park.

In terms of who is the better bowler, probably Shoaib.

 

[The Sean]

My thoughts mirror Matt and Vic really. Shoaib was faster, more penetrative and more destructive when he was fully fit and switched on. The problem is that as a captain I'd know that if I had Lee in my team he would always give 110% regardless of the pitch conditions, the opposition, the state of the match, the weather, a slight twinge in his back etc. I could never have the same confidence in Shoaib.

 

[Matt79]

Then, if we momentarily take off the blinkers, there's the whole "I'm a roid-taking, team-mate bashing, coach pushing joke" aspect to consider as well...

 

[Uppercut]

Assuming you mean in tests, over their careers or right now?

Over the course of his career Akhtar's easily been better. Right now Lee is.

 

[Precambrian]

Assuming you mean in tests, over their careers or right now?

Over the course of his career Akhtar's easily been better. Right now Lee is.

Hmm... I would be a stupid to ask about Now, because one has hardly played any tests in the last 1.5 years, and the other has touched a low in his career.

I mean an analysis over their career.

 

[Uppercut]

Ah. If they both retired right now, and we were looking back on their careers solely on the pitch, Akhtar was miles better.

Lee's better in ODIs and batting.

 

[Precambrian]

Ah. If they both retired right now, and we were looking back on their careers solely on the pitch, Akhtar was miles better.

Lee's better in ODIs and batting.

Honestly, can;t see Lee going on for many years at his form of 2007.

 

[kingkallis]

Basically, if I could have had one play for me over a long period of time, it would be Lee. Because I know what I'd get, I could create plans; whilst with Shoaib the temprementalness would drive me insane. He may win me some games, but too many games where he gives me not enough or doesn't make it on the park.

In terms of who is the better bowler, probably Shoaib.

Yeah, you'd want to keep stumps and bats away when planning or discussing something with him!

 

[Uppercut]

Honestly, can;t see Lee going on for many years at his form of 2007.

I think he has a couple of years left in him. I didn't think he bowled that badly against SA- in the first test there were two excellent spells he got no reward for, and in the second he was injured after about 10 overs. And he was awesome against New Zealand.

Joke-bowler in India, but that was a bloody tough tour for quicks. Ishant was the only specialist fast bowler to average under 40. The pitches were so flat even Amit God Mishra only averaged 24. Reports of Lee's demise have been greatly exaggerated IMO.

 

[Jono]

Merge them both.

You'd get one hell of a playboy.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Mosman got it for one year!