• 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.

Wasim Akram vs Fred Trueman

Who was the greater fast bowler?(Tests)

  • Wasim Akram

    Votes: 17 41.5%
  • Fred Trueman

    Votes: 24 58.5%

  • Total voters
    41

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
No, I said myself that fielding did affect his numbers. But we don't know how much and may never know. I still dont think even with the catches that he would go past McGrath and Marshall.
I agree. What I'm saying though is that the very fact that it cannot be quantified but people acknowledge it did affect his stats adversely means the fielding support argument shouldn't be dismissed outright, especially when people compare Wasim with other ATGs on the basis of those adversely affected surface level stats.

Obviously subtracting 5 points or whatever from his average like PFK did is ridiculous.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
And again, you've argued with me for years that I overvalue catching.
Not quite. I think you overvalue it when selecting slip fielding batsmen in ATG XIs and stuff like that. My opinion is that there are diminishing returns for slip catchers/keepers where after a certain baseline level of quality it doesnt matter a great deal how much better they are, compared to primary skills like batting/bowling. So I just push back on the notion that its important enough for them to be considered allrounders.

Wasim's slip fielders were generally imo below that baseline level of acceptable quality.
 
Last edited:

kyear2

International Captain
I'm at a loss how you've said this with no irony. Ridiculous statement.
Because you're missing my point. Why didn't they ever improve it over almost 20 years .

And again I say, Ambrose had some of the absolute worst wicket keepers in history, so do we adjust for the time he had Murray and Browne?

The west indies, Australia etc didn't have good cordons and fielding support by accident. It takes leadership, skill and practice, Smali said it wasn't that big a factor when Imran was around because it wasn't tolerated. How can you justify having horrible support, and doing nothing about it for a decade. Sacrifice a few runs and get a specialist in at 2nd and shuffle around him, have more catching drills.
There's an anecdote about a fielder dropping a catch while Viv was captain, and it goes that he was banished to the boundary, and even when he reached there Viv kept motioning for him to go back further.

And again, every bowler and batsman had challenges. Do we go back and adjust for them as well? This argument to justify Wasim as being the best because.... Is just ridiculous.

And yes, catching is extremely important, it played significant roles in all of the great teams in the past and contributed to the successes of McGrath, Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn etc..but two points, how do you quantify how much his numbers would have improved, and why would we. Why didn't Pakistan do more to provide that support and why should we single him out to adjust figures when it can be said that most players faced challenges. That's my point.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Because you're missing my point. Why didn't they ever improve it over almost 20 years .

And again I say, Ambrose had some of the absolute worst wicket keepers in history, so do we adjust for the time he had Murray and Browne?

The west indies, Australia etc didn't have good cordons and fielding support by accident. It takes leadership, skill and practice, Smali said it wasn't that big a factor when Imran was around because it wasn't tolerated. How can you justify having horrible support, and doing nothing about it for a decade. Sacrifice a few runs and get a specialist in at 2nd and shuffle around him, have more catching drills.
There's an anecdote about a fielder dropping a catch while Viv was captain, and it goes that he was banished to the boundary, and even when he reached there Viv kept motioning for him to go back further.

And again, every bowler and batsman had challenges. Do we go back and adjust for them as well? This argument to justify Wasim as being the best because.... Is just ridiculous.

And yes, catching is extremely important, it played significant roles in all of the great teams in the past and contributed to the successes of McGrath, Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn etc..but two points, how do you quantify how much his numbers would have improved, and why would we. Why didn't Pakistan do more to provide that support and why should we single him out to adjust figures when it can be said that most players faced challenges. That's my point.
Doesnt need to be easily quantifiable to be a valid point does it? Again, the PFK method of subtracting arbitrary numbers from his average is not something I agree with.

Happy to accept your word that Ambrose's numbers might have suffered marginally because his keepers were apparently terrible. I never pushed back against it because it was never brought up. If you feel that it was bad enough that his numbers vs McGrath''s shouldnt be compared in a simple a vs b way then I'd argue you should bring it up more often.
 

kyear2

International Captain
Not quite. I think you overvalue it when selecting slip fielding batsmen in ATG XIs and stuff like that. My opinion is that there are diminishing returns for slip catchers/keepers where after a certain baseline level of quality it doesnt matter a great deal how much better they are, compared to primary skills like batting/bowling. So I just push back on the notion that its important enough for them to be considered allrounders.

Wasim's slip fielders were generally accepted to be below that baseline level of acceptable quality.
No, not all rounders, but better all round players. For instance, Tendulkar or Smith / Lara for a place on my team, I'll take the latter. But I do accept your point and it's not like I'm trying to force Hooper or Waugh into the team, just think it is an overlooked factor in rating of players overall.

And yes Pakistan was horrible, but again my basic point remains, we can't quantify how much it would have improved his numbers. And my next question, why wasn't it worked on?
 

kyear2

International Captain
Doesnt need to be easily quantifiable to be a valid point does it? Again, the PFK method of subtracting arbitrary numbers from his average is not something I agree with.

