Younis and Akram speed

[Singh bling]

 

 

Clearly around 150 or above.

[rkt.india]

14 hours ago, Singh bling said:

 

 

Clearly around 150 or above.

Waqar was quick for sure. But Srinath was as quick and quicker when both retired in 2003 WC.

[rkt.india]

 

 

 

[putrevus]

On 11/12/2025 at 11:50 AM, singhvivek141 said:

Again, quality is not the topic of discussion here. It's the "speed" and only speed.

Umesh Yadav is faster than any pacer we have produced post 2000's, just because Bumrah and Shami are better than him, it doesn't mean we can't simply talk about Umesh. As many have pointed out, Umesh was perhaps the first pacer under the modern speed guns who destroyed this "myth" that Indians can't bowl fast. Even at age of 36-37, he was hitting 144-146 in IPL. 

If we stick to talking about the quality, then Waqar avg 76 in India, 40 in Australia (which was the strongest team of modern times). So he choked against the strongest team and the arch rivals...everything else is secondary.
Shami who is playing cricket in the modern era of flat bats, no ball tempering and better batting conditions outbowl Bekar Younis in Australia, let's not even talk about Bumrah who will wipe the floor with Akram on one hand and Bekar Younis on the other. Avgs even less than 20 in Australia which Akram and Bekar can only dream about.

Only speed has no value, there are lot of fast bowlers who are faster than them

 

Waqar Sample size is too small. Against India and Australia

 

Shami is not better bowler than Waqar.

 

No Bumrah is not better bowler than Akram either.

[singhvivek141]

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

No Bumrah is not better bowler than Akram either.

Despite bowling in modern era, Bumrah's economy is very similar to Akram.

Bumrah has better numbers (both in avg and SR) than Akram in Australia, England, SA (not counting WI, home country). Akram only has an edge in NZ.
Bumrah's worse is in NZ (avg 31), Akram's in SA (avg 39). Both have played 2 test each so that negates....NET to NET Bumrah is in clear lead.
Bumrah has played less than 30% of his matches in home conditions (which is spin friendly),avgs under 20. Akram has played almost 38-39% matches at home (and we know how unbiased Pooki umpires are) yet avgs above 20.

Akram has more hype (ofcourse he deserve) coz Pakistan promotes their fast bowlers heavily. Bumrah don't coz India can't look away from their batters. But Bumrah is ahead of Akram in majority of the factors, maybe longevity goes in Akram's favour coz he started pretty early, while Bumrah has to wait additional 4-5 years to get the test cap coz again, India can't look anything beyond their batters.

 

 

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

Waqar Sample size is too small. Against India and Australia

Shami is not better bowler than Waqar.

Waqar has played 7 tests in Australia, not a small sample size. Failure in 4-5 tests can end the career of any player.

Shami has better numbers in Australia, SA, SL...Waqar is ahead in England and NZ...not counting home and WI coz they've gone to dogs.
Not even considering ODI's and specially ICC tournaments where Shami is a legend and Waqar a bonafide choker.
 

Edited November 16, 2025 by singhvivek141

[putrevus]

6 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Despite bowling in modern era, Bumrah's economy is very similar to Akram.

Bumrah has better numbers (both in avg and SR) than Akram in Australia, England, SA (not counting WI, home country). Akram only has an edge in NZ.
Bumrah's worse is in NZ (avg 31), Akram's in SA (avg 39). Both have played 2 test each so that negates....NET to NET Bumrah is in clear lead.
Bumrah has played less than 30% of his matches in home conditions (which is spin friendly),avgs under 20. Akram has played almost 38-39% matches at home (and we know how unbiased Pooki umpires are) yet avgs above 20.

Akram has more hype (ofcourse he deserve) coz Pakistan promotes their fast bowlers heavily. Bumrah don't coz India can't look away from their batters. But Bumrah is ahead of Akram in majority of the factors, maybe longevity goes in Akram's favour coz he started pretty early, while Bumrah has to wait additional 4-5 years to get the test cap coz again, India can't look anything beyond their batters.

 

 

Waqar has played 7 tests in Australia, not a small sample size. Failure in 4-5 tests can end the career of any player.

