2nd greatest living cricketer

[Bolo.]

Wasn't SA still pretty good for fast bowlers during that period though

Ya. He was not nearly as good in the 2000s as these averages are suggesting. He could get away with his lack of speed in RSA cos of the pitches. At least when he was still getting up to the mid 130s, which is fast enough to generate lift on bouncy pitches. Was a bit iffy, even in RSA, when he was doen to the mid 120s.

But when he was getting it up close to 150 was when he was an actual ATG, and he could get lift out of pretty much any pitch. Would have been fine in the 2000s if he had not done his back in. Not as good as Mcgrath obviously, but there are better bowlers than Pollock out there who would have run Mcgrath closer.

 

[_00_deathscar]

If my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bike.

And even without that the whole town took a ride on her

 

[The Sean]

Agree, as I've said, Hadlee over McGrath is the only acceptable trade off. Close enough as bowlers both being top 5. But also squeezing in Imran to be able to "bat deep" , doesn't make sense to me.. if you're going outside of the top 5 or so options to choose a bowler because you need to strengthen the batting, you're just unnecessarily weakening your attack, and to bowl is their primary job and objective.
You can surely afford to pick at least one of your bowlers on their bowling talents alone.

Yeah, I tend to view things the same way as you on this - the only difference being a personal one where I do rate Imran as a fast bowler in that same class and so am happy for him to be in my side. I completely agree with you that if I rated Imran a notch lower, as you do, I wouldn't squeeze him into the team at the expense of a better bowler - one who might be the difference between dismissing the Klingon Bradman and not - just for those extra runs.

 

[honestbharani]

Hi JBTRUNDLER

no

 

[bagapath]

even if all these great fast bowlers averaged zero with the bat, a combination of Imran - Hadlee - Akram is hard to beat purely on bowling.
perhaps you could match it with Marshall- McGrath - Truman or with Ambrose - Steyn - Lillee or with Lindwall - Garner - Donald. But it will be almost impossible to beat that combo without a lengthy argument, if there is any. That combo has everything. Pace, swing, variety, versatility, striking ability, accuracy, stamina, match winning mindset… So do the other combinations in equal measures. But none more than them
Now if you add up their batting skills, then those three should be in any all time XI without question as the no’s 8/9/10

 

[subshakerz]

McGrath pretty much entered the 2000s decade in his peak and just continued that form before slightly tailing off around 2006/2007.

In fact, I think there were signs of flatter pitches in Australia in the late 90s but it didnt seem to matter as the gulf between Australia and the rest of the world just increased. It was a regular occurence for a visiting team to score competitively in the first innings, only for Australia to pile on and then collapse in the second.

 

[subshakerz]

even if all these great fast bowlers averaged zero with the bat, a combination of Imran - Hadlee - Akram is hard to beat purely on bowling.
perhaps you could match it with Marshall- McGrath - Truman or with Ambrose - Steyn - Lillee or with Lindwall - Garner - Donald. But it will be almost impossible to beat that combo without a lengthy argument, if there is any. That combo has everything. Pace, swing, variety, versatility, striking ability, accuracy, stamina, match winning mindset… So do the other combinations in equal measures. But none more than them
Now if you add up their batting skills, then those three should be in any all time XI without question as the no’s 8/9/10

Having Imran and Akram is overkill. You only need Imran to give reverse. I prefer Imran Hadlee Marshall, Marshall being not far from Akram as a bat and a better bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, I tend to view things the same way as you on this - the only difference being a personal one where I do rate Imran as a fast bowler in that same class and so am happy for him to be in my side. I completely agree with you that if I rated Imran a notch lower, as you do, I wouldn't squeeze him into the team at the expense of a better bowler - one who might be the difference between dismissing the Klingon Bradman and not - just for those extra runs.

Yeah I also put Imran in that top tier so to me with his batting its just a no brainer to have him in the side as well as Hadlee and Marshall.

 

[TheJediBrah]

even if all these great fast bowlers averaged zero with the bat, a combination of Imran - Hadlee - Akram is hard to beat purely on bowling.

No it's not. Marshall + McGrath are both superior to Imran & Akram.

 

[kyear2]

No it's not. Marshall + McGrath are both superior to Imran & Akram.

I believe they are as well. Probably not the others, but those 2 are. I think the discussion as to who's the best ever is between those 2, and don't think that parts arguable. Think MM is just ahead, but that's an argument for another time.

I will also say that I will reevaluate my opinion of Imran. I will read and I will watch.

I do believe that he did benefit from charitable home umpires a bit more than most, and he was a cheat. But tbh those facts have skewed my opinion of him, probably more than they should have.
But don't get me wrong, Hadlee was definitely better and I believe so was Ambrose, but by the how much, I'll look into it.
And I also genuinely believe that you don't compromise your opening bowlers especially to strengthen the batting, that makes no sense.

But if once I take a 2nd look and he's as close to Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn and co as some of you think. I'll be big enough to say so.

I'm also aware though that many have him rated lower top 10, but still think that's good enough because of the extra batting, and as I said that doesn't compute to me. But I'll take a look and will see.

