Younis and Akram speed

[Ranvir]

21 minutes ago, tapandrun said:

which match he clocked 156  kmph-- benoni, paarl , centurion 

Logic doesn't seem to be your strong point. Srinath had a serious shoulder injury in 1997 and yet he was still the second fastest bowler in the 1999 World Cup at 149kph. In the 2003 World Cup aged 33 he bowled over 140kph so he was obviously faster at his peak.

 

Where is evidence of Wasim Akram bring fast or Waqar Younis being express?

[tapandrun]

3 hours ago, Ranvir said:

Logic doesn't seem to be your strong point. Srinath had a serious shoulder injury in 1997 and yet he was still the second fastest bowler in the 1999 World Cup at 149kph. In the 2003 World Cup aged 33 he bowled over 140kph so he was obviously faster at his peak.

 

Where is evidence of Wasim Akram bring fast or Waqar Younis being express?

I am only1 who is posting things with some substantial evidences,  I have shared the cricinfo article from where its all originating - The claims of 156 kmph.

The cricinfo page where the records are shared by same author eddi smith.  Also posted the sprtskeeda page where it claimed srinath bowled 154 kmph in same WC.

 

Rest no one is giving any evidences of any claims ,its all here-say. 

 

 

Again to that point he bowled 140+ kmph in wc -2003 and claims he could have would have at higher pace in prime. I can not tell much about it.

 

Nehra bowled 149 kmph with bad leg and puking on ground, does not mean he bowled higher than that when fit. Half fit batter have scored runs does not mean they would score 500 if fully fit.

 

I never said Akram was express pace, I my comments i maintained that even in his peak he would have been 138-143 kmph bowler and could slip 1-2 145-148 kmph balls.

 

Also mentioned that waqar was no tait/lee/akthar, he would have bowled high 140 kmph and his higestt 153 kmph. I compared his speeds to pathirana who in peak fitness can bowl multiple balls in high 140s and upto 151-152 in an over but nt any higher 

 

Time stamp :52.10 , you can see speed shown to be 150 kmph, this is the match/series from where claims of 153 kmph comes from , there is a compilation video of showing waqar's speed reading , think it was shared on this forum.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 11, 2025 by tapandrun

[New guy]

On 11/9/2025 at 7:14 PM, putrevus said:

I don't understand the fascination to prove Srinath bowled faster than Waqar or Wasim. Does it matter if he bowled faster even if we assume he bowled faster as a bowler he was  inferior to either of them.

 

According to geniuses here Andy Roberts/Garner were trundlers but Harshit Rana is a pace bowler.

 

 

I think the point is, if he was allowed to tamper the same way as them (or even taught legal reverse), he would be as good or better than them.

 

Waqars reputation is mainly built on taking wickets through reverse at home, at a time when batsmen were unable to play reverse and there was no scrutiny on what bowlers did.

 

Once neutral cameras/umpires etc came, Waqar and Srinath's numbers became more or less same.

[tapandrun]

14 minutes ago, New guy said:

I think the point is, if he was allowed to tamper the same way as them (or even taught legal reverse), he would be as good or better than them.

 

Waqars reputation is mainly built on taking wickets through reverse at home, at a time when batsmen were unable to play reverse and there was no scrutiny on what bowlers did.

 

Once neutral cameras/umpires etc came, Waqar and Srinath's numbers became more or less same.

Think the issue with reverse is that Srinath didnt bowl full enough to use reverse effectively.

This is where both Wasim and Waqar were good bowling full and when needed they can pin a bouncer or two to push back the batter. 

[New guy]

35 minutes ago, tapandrun said:

Think the issue with reverse is that Srinath didnt bowl full enough to use reverse effectively.

This is where both Wasim and Waqar were good bowling full and when needed they can pin a bouncer or two to push back the batter. 

You will only do that IF you knew the ball is reversing. Srinath had two drawbacks here

 

1) india was not tampering the ball to make it reverse early enough in the game. Full ball without reverse will just disappear. 

 

And 2) He had no one to teach or guide him in reverse. All our previous bowlers were slow trundlers, manoj was supposed to be a reverse yorker specialist but didn't know anything. Coaches and captian would just ask Srinath to focus on line and length with field set which discouraged full bowling.

Edited November 11, 2025 by New guy

[bsriharsha]

2 hours ago, New guy said:

Once neutral cameras/umpires etc came, Waqar and Srinath's numbers became more or less same.