Shami has better numbers in Australia, SA, SL...Waqar is ahead in England and NZ...not counting home and WI coz they've gone to dogs.
Not even considering ODI's and specially ICC tournaments where Shami is a legend and Waqar a bonafide choker.
 

Waqar played against strongest Australian team where as Shami played against one of the weakest team , one series Warner and Smith were not even there. 
 

So no Shami is no way better than Waqar, I love Shami but he is not even close.

 

Bumrah went wicket less on juicy SA and England tests where other inferior bowlers were talking bucketfuls.

 

Noway Bumrah is better bowler than Alram plus in Odis Bumrah is lot weaker than Akram Akram would have been great in t20s if he had played.

 

With his ability to swing the ball both ways , guy like Trent Boult has done well in t20s.

 

Akram unlike Boult would be lethal in death overs too.

 

So no way Bumrah is better bowler than Akram.

 

Akram would be on Mount Rushmore of fast bowlers not just due to his bowling abilities but him being the best left arm pace bowler ever to have played this game.

Edited November 16, 2025 by putrevus

[Rightarmfast]

On 11/6/2025 at 7:55 PM, putrevus said:

You want to give medal to Srinath for beating Akram and Waqar in 2003 world cup go for it.

 

Wasim was like Marshall or Steyn, he could crank up speed when he wanted but for most part operated within himself.

 

Waqar had stress fracture, even Dennis Lillee who had the same injury became medium pacer after his injury.Srinath had rotator cuff injury so not comparable.It is admirable Srinath after his rotator cuff injury came back strong .

 

While I agree they were doing ball tampering and had help from home cooked umpires, they were still far better bowlers than Srinath.

 

Just like Imran was a better bowler than Kapil with or without ball tampering but as allrounder and  batsman Kapil was better.Kapil was far superior as he could change the match on its head by himself which Imran in his life time could not do.

 

Clocking 149 few times does not make anyone express fast bowler.

Have a look at this clip. Wasim, as good as he is bowling, Wasim was still in his peak in 94. So, he looks like he is bowling 150, but listen to the commentator, at 3:25 the commentator says Wasim is bowling with a lot of venom. And at 3:45 he says, Wasim is bowling at around 135! That was venom for them. And yes, the commentator is not talking out of thin air. It isnt that speed guns were not there in 80's and 90's. Stadiums had them. They just didnt broadcast. 

In many of the matches from 90's, I have seen the speeds being shown within the stadium. 

So, not saying that Wasim is not bowling quality, but his pace is still in 130's, and he looks quicker. Because of bounce and his arm action. ( Although, his bowling in his peak doesnt look as menacing as a peak Bumrah to me)

 

Watch from 3:25- 3:50

 

@express bowling @Suhaan @Mosher @Vilander @tapandrun @singhvivek141 

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2025 by Rightarmfast

[rkt.india]

On 11/16/2025 at 4:41 PM, putrevus said:

Waqar played against strongest Australian team where as Shami played against one of the weakest team , one series Warner and Smith were not even there. 
 

So no Shami is no way better than Waqar, I love Shami but he is not even close.

 

Bumrah went wicket less on juicy SA and England tests where other inferior bowlers were talking bucketfuls.

 

Noway Bumrah is better bowler than Alram plus in Odis Bumrah is lot weaker than Akram Akram would have been great in t20s if he had played.

 

With his ability to swing the ball both ways , guy like Trent Boult has done well in t20s.

 

Akram unlike Boult would be lethal in death overs too.

 

So no way Bumrah is better bowler than Akram.

 

Akram would be on Mount Rushmore of fast bowlers not just due to his bowling abilities but him being the best left arm pace bowler ever to have played this game.

Yes, Bumrah is better than Akram.

[Suhaan]

4 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Have a look at this clip. Wasim, as good as he is bowling, Wasim was still in his peak in 94. So, he looks like he is bowling 150, but listen to the commentator, at 3:25 the commentator says Wasim is bowling with a lot of venom. And at 3:45 he says, Wasim is bowling at around 135! That was venom for them. And yes, the commentator is not talking out of thin air. It isnt that speed guns were not there in 80's and 90's. Stadiums had them. They just didnt broadcast. 

In many of the matches from 90's, I have seen the speeds being shown within the stadium. 

