Sydney Barnes vs Shoaib Akhtar

[PlayerComparisons]

Two strike bowlers

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Barnes is arguably the best bowler to have walked this planet. This is a ridiculous comparison.

 

[shortpitched713]

Agreed that it's a ridiculous comparison.

Akhtar is historically relevant as the fastest bowler ever. But he's also an excellent example of why someone with the talent to do so may not want to obsess on that.

 

[kyear2]

Barnes is arguably the best bowler to have walked this planet. This is a ridiculous comparison.

Based on? His test career is the equivalent of if Hadlee only played England and SL. Literally.

His record, especially considering the era, isn't that impressive.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Based on? His test career is the equivalent of if Hadlee only played England and SL. Literally.

His record, especially considering the era, isn't that impressive.

Arguably a key word and he has always been in the argument every time. His record ofc not as impressive as it looks but 189 @ 16.43 at SR of 42, taking 7 wicket a match. That adjusted average is still 20 ish to go with the sheer impact he made every innings would put him in any argument. And It’s not like he played with weak bowling attack too.

The Sheer impact per match, the reputation and
the adjusted stats would put him in any argument.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

I think Shoaib looks better on the eyetest but Barnes does have the more impressive record

 

[Coronis]

Based on? His test career is the equivalent of if Hadlee only played England and SL. Literally.

His record, especially considering the era, isn't that impressive.

I don’t recall anyone else from his era averaging 16. Or taking 7 wickets a match. Or averaging a 5’fer almost every match. Or combining all that with a worldclass SR and economy

 

[kyear2]

I don’t recall anyone else from his era averaging 16. Or taking 7 wickets a match. Or averaging a 5’fer almost every match. Or combining all that with a worldclass SR and economy

As with WG, the era wasn't as competitive as subsequent ones, and it's before I personally cut off.

None of us has ever seen him bowl or could swear to what he even did.

His record against Australia was good, his SA one was unlike any in anything resembling modern competition and was beyond minnow bashing.

Again, as with WG, I don't see how they could be compared to players from subsequent eras.

And the disparity between teams, it slime Sachin only.plahinf against SL, Zim and Bang. Or as I earlier referenced Hadlee vs SL and England only.

In 7 matches, 14 innings vs SA, he reaped 83 wickets at 8, a strike rate of 25 and 12 five wicket hauls.

Come on.

 

[Coronis]

As with WG, the era wasn't as competitive as subsequent ones, and it's before I personally cut off.

None of us has ever seen him bowl or could swear to what he even did.

His record against Australia was good, his SA one was unlike any in anything resembling modern competition and was beyond minnow bashing.

Again, as with WG, I don't see how they could be compared to players from subsequent eras.

And the disparity between teams, it slime Sachin only.plahinf against SL, Zim and Bang. Or as I earlier referenced Hadlee vs SL and England only.

In 7 matches, 14 innings vs SA, he reaped 83 wickets at 8, a strike rate of 25 and 12 five wicket hauls.

Come on.

Yeah even Murali can’t compete with that. You’ve convinced me to rate Barnes even higher.

 

[sayon basak]

I think Shoaib looks better on the eyetest but Barnes does have the more impressive record

Barnes doesn't have any eyetest.

 

[sayon basak]

Barnes easily.
Akhtar wasn't even the 2nd best in his team.