That also coincided with waqar becoming more of a stock bowler post his injury than the tearaway quick he was before. 

[bsriharsha]

1 hour ago, New guy said:

You will only do that IF you knew the ball is reversing. Srinath had two drawbacks here

 

1) india was not tampering the ball to make it reverse early enough in the game. Full ball without reverse will just disappear. 

 

And 2) He had no one to teach or guide him in reverse. All our previous bowlers were slow trundlers, manoj was supposed to be a reverse yorker specialist but didn't know anything. Coaches and captian would just ask Srinath to focus on line and length with field set which discouraged full bowling.

Srinath was expected to be the wicket taker and also be the guy to contain runs. Especially with Kapil Dev in his retirement stage. 

 

If someone is looking for wickets , he will end up conceding runs in the effort. he had an impossible job. The captaincy at the time didn't help too. Basically no support from the other "fast" bowler in Venky Prasad as well. It was only when the likes of Zak, Nehra arrived that he got that much needed support. By that time , his career was winding down. 

 

It's easier for an Ambrose to take wickets when you had Walsh at the other end who didn't give an inch and also took more than his fair share of wickets. 

 

Srinath never had his Walsh. 

[bsriharsha]

Waqar pre injury was terrifying. He would be rated on the level of Marshall, Steyn had he not had that injury. Look at his stats and strike rate pre injury. That was Waqar. 

 

He might have become a srinath post injury but srinath is still a very very good bowler.

[bsriharsha]

And he was consistently over 150. There's a difference between srinath bowling one or two deliveries over 150 and waqar being consistently near or over the 150 mark.

[Nikhil_cric]

14 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Prasad was clocked at 133 in WC99. He was thereabouts most of the time in his initial years, I'd say. 

 

Yes, Donald was quick definitely. But he was not within the 155 mark. say about 150-153ish tops. 

 

Brace around his lower spine in WC? dont recall that at all. Dont think so. Do you remember which match did he clock 152.9, in 98?

Donald was only clocked later in his career when he was older.  

 

Some early clips of his show that he was really rapid. 

 

On par with Waqar at least.

 

I agree about Prasad, he was around that mark in 95/96 etc and even on the 96/97 tour of South Africa during his Durban spell. 

 

Definitely lost a decent amount of pace after that. 

 

I think Donald clocked 152.9 in that famous spell against Atherton.  

[rkt.india]

6 hours ago, bsriharsha said:

Waqar pre injury was terrifying. He would be rated on the level of Marshall, Steyn had he not had that injury. Look at his stats and strike rate pre injury. That was Waqar. 

 

He might have become a srinath post injury but srinath is still a very very good bowler.

He was terrifying because of ball tempering. He was quick in his early years but most of his wickets were due to reverse swing and how that reverse swing was achieved is known to all.

[bsriharsha]

4 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

He was terrifying because of ball tempering. He was quick in his early years but most of his wickets were due to reverse swing and how that reverse swing was achieved is known to all.

That's like saying murali was effective because he chucked. Both were accepted by icc. 

[bsriharsha]

The fact is that waqar was still a.lethal bowler before the whole tampering ****.

[Ranvir]

13 hours ago, tapandrun said:

I am only1 who is posting things with some substantial evidences,  I have shared the cricinfo article from where its all originating - The claims of 156 kmph.

The cricinfo page where the records are shared by same author eddi smith.  Also posted the sprtskeeda page where it claimed srinath bowled 154 kmph in same WC.

 

Rest no one is giving any evidences of any claims ,its all here-say. 

 

 

Again to that point he bowled 140+ kmph in wc -2003 and claims he could have would have at higher pace in prime. I can not tell much about it.

 

Nehra bowled 149 kmph with bad leg and puking on ground, does not mean he bowled higher than that when fit. Half fit batter have scored runs does not mean they would score 500 if fully fit.

 

I never said Akram was express pace, I my comments i maintained that even in his peak he would have been 138-143 kmph bowler and could slip 1-2 145-148 kmph balls.

 

Also mentioned that waqar was no tait/lee/akthar, he would have bowled high 140 kmph and his higestt 153 kmph. I compared his speeds to pathirana who in peak fitness can bowl multiple balls in high 140s and upto 151-152 in an over but nt any higher 

 

Time stamp :52.10 , you can see speed shown to be 150 kmph, this is the match/series from where claims of 153 kmph comes from , there is a compilation video of showing waqar's speed reading , think it was shared on this forum.