So, not saying that Wasim is not bowling quality, but his pace is still in 130's, and he looks quicker. Because of bounce and his arm action. ( Although, his bowling in his peak doesnt look as menacing as a peak Bumrah to me)

 

Watch from 3:25- 3:50

 

@express bowling @Suhaan @Mosher @Vilander @tapandrun @singhvivek141 

 

 

 

Had this quick arm typical pakistani action to create an illusion of being genuinely fast

Ata-ur-rehmann had an arm action of mach 4 but delivered slower than Venkatesh Prasad

[singhvivek141]

9 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Have a look at this clip. Wasim, as good as he is bowling, Wasim was still in his peak in 94. So, he looks like he is bowling 150, but listen to the commentator, at 3:25 the commentator says Wasim is bowling with a lot of venom. And at 3:45 he says, Wasim is bowling at around 135! That was venom for them. And yes, the commentator is not talking out of thin air. It isnt that speed guns were not there in 80's and 90's. Stadiums had them. They just didnt broadcast. 

In many of the matches from 90's, I have seen the speeds being shown within the stadium. 

So, not saying that Wasim is not bowling quality, but his pace is still in 130's, and he looks quicker. Because of bounce and his arm action. ( Although, his bowling in his peak doesnt look as menacing as a peak Bumrah to me)

 

Watch from 3:25- 3:50

 

@express bowling @Suhaan @Mosher @Vilander @tapandrun @singhvivek141 

 

 

 

Have been saying for ages, Akram wasn't a speed demon. A 130-140k pacer with peak pace around 143-144, but that doesn't make him a lesser bowler. His excellence was in making the ball talk, in modern terms, Trent Boult is the closest comparison to Akram.
 

[tapandrun]

10 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Have a look at this clip. Wasim, as good as he is bowling, Wasim was still in his peak in 94. So, he looks like he is bowling 150, but listen to the commentator, at 3:25 the commentator says Wasim is bowling with a lot of venom. And at 3:45 he says, Wasim is bowling at around 135! That was venom for them. And yes, the commentator is not talking out of thin air. It isnt that speed guns were not there in 80's and 90's. Stadiums had them. They just didnt broadcast. 

In many of the matches from 90's, I have seen the speeds being shown within the stadium. 

So, not saying that Wasim is not bowling quality, but his pace is still in 130's, and he looks quicker. Because of bounce and his arm action. ( Although, his bowling in his peak doesnt look as menacing as a peak Bumrah to me)

 

Watch from 3:25- 3:50

 

@express bowling @Suhaan @Mosher @Vilander @tapandrun @singhvivek141 

 

 

 

 

Mentioned this before till the Speedometer became common thing in broadcasting. The bowler were not bowling at consistently high pace.

Bowling super fast and consistency over longer term only came with Lee and Shoib, who bowled express pace through out the matcha and over the years.

 

Bowler would come warm up in the spell and once in rhythm they bowl fast and then again go back bowling rubbish till the wkt star responding or they had batting side under pressure.

 

Wasim for most part of his career was 130-142 kmph bowler, could have been little faster in absolute prime. I read a lot of mention about him touching 150/153 kmph but never found the series or the match, some said 1990s claiming commentators saying it. Those are secondary reporting v.unreliable.

 

He may have touched 145 kmph.

 

Wasim, he had all the skill to not to push his body every game vs every team to be effective, he had groin injury , diabetes , etc..

 

Mentioned this on other threads as well speedometer made bowlers more faster and sustain the pace and be competitive, they can see the reading can tell where they stand in terms of speeds where other bowlers are wrt to them. Now if a bowler is not bowling their usual pace the direct question is are they fully fit , is there a niggle or not??

 

Previously no such thing was there, plus not long back once the bowlers have established the name most team would respectfully play them out waiting for weaker bowlers.

So no real need to push every game, today every one is fair game for batter.

 

Sharadul, Agarkar, Mohit sharma ..etc have all touched 145+ kmph in their time are they 140+ kmph answer is no. 

 

Not long back Shaheen was touching 150 kmph though it was small peak couple of seasons (1.5 years) and bowling 145+kmph consistently in t20is but now he hardly touches 140 kmph these days.

 

He is not same menace that he was during that time, but he still picks most wkts as a pacer for Pak.

