Younis and Akram speed

[putrevus]

Anderson and Broad will enter into Hall of fame one day. Courtney Walsh is already is allready in hall of fame.

 

Waqar was better than all these three .He was as fearsome express fast bowler as any WI fast bowlers.

 

Is he on Mount Rushmore of fast bowlers, no he is not but it does not take away from his greatness.

 

Akram certainly is on Mount Rushmore for fast bowlers.

Edited July 5 by putrevus

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Nikhil_cric said:

This was Waqar in 2002 when in reality he was around 34/35 years old with a 13 year career behind him.  

 

I don't rate Waqar as a true ATG but he was genuinely quick at his peak. 

 

There's no doubt about it. 

 

 

We have a Shami, whose real age is around 38 now, with 13 years of career behind him, still clocking upto 144 k and regularly crossing 140 k.

 

Being quick for 3 or 4 years, and then dropping speed, is in old problem with Pakistani pacers. 

 

Sustaining speeds, both throughout one's career as well as throughout the day in test matches, is important for being a genuine quick too.

 

Zaheer was quick in the early 2000s ( not Waqar 1989 level but much quicker than rest of Zaheer's career, but we consider him fast-medium to brisk-medium ).

 

Yes, Waqar was quick in the 1989 to 1993 period. I watched him bowl live in matches. But 4 express years and then brisk pace to medium pace, is not something I would be happy about if he were one of our pacers.

Edited July 5 by express bowling

[putrevus]

12 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

We all accept the fact that Australia was the best team throughout the career of Sachin and Younis. Compare them both there
Sachin avg 53 in Australia, Bekar did jack.
Sachin's worst avg is in Pak, which was 40s (reason we all know)...everywhere else it was above 45 (49 in NZ, 54 in Eng, 46 in SA).

Sachin's closes was Lara (another ATG). He avg 42 in Australia, 33 in India, 37 in NZ. He scored heavily on his home...while Sachin's avg is equivalent to his overall avg at home.

Waqar's longevity doesn't mean he's an ATG with all the flaws mentioned above. Anderson has more wkts than Steyn, but no one will call Anderson an ATG, while Steyn is.

It does not work like that, a great player for whatever reason may not be at his best against certain opponent. It does not take away from his overall greatness,.

 

Bumrah has stunk in all odi knockout matches all his career, with him in line up India has been unable to seal test series wins against SA and England either and last year they won both tests without him and lost both tests with him that too unable to defend 375 in 4th innings.

 

Shami has out performed Bumrah in odi world cups by wide margin. Does it mean Shami is better bowler than Bumrah.

 

Waqar is an ATG great fast bowler by any book.There is no debate on it.

Edited July 5 by putrevus

[singhvivek141]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

It does not work like that, a great player for whatever reason may not be at his best against certain opponent. It does not take away from his overall greatness,.

 

Bumrah has stunk in all odi knockout matches all his career, with him in line up India has been unable to seal test series wins against SA and England either and they both tests last year without him and lost both test with him that too unable to defend 375 in 4th innings.

 

Shami has out performed Bumrah in odi world cups by wide margin. Does it mean Shami is better bowler than Bumrah.

 

Waqar is an ATG great fast bowler by any book.There is no debate on it.

I was talking only about tests, I am not bringing in ODI's where Waqar was beaten like a street dog by India twice in the WC games. He lost his mental balance after the 1996 WC pasting shows how helpless Waqar was when there was no ball tempering. In 2003 WC India kicked Waqar like a dead cow by bashing 72 odd runs in 8 overs, such ridiculous performance is enough to throw eggs on his face for his life, and here we're debating on him being an ATG.

Coming back to Tests, that's where we measure the consistency part, Bumrah has flopped in games, no doubt about that, no one can be at 100% in every game. But when you measure his impact across, it shows that along with lows, he has hit the highs over a reliable amount of time. Bumrah avg 17 in Australia is a goddamn stat even in itself which shows his performance. Australia is a fortress for any of Asian to conquer, similar India is for any SENA bowler.

Shami isnt an ATG, he is an Indian great...and he's better than Waqar. 

[singhvivek141]

19 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

We have a Shami, whose real age is around 38 now, with 13 years of career behind him, still clocking upto 144 k and regularly crossing 140 k.

 

Being quick for 3 or 4 years, and then dropping speed, is in old problem with Pakistani pacers. 

 

Sustaining speeds, both throughout one's career as well as throughout the day in test matches, is important for being a genuine quick too.

 

Zaheer was quick in the early 2000s ( not Waqar 1989 level but much quicker than rest of Zaheer's career, but we consider him fast-medium to brisk-medium ).

