Was Agarkar more tailunted than Akram?

[Mr. Wicket]

How about economy rates?

:offtopic: :orderorder: Bowlers are judged by their ability to take wickets, not bowl dot balls. You don't hear people claiming Gavin Larsen was a great bowler because of his 3.76 e/r. Besides the best way of clamping down the run rate is to dismiss the batsmen that are scoring frequently. Agarkar does that and as Shwetabh shows, with great success.

[Dark Warrior]

:amitdance:

[vvvslaxman]

No ways !!! Akram was genious...have to say agarkar could have improved his batting after playin for so long...

Just remove "I" from and replace with "er". That is aggy for you

[kabira]

:offtopic: :orderorder: Bowlers are judged by their ability to take wickets, not bowl dot balls. You don't hear people claiming Gavin Larsen was a great bowler because of his 3.76 e/r. Besides the best way of clamping down the run rate is to dismiss the batsmen that are scoring frequently. Agarkar does that and as Shwetabh shows, with great success.

yes right, comparing Economy rates between two different decades is not fair. When Akram bowled most of the times, initial part of his career, 220 was good score. and when Agarkar bowled, 280-300 was par score. So yes Agarkar is statistiscally greater than Akram

[The Outsider]

Economy rates? Agarkar is a strike bowler, Akram was a defensive bowler. Obviously, a strike bowler is going to go for a few runs. Also, as you've pointed out already Akram played most of his cricket before Agarkar debuted when scores of 200-220 used to be good scores, not the case when Agarkar played.

[DomainK]

And Agarkar also took the fastest 50 wickets (later broken by Mendis). Akram took his first 50 in 33 matches compared to Agarkar's 23. 10 matches more to get the same number of wickets. Another record- least number of matches played to take 200 wickets and complete 1000 runs- 133 matches. He is not only a great bowler, he is also a great all rounder.

[The Outsider]

50 wickets - Agarkar 23 matches - Akram 38 matches 100 wickets - Agarkar 67 matches - Akram 74 matches 150 wickets - Agarkar 97 matches - Akram 114 matches 200 wickets - Agarkar 133 matches - Akram - 143 matches 250 wickets - Agarkar 163 matches - Akram - 173 matches

[Malcolm Merlyn]

50 wickets - Agarkar 23 matches - Akram 38 matches 100 wickets - Agarkar 67 matches - Akram 74 matches 150 wickets - Agarkar 97 matches - Akram 114 matches 200 wickets - Agarkar 133 matches - Akram - 143 matches 250 wickets - Agarkar 163 matches - Akram - 173 matches

TWO WORDS:hatsoff: Genius

[DomainK]

50 wickets - Agarkar 23 matches - Akram 38 matches 100 wickets - Agarkar 67 matches - Akram 74 matches 150 wickets - Agarkar 97 matches - Akram 114 matches 200 wickets - Agarkar 133 matches - Akram - 143 matches 250 wickets - Agarkar 163 matches - Akram - 173 matches

That should remove any remaining doubt in anyone's mind.

[kabira]

and I bet most of his wickets will be in subcontinent. What a Class bowler. Only if could concentrate for more than 2 deliveries

[Guest Hiten.]

TWO WORDS:hatsoff: Genius

Where is the second word ? :hmmmm:

[Sachinism]

50 wickets - Agarkar 23 matches - Akram 38 matches 100 wickets - Agarkar 67 matches - Akram 74 matches 150 wickets - Agarkar 97 matches - Akram 114 matches 200 wickets - Agarkar 133 matches - Akram - 143 matches 250 wickets - Agarkar 163 matches - Akram - 173 matches

[table="head] Wickets| Agarkar| Akram 0-50| 23| 38 51-100| 44| 36 101-150| 30| 40 151-200| 36| 39 201-150| 30| 30[/table]

[iHammad]

What rubbish it doesnt matter if Agarkar has a better average or took more quicker wickets than Wasim Akram! Akram is a legend, while Agarkar is not even known by people in other countries! What counts is that Akram has more wickets than him and could swing the ball waay way way way way better than that chooto Aggy.

[kabira]

^if Aggy had played that many games, he would have overtaken Akrambhai easily.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Where is the second word ? :hmmmm:

the words were HATS OFF GENIUS was an after thought:giggle:

[Malcolm Merlyn]

What rubbish it doesnt matter if Agarkar has a better average or took more quicker wickets than Wasim Akram! Akram is a legend, while Agarkar is not even known by people in other countries! What counts is that Akram has more wickets than him and could swing the ball waay way way way way better than that chooto Aggy.

did u again changed your profile name????:giggle: hope you are not inspired by MOYO

[Show_stopper]

What rubbish it doesnt matter if Agarkar has a better average or took more quicker wickets than Wasim Akram! Akram is a legend, while Agarkar is not even known by people in other countries! What counts is that Akram has more wickets than him and could swing the ball waay way way way way better than that chooto Aggy.

But Akram was not a match winner..just check the 99 WC final scorecard.

[Chaos]

AKRAM is a legend.........absolutely legend.......no comparision with anyone let alone that no good AGGY....... As Sidhu Said"What stats show is very suggestive what they hide is very vital" Every batsman from Tendulkar to Lara and Great Bowlers like Donald and Ambrose that what Akram could do with the ball was exceptional.......So talent wise AGARKAR was no where near The Great Wasim Akram......

hello uncle ji... dont put lara in same line as tendulkar... mouni wont tolerate it!

[The Outsider]

Also, Agarkar did all this without ball tampering, match fixing, or drugs. Legend :adore:

[DomainK]

What rubbish it doesnt matter if Agarkar has a better average or took more quicker wickets than Wasim Akram! Akram is a legend, while Agarkar is not even known by people in other countries! What counts is that Akram has more wickets than him and could swing the ball waay way way way way better than that chooto Aggy.

What is the use of that way way way way way better swing that does not get you wickets? A bowler's primary job is to take wickets. Swing is an instrument, not an objective. The objective is always the wicket. Agarkar could have swung it more than Akram if he wanted to, but he decided to do it as much as was necessary for taking wickets. That is control. Control of the ball, of the batsman and the wicket. Akram has more wickets because he played more matches. In a head to head comparison, as has been conclusively proved in this thread, Agarkar is light years ahead of Akram.