Amir when he cam in to intnl cricket was cranking up 145+ kmph in 2nd season in test and after making his return after the ban he was cranking good clicks and then suddenly pace dropped off, he hardly bowled 140 kmph

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ultimate_Game]

On 11/1/2025 at 6:10 PM, Ranvir said:

I think their top speed at their peak was overrated. Srinath was clocking faster than them in the late 90s and early 2000s and yes he also suffered from major injuries at the time.

 

I think both operated around 135 - 142 mark, maybe the odd effort ball around 145.

 

Younis looked faster than he was due to pitching the ball full. Both got a lot of movement which again exaggerates speed.

 

Thoughts?

 

Srinath may have been "faster" in patches but he wasn't hostile and didn't have the attitude of a fast bowler. Plus Akram had so much variety and could bowl 6 different balls every over. He never let batters settle and be comfortable. With Srinath you saw hunched shoulders and stooping like a "lachaar 4 ladkiyon ka baap".

 

Waqar was a bit overhyped. Post his back trouble he wasn't that great and mostly relied on "reverse" swing which was due to tampering. But Akram was a different beast.

[Trichromatic]

On 12/13/2025 at 10:30 PM, tapandrun said:

Wasim for most part of his career was 130-142 kmph bowler, could have been little faster in absolute prime. I read a lot of mention about him touching 150/153 kmph but never found the series or the match, some said 1990s claiming commentators saying it. Those are secondary reporting v.unreliable.

 

He may have touched 145 kmph.

 

 

May have touched 145 kph? Any fast bowler has bowled faster than that.

[Trichromatic]

37 year old Akram was bowling at avg 135 kph in 2003 WC.

[rkt.india]

3 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

37 year old Akram was bowling at avg 135 kph in 2003 WC.

36 year old Zaheer also bowled 135+. 40 year old Anderson hit 135-140. 35 year old Starc is bowling 145.

[Rightarmfast]

5 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

37 year old Akram was bowling at avg 135 kph in 2003 WC.

To be fair, in his own words I have heard Akram say that at his peak he would have bowled between 145-150. But I guess he touched 145ish on very rare occassions. 

[Ranvir]

6 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

37 year old Akram was bowling at avg 135 kph in 2003 WC.

His average was in the low 130s, the same as it was in 1999.

[Ranvir]

8 hours ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Srinath may have been "faster" in patches but he wasn't hostile and didn't have the attitude of a fast bowler. Plus Akram had so much variety and could bowl 6 different balls every over. He never let batters settle and be comfortable. With Srinath you saw hunched shoulders and stooping like a "lachaar 4 ladkiyon ka baap".

 

Waqar was a bit overhyped. Post his back trouble he wasn't that great and mostly relied on "reverse" swing which was due to tampering. But Akram was a different beast.

He wasn't faster in patches, he was faster overall. This thread is about their bowling speeds not overall performance, which Akram and Younis were clearly superior in.

[Ultimate_Game]

5 hours ago, Ranvir said:

He wasn't faster in patches, he was faster overall. This thread is about their bowling speeds not overall performance, which Akram and Younis were clearly superior in.

 

Bowling speed doesn't mean anything. You can very well say Srinath was faster than McGrath, Pollock or any number of ATGs but it really doesn't prove anything. Likes of Varun Aaron or Umran Malik were fast too and what does that prove? Srinath was nowhere near other top pacers, especially Wasim Akram. Plenty of folks will pick Akram and possibly Waqar in an ATG team but I doubt Srinath makes it to anyone's list. He wouldn't even make it to the list of 90s best pacers. He was average to good but that's about it.

[Ranvir]

19 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Bowling speed doesn't mean anything. You can very well say Srinath was faster than McGrath, Pollock or any number of ATGs but it really doesn't prove anything. Likes of Varun Aaron or Umran Malik were fast too and what does that prove? Srinath was nowhere near other top pacers, especially Wasim Akram. Plenty of folks will pick Akram and possibly Waqar in an ATG team but I doubt Srinath makes it to anyone's list. He wouldn't even make it to the list of 90s best pacers. He was average to good but that's about it.

I don't know what's so hard for you to understand, the title of this thread is 'Younis and Akram speed'. I'm only talking about speed, nothing else.