 

Yes, Waqar was quick in the 1989 to 1993 period. I watched him bowl live in matches. But 4 express years and then brisk pace to medium pace, is not something I would be happy about if he were one of our pacers.

Shami actually went reverse, he was slower in his younger days...I remember his debut series vs Pak and then SA ODI games...he was mostly oscillating at 135-136 with odd ball touching 140. In Aus series of 2014 he was even bowling 127-128k by 3rd session, was pretty disappointed.

His revival came after ODI WC 2015 injury layoff, when he came back with a runup of shorter strides. Since then he became a 135-145k pacer with even touch 146-147 in odd occasions, was consistently able to maintain his pace across sessions. 

[singhvivek141]

Also...the speed guns from 90s till mid 00s were unreliable. One series they'll will bowl medium pace, in next they all start to clock in mid 140s.
Something wasn't right.

[putrevus]

16 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

I was talking only about tests, I am not bringing in ODI's where Waqar was beaten like a street dog by India twice in the WC games. He lost his mental balance after the 1996 WC pasting shows how helpless Waqar was when there was no ball tempering. In 2003 WC India kicked Waqar like a dead cow by bashing 72 odd runs in 8 overs, such ridiculous performance is enough to throw eggs on his face for his life, and here we're debating on him being an ATG.

Coming back to Tests, that's where we measure the consistency part, Bumrah has flopped in games, no doubt about that, no one can be at 100% in every game. But when you measure his impact across, it shows that along with lows, he has hit the highs over a reliable amount of time. Bumrah avg 17 in Australia is a goddamn stat even in itself which shows his performance. Australia is a fortress for any of Asian to conquer, similar India is for any SENA bowler.

Shami isnt an ATG, he is an Indian great...and he's better than Waqar. 

So what India beat them in couple of matches. None of that matters, Waqar was an ATG fast bowler in any format.

 

I just gave you examples of Bumrah;s failures, it does not mean Bumrah is not an ATG fast bowler.

 

Waqar was an express fast bowler too not just some trundler .

 

Shami is not better than Waqar either.

Edited July 5 by putrevus

[Suhaan]

Kohki bootlickers always repay thelove they get from paxtani frauds

[Suhaan]

Waqr stunked in WCs just like Shami hasn't got that many wickets as bottle cap operators likeWaqar  did

Shami has the best bowling average and strike rate in ICC Men's CWC history.Shami took 55 wickets at an incredible average of 13.53 and a strike rate of 15.8.

But Shami has already compensated it by being borderline GOAT pacer(especially from Asia) ,so he truly is equally good ifnot better,even if you act too generous with  Waqar

Edited July 5 by Suhaan

[tapandrun]

23 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

We have a Shami, whose real age is around 38 now, with 13 years of career behind him, still clocking upto 144 k and regularly crossing 140 k.

 

Being quick for 3 or 4 years, and then dropping speed, is in old problem with Pakistani pacers. 

 

Sustaining speeds, both throughout one's career as well as throughout the day in test matches, is important for being a genuine quick too.

 

Zaheer was quick in the early 2000s ( not Waqar 1989 level but much quicker than rest of Zaheer's career, but we consider him fast-medium to brisk-medium ).

 

Yes, Waqar was quick in the 1989 to 1993 period. I watched him bowl live in matches. But 4 express years and then brisk pace to medium pace, is not something I would be happy about if he were one of our pacers.

 

Since the proper telecast and speed being displayed for each ball its hard to drop considerable amount of pace these days. A drop of 5-7 kmph bring bowler to criticism of being unfit or not putting the effort. 

 

Have pointed this out multiple times apart from Akthar/Lee/Tait/Wood no one was able to sustain high pace with longevity. These 4/5 bowlers can not be your base line.

Yes speedometer and speeds can be argued up-on but same can be done for current times.

 

Its clear that pre ball-by-ball display of speeds bowlers were not sustaining high pace. They were quick when they were in prime for say 2-3/4 yrs and injury here or there it were not that fast. The injury issue and drop in pace is genuine issue and happen today as well. And because of lack of speedometer bowler would not know if they are bowling at lower speeds untill it too late, and even by that time they would have made their names and hardly any batter would attack them.

 

It was how it was play out best bowler and target others and if there was 1 game where batter dominated a top bowler it became a thing of legends. Its not the case anymore even the top bowlers get hit,not because they are not bowling well but batters are ready to take them down.

 

Rabada/Nortje/Archer these are proper comparison, these bowlers also hit early to mid 150s in their prime and then dropped off pace, it would have been same for bowlers of the past.

 

Rabada etc have speedometer and modern sports science to help them recover some of lost pace but can they sustain for long period of time --Ans would be no.