 

[subshakerz]

I believe they are as well. Probably not the others, but those 2 are. I think the discussion as to who's the best ever is between those 2, and don't think that parts arguable. Think MM is just ahead, but that's an argument for another time.

I will also say that I will reevaluate my opinion of Imran. I will read and I will watch.

I do believe that he did benefit from charitable home umpires a bit more than most, and he was a cheat. But tbh those facts have skewed my opinion of him, probably more than they should have.
But don't get me wrong, Hadlee was definitely better and I believe so was Ambrose, but by the how much, I'll look into it.
And I also genuinely believe that you don't compromise your opening bowlers especially to strengthen the batting, that makes no sense.

But if once I look take a 2nd look and he's as close to Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn and co as some of you think. I'll be big enough to say so.

I'm also aware though that many have him rated lower top 10, but still think that's good enough because of the extra batting, and as I said that doesn't compute to me. But I'll take a look and will see.

Fair enough. I think one thing to consider is that in the 80s biased home umpiring and ball tampering were the norm so even if Imran benefited more it is hard to discredit him solely and not others.

I also consider Hadlee, Marshall, McGrath and maybe Ambrose ahead of Imran as bowlers but IMO its not that much.

 

[kyear2]

Fair enough. I think one thing to consider is that in the 80s biased home umpiring and ball tampering were the norm so even if Imran benefited more it is hard to discredit him solely and not others.

I also consider Hadlee, Marshall, McGrath and maybe Ambrose ahead of Imran as bowlers but IMO its not that much.

Re the umpires, I acknowledged that, why I said more than most. I've read tales about Marshall crying in India when they didn't give out Sunny, we've all heard about Fred in NZ, I've spoken to players who spoke about Lillee in the '70 over stepping by almost a foot and never being called and Smali always brings up a lbw decision vs Pakistan in the Caribbean. But everything I've read says Pakistan was different.

And with regard to the ball tampering, I can't recall off the top of my head hearing stories about others in that era. Plus it was to accelerate the scuffing of the ball to facilitate reverse. How many was using that back then? But I could be wrong on that one. ??‍

 

[TheJediBrah]

Fair enough. I think one thing to consider is that in the 80s biased home umpiring and ball tampering were the norm so even if Imran benefited more it is hard to discredit him solely and not others.

I also consider Hadlee, Marshall, McGrath and maybe Ambrose ahead of Imran as bowlers but IMO its not that much.

The level to which it happened in Pakistan was not the norm

 

[Victor Ian]

The level to which it happened in Pakistan was not the norm

How do we know? That's just what our media told us.

 

[subshakerz]

Re the umpires, I acknowledged that, why I said more than most. I've read tales about Marshall crying in India when they didn't give out Sunny, we've all heard about Fred in NZ, I've spoken to players who spoke about Lillee in the '70 over stepping by almost a foot and never being called and Smali always brings up a lbw decision vs Pakistan in the Caribbean. But everything I've read says Pakistan was different.

And with regard to the ball tampering, I can't recall off the top of my head hearing stories about others in that era. Plus it was to accelerate the scuffing of the ball to facilitate reverse. How many was using that back then? But I could be wrong on that one. ??‍

Seam lifting and even scuffing the ball in the 80s were rampant in county and international cricket to the extent that umpires barely enforced ball tampering rules. I think one reason for change was better TV coverage honestly. Obviously no bowler from that time, Imran aside, openly admits this given the blowback they would face but I have heard Holding and Hadlee come close when they were defending the legalisation of ball tampering several years back.

 

[subshakerz]

The level to which it happened in Pakistan was not the norm

Granted but then if we are going diminish Imran's record because of umpire bias then by a minimum, bowlers like Marshall and Hadlee should be penalized also.

Or we can do the practical thing and just take their records at face value without pondering what their record would be in hypothetically different circumstances.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

-

No it's not. Marshall + McGrath are both superior to Imran & Akram.

Akram > Hadlee = Marshall > McGrath > Imran

 

[TheJediBrah]

Kapil > all

 

[sunilz]

-

Akram > Hadlee = Marshall > McGrath > Imran

But if you also include Imran's batting will he be preferred over McGrath?
Similarly Will Hadlee be preferred over Marshall if you consider his batting?

I would like to know detailed answers of above 2 questions.

 

[kyear2]

Granted but then if we are going diminish Imran's record because of umpire bias then by a minimum, bowlers like Marshall and Hadlee should be penalized also.

Or we can do the practical thing and just take their records at face value without pondering what their record would be in hypothetically different circumstances.

Ok, I don't follow. You said granted it was or may have been worst in Pakistan. So by extension if it tarnishes his, again because it was worst there, we should also penalize the other 2?
Re the ball tampering, I said I wasn't sure, but I wouldn't say rampant in intl cricket. And to be fair, no one can say how much it actually even improved his numbers, if at all. But he did cheat.

But again, why so eager to defend at all costs and create the false equivalency.

And look home umpiring bias is nothing new, I recall reading years back about Bradman edging to slip and being given not out and Hammond saying quite loudly, something to the effect of, well that's a hell of a way to start a series. But I do recall hearing, and as someone said, it could just be the media, but that Javed wouldn't be given lbw at at home, tbh never even looked in that one and sure it can't fully be true, and Imran's advantage there.