Happy to accept your word that Ambrose's numbers might have suffered marginally because his keepers were apparently terrible. I never pushed back against it because it was never brought up. If you feel that it was bad enough that his numbers vs McGrath''s shouldnt be compared in a simple a vs b way then I'd argue you should bring it up more often.
But why, McGrath was the better bowler. And again, have absolutely no way of quantifying how much of a difference it made
 

kyear2

International Captain
"Pakistan's slip fielding was especially bad"
"It doesn't matter though"
Never said that. What I did say, is that it doesn't matter enough to push him from where I have him just above or below the top 10, to undisputed no. 1 or even top 5.

Is that what you're arguing?
 

trundler

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Never said that. What I did say, is that it doesn't matter enough to push him from where I have him just above or below the top 10, to undisputed no. 1 or even top 5.

Is that what you're arguing?
My position has always been that there really isn't much difference between the top ~8. Like I said in the ATG selection thread, there's virtually no drop off in quality between the first 3 XIs. But Wasim especially gets underrated here in a reactionary way because people shut off their common sense and pretend the abject fielding had a negligible impact. Faulting Wasim for being 2 shy of 4 WPM over 18 years is incredibly daft for example. So no, I don't think McGrath or Marshall were especially better, they just happened to play in stronger teams which is no coincidence.
 

kyear2

International Captain
My position has always been that there really isn't much difference between the top ~8. Like I said in the ATG selection thread, there's virtually no drop off in quality between the first 3 XIs. But Wasim especially gets underrated here in a reactionary way because people shut off their common sense and pretend the abject fielding had a negligible impact. Faulting Wasim for being 2 shy of 4 WPM over 18 years is incredibly daft for example. So no, I don't think McGrath or Marshall were especially better, they just happened to play in stronger teams which is no coincidence.
And on that we disagree, and that's cool. I do think there's somewhat of a top tier and for me that's my top 5, you can and do see it differently and that's what forums are for.

Didn't say negligible btw, said unquantifiable and who says that isn't already factored in for most.

Also think Hadlee is better btw, and I don't think he played in a stronger team.
 

kyear2

International Captain
Learn to do it right, FFS...

There's a video by Robelina on YouTube from the '84 Windies tour to Australia where they show all of the wickets, catches and drops from that series.
That and from what I saw growing up and experienced from my extremely low level of playing the game shaped my views that slip catching is extremely important and critical to a team's success in cricket. As I've said before it's just as important as having a decent tail or having part time bowlers etc...

I also never said it doesn't matter, and also said it probably does factor in to how most already rate him

What I have said, especially in response to PFK is that it wasn't enough to catapult him to no 1 or even top 5 in my opinion. What I've also said is that it's near impossible to quantify how much it would have changed his numbers.
Also if we go back, there's multiple reasons why we can go back and adjust anyone's numbers. But they all did what they did, and I'm sure that most do factor in what Wasim had to deal with.

That's my entire point. But feel free to continue to mis-characterise or oversimplify my statements.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
That's my entire point. But feel free to continue to mis-characterise or oversimplify my statements.
Where did that come from? I was just pointing out it works better as this meme. :laugh:

FWIW, while I am more in agreement with @trundler , I do get your position based on your last two posts. But I think you could have argued/articulated it better than you have.
 

Kirkut

International Debutant
There's a video by Robelina on YouTube from the '84 Windies tour to Australia where they show all of the wickets, catches and drops from that series.
That and from what I saw growing up and experienced from my extremely low level of playing the game shaped my views that slip catching is extremely important and critical to a team's success in cricket. As I've said before it's just as important as having a decent tail or having part time bowlers etc...

I also never said it doesn't matter, and also said it probably does factor in to how most already rate him

What I have said, especially in response to PFK is that it wasn't enough to catapult him to no 1 or even top 5 in my opinion. What I've also said is that it's near impossible to quantify how much it would have changed his numbers.
Also if we go back, there's multiple reasons why we can go back and adjust anyone's numbers. But they all did what they did, and I'm sure that most do factor in what Wasim had to deal with.

That's my entire point. But feel free to continue to mis-characterise or oversimplify my statements.
More than dropped catches I would say that Wasim had times where he went through motions and nothing happened, otherwise he came up with magic spells where he got late swing like in the UK under hot Indian sun and got Dravid/Laxman clean bowled. McGrath and Marshall also had times where they had to work hard to get wickets but they've always made sure that batsmen earned their runs even if wickets weren't coming.

In ODIs though Akram was the greatest, better than McGrath IMO and Marshall not even in the contest.
 

kyear2

International Captain
More than dropped catches I would say that Wasim had times where he went through motions and nothing happened, otherwise he came up with magic spells where he got late swing like in the UK under hot Indian sun and got Dravid/Laxman clean bowled. McGrath and Marshall also had times where they had to work hard to get wickets but they've always made sure that batsmen earned their runs even if wickets weren't coming.

In ODIs though Akram was the greatest, better than McGrath IMO and Marshall not even in the contest.
That's the thing, I think sometimes persons conflate test and odi Wasim.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Or people knows Akram stats are more impressive than the likes of Ambrose.
If they combine ODI and tests of course Akram would come out better than pretty much any other bowl except McG.

Ambrose wasn't very good in ODIs, a little better than Marshall, but nobody is counting ODIs here.

So....nah
 

Top