Comparing two diff era and specially when there are not much evidences to compare with and no comparison being made by experts and all is done by fans hold no water.

 

In recent times we saw Nahid bowling 140-150(ish) kmph troubling the batters on Bd pitches , batters from Nz,Aus, Pak not bad sides and ppl talking about his pace, calling him express. This is no express pace. 

 

So its depends on time and era -- When Akthar/Shoib/Tait were there no one considered 145+ kmph express, it was supposed to be 153+ kmph.  

During Shoib/Lee era it seems like apart from Ind bowler everyone was bowling high 140s, Bond, Sami, Edwards are not even mentioned and talked when ppl talk of high pace , they may be talked as quickest if they not in same era of Lee/Akthar/Tait.

Today every bowler is bowling in same bracket -- High 130s to hardly touching 150ish kmph that is it.  

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

[express bowling]

3 minutes ago, tapandrun said:

 

Since the proper telecast and speed being displayed for each ball its hard to drop considerable amount of pace these days. A drop of 5-7 kmph bring bowler to criticism of being unfit or not putting the effort. 

 

Have pointed this out multiple times apart from Akthar/Lee/Tait/Wood no one was able to sustain high pace with longevity. These 4/5 bowlers can not be your base line.

Yes speedometer and speeds can be argued up-on but same can be done for current times.

 

Its clear that pre ball-by-ball display of speeds bowlers were not sustaining high pace. They were quick when they were in prime for say 2-3/4 yrs and injury here or there it were not that fast. The injury issue and drop in pace is genuine issue and happen today as well. And because of lack of speedometer bowler would not know if they are bowling at lower speeds untill it too late, and even by that time they would have made their names and hardly any batter would attack them.

 

It was how it was play out best bowler and target others and if there was 1 game where batter dominated a top bowler it became a thing of legends. Its not the case anymore even the top bowlers get hit,not because they are not bowling well but batters are ready to take them down.

 

Rabada/Nortje/Archer these are proper comparison, these bowlers also hit early to mid 150s in their prime and then dropped off pace, it would have been same for bowlers of the past.

 

Rabada etc have speedometer and modern sports science to help them recover some of lost pace but can they sustain for long period of time --Ans would be no.

Comparing two diff era and specially when there are not much evidences to compare with and no comparison being made by experts and all is done by fans hold no water.

 

In recent times we saw Nahid bowling 140-150(ish) kmph troubling the batters on Bd pitches , batters from Nz,Aus, Pak not bad sides and ppl talking about his pace, calling him express. This is no express pace. 

 

So its depends on time and era -- When Akthar/Shoib/Tait were there no one considered 145+ kmph express, it was supposed to be 153+ kmph.  

During Shoib/Lee era it seems like apart from Ind bowler everyone was bowling high 140s, Bond, Sami, Edwards are not even mentioned and talked when ppl talk of high pace , they may be talked as quickest if they not in same era of Lee/Akthar/Tait.

Today every bowler is bowling in same bracket -- High 130s to hardly touching 150ish kmph that is it.  

 

 

 

 

Keeping aside speed readings for the moment, batsmen can feel if a bowler is still quick.

 

Even from Pakistan, Imran actually became quicker in the 2nd half of his career. 

 

Among the 80s and 90s top pacers, Waqar looked to be the one who became the most innocuous after his quickest years.

 

While Imran and Wasim stayed fiery for a long time.

[tapandrun]

31 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Keeping aside speed readings for the moment, batsmen can feel if a bowler is still quick.

 

Even from Pakistan, Imran actually became quicker in the 2nd half of his career. 

 

Among the 80s and 90s top pacers, Waqar looked to be the one who became the most innocuous after his quickest years.

 

While Imran and Wasim stayed fiery for a long time.

 

Yes Waqar was v.quick out of the box think after he had back injury think SA tour or something like that , then he kept loosing the pace. Have pointed this multiple times in many cases once bowler has injury and if they do not recover and regain their speeds in quick time then it becomes impossible all the bowler can do aftet that is to push v.hard and get injured again. Its v.imp that bowler get to their pre injury default speeds as quickly as possible.

 

Both Imran and wasim got faster as they gained some muscles bt both were nt that quick just out of the box.

 

Waqar was not that skillful he relied on high pace and revers , once pace was gone, he was v.much like Ind pacer who would talk about reverse and would say they had no idea how it worked. Not accepting that reverse only works at high pace.

 

Edited July 5 by tapandrun

[Nikhil_cric]

3 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 

We have a Shami, whose real age is around 38 now, with 13 years of career behind him, still clocking upto 144 k and regularly crossing 140 k.