 

 

 

 

 

Nehra was 24 in 2003, his peak physical years. Srinath was 33 and at the end of his career. Srinath was 2 years older than Younis and still bowling faster than him in that tournament. I believe Srinath was faster than Waqar at his peak as well.

I'm pretty confident that if they had speed guns in the 1996 World Cup Srinath would have been the fastest bowler. 

As to why his pace was not talked about enough? I guess it's because of his ultra calm and unthreatening personality and also being Indian. In the 90s the likes of Ambrose, Walsh and McGrath were classified as 'Right Arm Fast', none of them were and Srinath was easily faster.

[tapandrun]

1 hour ago, bsriharsha said:

The fact is that waqar was still a.lethal bowler before the whole tampering ****.

Pak team has been tampering the ball before waqar, think it started from the time of sarfaraz.

Pak bowlers have been street-smart and innovative now its called chucking or ball-tampering.

 

Think the issue with waqar was his injury, he was nt the fast anymore and he didnt have any-other skills. where-else wasim developed into more of a complete bowler.

He can move ball in both direction on will. He can bowl yorkers which can dip into the right handed batter or leave them.

[putrevus]

On 11/9/2025 at 12:47 PM, singhvivek141 said:

That's not the topic, topic itself talks purely about speed of Akram and Waqar.

Akram was a 130-140k pacer for most of his career, he obviously can generate swing and movement so batters may see hurried up as they couldn't follow the trajectory. But he wasn't "fast" by any sense. Can be called as fast-medium.

Waqar looked fast in patches, probably because he used to bowl fuller (and he definitely had more pace than Wasim) with late swing. But again, whenever I saw him in live matches (mostly against India), he didn't look fast enough to me. But maybe pre-1994 and against some other oppositions he may have been bowling express which I'm not aware of.

Srinath too was fast in patches, he was quite like ishant Sharma who on his day will run fast and release the ball with momentum. Ishant has clocked 150+ several times, but has bowled at 130-140 as well, hence usually we consider him a 135-145 pacer, probably Srinath was like that. In 2003 WC against some teams he was clocked 131-136, but suddenly against England he started bowling overs after overs at 140-143k.

Andy Roberts/Garner example is more suited to Morne Morkel. Morkel has inferior numbers than the two, but he was faster than both.

Sorry you cannot just discuss speed without discussing quality of the bowlers.So just having speed is off zero value. Mohd Sami of Pakistan is example of that, he had speed but nothing much.There are many bowlers who could bowl at pace but never are considered great fast bowlers.

 

So Srinath being faster or slower than Waqar or Akram is immaterial.He was not as good as them with or without ball tampering.

 

Reverse swing can be obtained legally too.Did they tamper with ball answer is yes but India did not even have anyone who could bowl reverse swing then.Manoj Prabhakar boasts that he is the one brought reverse swing into India but I don't remember him having any reverse swing.Correct me if I am wrong on him.

 

Similarly those WI bowlers without being express would be still best bowling attack on the planet today  due to their other attributes.Patrick Paterson was rated the fastest pace bowler by Dujon but he is not even in top 20 of their best bowlers.

 

 

 

 

[putrevus]

On 11/9/2025 at 10:21 PM, rkt.india said:

This thread is about speed so people are talking about speed only. 

What is the point in talking just about speed.

[bsriharsha]

It's like this. A murali right now would be called for chucking. 

 

It is what it is. He should have been called then but icc chickened out 

[bsriharsha]

Same way , no point in talking about Pakistani bowler ball tampering 

[singhvivek141]

2 hours ago, putrevus said:

Sorry you cannot just discuss speed without discussing quality of the bowlers.So just having speed is off zero value. Mohd Sami of Pakistan is example of that, he had speed but nothing much.There are many bowlers who could bowl at pace but never are considered great fast bowlers.

 

So Srinath being faster or slower than Waqar or Akram is immaterial.He was not as good as them with or without ball tampering.

 

Reverse swing can be obtained legally too.Did they tamper with ball answer is yes but India did not even have anyone who could bowl reverse swing then.Manoj Prabhakar boasts that he is the one brought reverse swing into India but I don't remember him having any reverse swing.Correct me if I am wrong on him.

 

Similarly those WI bowlers without being express would be still best bowling attack on the planet today  due to their other attributes.Patrick Paterson was rated the fastest pace bowler by Dujon but he is not even in top 20 of their best bowlers.

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.