• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Adam Gilchrist vs Wasim Akram

Who is the better test cricketer?


  • Total voters
    27

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Gilly was a borderline top 10 AT and one of the biggest X factors in the history of the game.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Wasim, he was ATG bowler and ATG tailender (hard to call him an allrounder but he was quite useful with the bat with a couple of centuries) and also a very good fielder. Quite safe pair of hands, great arm in the outfield, and one of the better fast bowling fielders out there. Which is why the awful fielding of his team mates would have really pissed him off.
 

howitzer

State Captain
Tricky given Gilchrist's relatively poor longevity. Going to defer my vote until someone provides a good enough argument one way or the other.
 

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Tricky given Gilchrist's relatively poor longevity. Going to defer my vote until someone provides a good enough argument one way or the other.
One of one in the history of the game?

Probably the biggest x factor to any team

Forever changed how we look at, select and grade wicket keepers?
 

Slifer

International Captain
Both once in a generation type players but respectfully, and imo, no one has changed the role of the wicket keeper more than Adam. Australia were great before he came along, he made them unfair and an atg team.
 

howitzer

State Captain
Yeah i think there's enough about Gilchrist to win this despite the lack of longevity. Still think it's close, though.
 

Bolo.

International Captain
Tricky given Gilchrist's relatively poor longevity. Going to defer my vote until someone provides a good enough argument one way or the other.
Sit this side as well. Gilchrist was better when playing, but the longevity difference is so big that I don't know which way to go.
 

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Years are a better measure. Not all sides play the same amount of cricket, but everyone ages.
Yeah, I know; I just commented that on a match to match basis, they played around the same amount. Gilly had to sit outside the team for many years due to the presence of Healy.
 

howitzer

State Captain
Yeah, I know; I just commented that on a match to match basis, they played around the same amount. Gilly had to sit outside the team for many years due to the presence of Healy.
And may well have ended up with a batting average quite a bit lower if he played in those years.
 

Bolo.

International Captain
And may well have ended up with a batting average quite a bit lower if he played in those years.
90s bowlers and pitches, playing before his prime, and behind a weaker top order.

We probably shouldn't think less of him if he'd averaged less under those circumstances, but we probably would.
 

Top