-
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.
Ambrose-Walsh or Wasim Akram-Waqar Younis
- Thread starter PhoenixFire
- Start date
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Walsh peaked at the end of his career so Ambrose-Walsh wasn't a deadly duo for that long. Waqar was deadly for a small part of his career before 1996. So this is a tough one. I will go for Ambrose-Walsh because after Bishop was gone, they carried the Windies attack for quite a while and even before Walsh reached his deadly phase, Ambrose was always too good and the pairing was dangerous.
BhupinderSingh
Banned
Wasim & Waqar
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Sami and Rao Iftikhar!adharcric said:
As for the thread, Wasim and Waqar for the reasons Goughy mentioned
Johnners
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ambrose & Walsh by a butt hair 
Whilst both combinations were IMO equal in terms of bowling quality, and the ability to run through sides in an instant, the intimidation factor was the winner for me.
Having two West Indian blokes deliver a cricket ball from 8 feet in the air at 135-150 km/hr is pretty darn intimidating
Whilst both combinations were IMO equal in terms of bowling quality, and the ability to run through sides in an instant, the intimidation factor was the winner for me.
Having two West Indian blokes deliver a cricket ball from 8 feet in the air at 135-150 km/hr is pretty darn intimidating
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
It'd be interesting to have a battle of best partnerships (batting/bowling) of all time.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Most fast bowlers who have longish careers tend to have a great patch of 5 to 7 years during which they are at their peak. Whenever the top bowlers in history are remembered, and evaluated, its invariably this peak period that is recalled. And thats how they should be judged.Beleg said:
The placement of this peak period in their careers varies from bowler to bowler.
For some its at the very beginning of their careers. Botham is a classic example of this. Then they peter out and though they may have bright patches/series in between a prolonged period of brilliance is rarely captured again.
Then there are the late bloomers like Imran who have moderate success in the early part of their careers, then hit the peak and conquer all before tapering off again.
This peak is a period of sustained brilliance over 5 years or more. Generally fast bowlers would have short careers but some make a successful transition to the medium pace variety and prolong their careers with a great success. Hadlee was one such bowler.
But not all fast bowlers are comfortable in the role of a medium pacer.
While I was studying this phenomenon and the similarities in the peak periods of bowlers from all over the world, I was amazed to see how so many West Indians of the last quarter century do not fit into this mold. Most of them have a relatively even performance over their entire careers some like Ambrose and Marshall remarkably so.
I think it can only be explained by the fact that the large number of fast bowlers in the West Indian side during the eighties and early 90's made it easier on these pacemen and the sharing of burden prolonged thier careers and kept them frsher for a longer time.
....to be continued
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Good read SJS. Please do continue..
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
I found that there was set patterns to careers with most careers split in three different phases.
Those who started brilliantly, then have a phase of tapering off followed by a disastrous end.
Those who started modestly, hit a brilliant patch and then tapered off and so on. Of course the bad periods (we are talking in terms of years remember) could have a patch/spell/series of brilliance and vice a versa but there was a trend.
I first took up Waqar since he has been mentioned here as having been good for only a short period, and compared him with two other Pakistani greats viz Imran and Wasim.
Here are the results, graphically represented.
For the sake of this excercise I took a period of avg below 20 to be brilliant, between 20 and but under 25 to be good, between 25 and under thirty to be modest and above 30 to be below par.
To make it easier to get stats as well as to remove subjectivity I took a calendar year as a unit.
The graphs represent the bowling averages of these three bowlers , year on year, for their entire careers.
Its intersting to see how the peak periods vary in their positioning in the career span but not in much else.
Waqar Younis :
- The peak period is the first six years (the first year was just two matches so I just clubbed it to the next five)
- This is followed by a modest period of four years (with one terrible and one good year in them.
- Finally he has a forgettable last five years.
Clearly the year 1999 should have been a warning which he could have taken and retired. Ideally the swan song could have come at the end of the previous year which was a resurgance and would have been a fantastic way to leave. But thats hindsight.
I havent checked but I think he became captain around that time otherwise the career may have ended with better timing WITHOUT TAKING AWAY ANYTHING from what had already been a great career.
Thats why I dont judge Waqar on the basis of those last five years.
(to be continued)
Those who started brilliantly, then have a phase of tapering off followed by a disastrous end.
Those who started modestly, hit a brilliant patch and then tapered off and so on. Of course the bad periods (we are talking in terms of years remember) could have a patch/spell/series of brilliance and vice a versa but there was a trend.
I first took up Waqar since he has been mentioned here as having been good for only a short period, and compared him with two other Pakistani greats viz Imran and Wasim.
Here are the results, graphically represented.
For the sake of this excercise I took a period of avg below 20 to be brilliant, between 20 and but under 25 to be good, between 25 and under thirty to be modest and above 30 to be below par.
To make it easier to get stats as well as to remove subjectivity I took a calendar year as a unit.
The graphs represent the bowling averages of these three bowlers , year on year, for their entire careers.
Its intersting to see how the peak periods vary in their positioning in the career span but not in much else.
Waqar Younis :
- The peak period is the first six years (the first year was just two matches so I just clubbed it to the next five)
- This is followed by a modest period of four years (with one terrible and one good year in them.
- Finally he has a forgettable last five years.
Clearly the year 1999 should have been a warning which he could have taken and retired. Ideally the swan song could have come at the end of the previous year which was a resurgance and would have been a fantastic way to leave. But thats hindsight.
I havent checked but I think he became captain around that time otherwise the career may have ended with better timing WITHOUT TAKING AWAY ANYTHING from what had already been a great career.
Thats why I dont judge Waqar on the basis of those last five years.
(to be continued)