Shoaib Akhtar or Brett Lee?

[salman85]

So i was on google,searching for some cricket pictures,and voila.I stumbled upon a Shoaib Akhtar and Brett Lee pic.I can't recall where this pic is from.But anyway,the question immediatley hit me :

Who was the better bowler?You can include potential,achievements,and everything under the sun here.But who was better?

Both were the fastest bowlers of their time.Both started their careers withint a few years of each other,both had amazing starts to their careers,both had fitness issues,and both are pivotal to their team's success in this World Cup.

Discuss.

 

[Sanz]

Akhtar, every single time. One of my most fav. cricketers ever. There is just no comparison as a bowler between the two. Shoaib miles ahead. And I couldn't care less about Statsguru.

 

[salman85]

Ok.That's surprising.

I didn't think someone would put Shoaib so far ahead of Lee.

 

[vcs]

I like Lee and don't like Akhtar much but Akhtar's the better Test bowler. Lee's the better ODI bowler though.

 

[morgieb]

Shoaib's clearly the better bowler, Lee's had the better career though.

 

[angad]

Shoaib Akhtar is better bowler, he is comparable to Waqar also, equally lethal peak. He won so many games for Pakistan with his invidual performance. and Half of his career he played on dustbowls. Akthar could crack open any batting lineup in the world at his peak.

Akthar from Jan 2000 to Jan 2006 took 127 wickets @ 20.56

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

^ Akhtar was injured in 2005-2006, otherwise he took 110 wickets @ 19.31 in 22 matches between 2000 to 2005.

Waqar's peak was 1989-94, He took 190 wickets in 33 tests @ 19.15

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

It's only longevity factor, otherwise he is ATG for me.

Also Shoaib performed in one of the major periods of batsmen Domination.

 

[robelinda]

Tough one. Shoaib has had many days on the test field where he bowls like he just has no fitness at all, Lee charges in every time. I get the feeling with Shoaib that he really needs to be fired up otherwise he just lopes in and bowls pies. Wouldnt have either of them in my test team, but would have Lee in my ODI team, performs on the big stage and gets pivotal wickets more often than not.

 

[salman85]

I don't think either of them fall under the All Time Great category.Both of them had the potential to do that,but for various reasons they will always belong to a tier below that of ATGs for me TBH.

Lee played second fiddle to Mcgrath for a long part of his career,and was never able to impose himself as Australia's cheif strike bowler out and out.Shoaib was Pakistan's strike bowler for a while post 2003,but again,he had off the field issues which halted his rise to an ATG level.

What makes this comparision so interesting that both will fall under the 'What Could Have Been' category for various reasons.So much potential showed at the start,but somehow that was not fulfilled in either case IMO.

 

[angad]

Shane Bond should be added to poll, he was class bowler.

 

[Noble One]

Shoaib Akhtar in both Test and ODI's. A far more dangerous bowler who had more weapons than Lee.

It is great seeing these two icon's of the 00's in the twilight of their careers still fighting it out at the World Cup (and still bowling very fast). Shoaib has looked finished as a cricketer five or six times now, and yet he is back again leading the Pakistan attack and could well lead them to a World Cup. Same with Lee, no doubt he is the leader of the Australian ODI attack currently, when just three months ago his career looked over.

 

[Blaze 18]

Shoaib Akhtar by a fair margin.

EDIT : I'm talking about Tests only.

 

[smash84]

Ok.That's surprising.

I didn't think someone would put Shoaib so far ahead of Lee.

yeah, me neither

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Don't really like either bowler but i'd go for Lee simply on fitness grounds, no use having a good bowler who wimps out every series when things don't go his way or the pitch looks a bit flat. Lee may not have been the best bowler in the history of the game but he had a huge heart and fitted brilliantly into the team he was in, Akhtar was to me always an outsider in his team even in his pomp.

 

[vcs]

Don't really like either bowler but i'd go for Lee simply on fitness grounds, no use having a good bowler who wimps out every series when things don't go his way or the pitch looks a bit flat. Lee may not have been the best bowler in the history of the game but he had a huge heart and fitted brilliantly into the team he was in, Akhtar was to me always an outsider in his team even in his pomp.

I agree with the general sentiment of your post even though I'd still have Akhtar with all his shenanigans above Lee as a Test bowler. You've pretty much outlined the reasons why I find it hard to like Akhtar, even with all his flashes of genius.

I think in that thread that Ankit made about value of wickets, Lee ranks very high on the absolute value of the wickets he takes. He's not the greatest of bowlers, and can go for plenty on his bad days, but is an honest trier, and I reckon he made things a lot easier for the likes of McGrath and Clark with his unstinting effort levels.

 

[smash84]

Don't really like either bowler but i'd go for Lee simply on fitness grounds, no use having a good bowler who wimps out every series when things don't go his way or the pitch looks a bit flat..

dude........akhtar did pretty ok on flat tracks.........that is probably the wrongest reason to rate Lee above Akhtar.........on flat pitches akhtar was pretty good with reverse swing........just check out his videos on youtube.........he literally ran through ATG batting line ups singlehandedly.

Lee was the more controlled bowler for me. Akhtar could be wayward at times.

 

[salman85]

Anyone remember this performance?

1st Test: Australia v Pakistan at Colombo (PSS), Oct 3-7, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

I'm not sure if i remember correctly,but i think this was a fairly flat wicket.Warne got 11 in this match,but i think that was down to poor batting rather than help from the wicket.Shoaib was phenomenal in the 2nd innings here.

I think one of the differences between Shoaib and Lee were their performances in form.Shoaib Akhtar on song was more dangerous than Lee,and could rip apart batting lineups in 3-4 overs.He was pretty much as close to unplayable as you can get when he was in the mood.I don't think an inform Lee was as lethal.Even though overall,Lee has been more consistent than Shoaib.

 

[Debris]

If it was tests only I might have chosen Akhtar but Lee is in the photo for best ODI bowler of all so it has to be Lee

 

[Blaze 18]

Dead heat in ODIs to be honest.

 

[Debris]

Dead heat in ODIs to be honest.

I, and their statistics, respectfully disagree.

 

[sledger]

Grudgingly I would have to concede that Shoaib is better, but I've a lot of time for Lee, who has always been a favourite of mine.