 

Being quick for 3 or 4 years, and then dropping speed, is in old problem with Pakistani pacers. 

 

Sustaining speeds, both throughout one's career as well as throughout the day in test matches, is important for being a genuine quick too.

 

Zaheer was quick in the early 2000s ( not Waqar 1989 level but much quicker than rest of Zaheer's career, but we consider him fast-medium to brisk-medium ).

 

Yes, Waqar was quick in the 1989 to 1993 period. I watched him bowl live in matches. But 4 express years and then brisk pace to medium pace, is not something I would be happy about if he were one of our pacers.

Shami has access to some great workload management, coaches, physios etc. which was not there in Waqar's time especially for Pakistanis. Not to mention the back stress fractures

 

Waqar clocked 150+ even in 1996 so it wasn't just 4 years 

 

Many lost pace in those days - Ambrose, Gillespie, Gough - all lost pace. 

 

[express bowling]

 

1 minute ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Waqar clocked 150+ even in 1996 so it wasn't just 4 years 

 

It is the day in day out speeds that matter.  

 

In general, Waqar looked much slower in 1996.  

 

1 minute ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Many lost pace in those days - Ambrose, Gillespie, Gough - all lost pace. 

 

 

Not really. It was marginal till they reached their last few years. Plus Ambrose 6'7" and Gillespie 6'5" had high release points to rely on too and never became innocuous.

 

Waqar, with his round arm action and medium height, had a low release point and needed the extra pace. A problem which the 6'2" Akram did not face.

 

Which is why his bowling average rose a lot in the last 50% of the tests he played.

[govinda]

Waqar had bumrahesque figures from 90 -95. He was geniunely quick. Imran was about bumrah pace from 1976-88

[New guy]

11 hours ago, putrevus said:

.

 

I just gave you examples of Bumrah;s failures, it does not mean Bumrah is not an ATG fast bowler.

 

 

Of course you would, you have been spreading fake agenda against Bumrah for years now.

 

And its pretty telling that after constantly attacking our best bowler ever under different pretexts, you are now all gung ho for an overhyped Pakistani bowler.

 

Sometimes such discussions really shows the true face of certain people. Manjerekar?

[Gollum]

14 hours ago, putrevus said:

So what India beat them in couple of matches. None of that matters, Waqar was an ATG fast bowler in any format.

 

I just gave you examples of Bumrah;s failures, it does not mean Bumrah is not an ATG fast bowler.

 

Waqar was an express fast bowler too not just some trundler .

 

Shami is not better than Waqar either.

Waqar was the greatest beneficiary of ball tampering. Check the scorecards of the Pak-Eng and Pak-NZ tests in early-mid 90s. 200/2 and then mysterious collpase to 240 all out, with Waqar suddenly becoming unplayable with the old ball.

 

He would have been exposed in today's era, just like all Pak tamperers and chuckers. 

 

Wasim was genuinely great and would have been a champ even without the dark arts. 

[Gollum]

Bumrah's competition is Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, Akram, McGrath, Steyn.

 

Not a tier 2 bottle cap sadakchaap like Waqar. Aadmi bhi ekdum suar hai, who brought religion into cricket after the Dewbai win in 2021. 

 

Besides Waqar has the unique distinction of never turning up against the best batting lineups or big games. He is even more overrated than Inzi, the so called 'best player of phaast bowling (certified by Kaali Dal)' who had one 100 in 120 innings against Aus+RSA.

[Nikhil_cric]

14 hours ago, putrevus said:

Anderson and Broad will enter into Hall of fame one day. Courtney Walsh is already is allready in hall of fame.

 

Waqar was better than all these three .He was as fearsome express fast bowler as any WI fast bowlers.

 

Is he on Mount Rushmore of fast bowlers, no he is not but it does not take away from his greatness.

 

Akram certainly is on Mount Rushmore for fast bowlers.

Marshall, Ambrose, McGrath, Steyn.  Akram not Mount Rushmore level as a Test bowler. 

 

 

[Vk1]

4 hours ago, Gollum said:

Waqar was the greatest beneficiary of ball tampering. Check the scorecards of the Pak-Eng and Pak-NZ tests in early-mid 90s. 200/2 and then mysterious collpase to 240 all out, with Waqar suddenly becoming unplayable with the old ball.

 

He would have been exposed in today's era, just like all Pak tamperers and chuckers. 

 

Wasim was genuinely great and would have been a champ even without the dark arts. 

Pak bowlers benefited with tampering till early 2000s.. i could remember few games in Sharjah.. even Abdul Razzaq was unplayable

Edited July 6 by Vk1