• 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.

Shane Warne vs Wasim Akram

Better test cricketer?


  • Total voters
    18

DrWolverine

International Captain
The more I look deeper into their records, the more I start to believe that Pigeon > MaCo is much more of a realistic possibility than I previously thought.
I have McGrath as my third best fast bowler but it is very obvious that McGrath has holes in his record.

1. Against the second best team of his era, his record is just mediocre.
17 Tests. 57 wkts @ 27.3 and 2 5-Fers.

2. His record in SL & Pak
in SL : 4 Tests. 10 wickets @ 29
in Pak : 5 Tests. 19 wickets @ 31

3. Just one 5-Fer in 17 Tests in Asia
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
isn't his SA record just bad because he played them a lot early on when he was a **** bowler?
 

Thala_0710

International Captain
I have McGrath as my third best fast bowler but it is very obvious that McGrath has holes in his record.

1. Against the second best team of his era, his record is just mediocre.
17 Tests. 57 wkts @ 27.3 and 2 5-Fers.

2. His record in SL & Pak
in SL : 4 Tests. 10 wickets @ 29
in Pak : 5 Tests. 19 wickets @ 31

3. Just one 5-Fer in 17 Tests in Asia
His SA record is not mediocre. It's not great but far from mediocre. In Asia, his record in IND is great which was the best batting team of his era. It's true though he could be a bit neutralized on flatter asian wickets.
But MaCo's record isn't perfect either
 

Thala_0710

International Captain
isn't his SA record just bad because he played them a lot early on when he was a **** bowler?
Actually he didn't that much. His record in SA is actually pretty good. At home lies the issue:
1994: 1 match 2 wkts @31 avg
1997-98: 2 matches 4 wkts @34 avg
2001-02: 3 matches 14 wkts @25 avg
2005-06: 3 matches 8 wkts @40.63
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Actually he didn't that much. His record in SA is actually pretty good. At home lies the issue:
1994: 1 match 2 wkts @31 avg
1997-98: 2 matches 4 wkts @34 avg
2001-02: 3 matches 14 wkts @25 avg
2005-06: 3 matches 8 wkts @40.63
eh then it's fine imo.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I've a bit of a problem with Wasim's numbers against the good batting lineups of his time (IE team averages over 30, Which is SA/Ind/Aus), it's 108 @ 27.5 with 62 SR and 3.7WPM
This is astonishingly stupid. For most of Wasim's career (until the mid/late 90s), WI were either the strongest or second strongest team in the world and Akram averaged like 21 against them in that timeframe. And he only played 4 games vs SA.


In fact, India and England were pretty mid for most of Akram's career. So if anything he had way worse numbers vs the worse teams than he did vs the best. You're all backwards here.
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
This is astonishingly stupid. For most of Wasim's career (until the mid/late 90s), WI were either the strongest or second strongest team in the world and Akram averaged like 21 against them in that timeframe. And he only played 4 games vs SA.


In fact, India and England were pretty mid for most of Akram's career. So if anything he had way worse numbers vs the worse teams than he did vs the best. You're all backwards here.
West Indies in the early 90s clearly has inferior output to Australia and India, it's closer to England's than it is to India's or Australia's

 

Top