Jump to content

Harbhajan Singh vs Saqlain Mushtaq


Recommended Posts

Posted

i am an indian, but saqlain alone with murali and warne were the best spin boweler ever. period. bhaji is a kid compared to those three

Posted
:hysterical:
:hysterical: what joke lol
I hope you are not using Lahori logic for your comparison. In ODI's Mushtaq was much better than Bhajji, but in tests he wasnt that effective at all Bhajji has taken 393 test wickets compared to Sucklain's 208. The average difference is less than 1.5. Bhajji's strike rate is better than Mushtaq's. So in effect, Bhajji has maintained a better strike rate and a very similar average but over a much larger time period and also taken 185 more wickets. So in tests Bhajji >>>> Sucklain In ODIs Sucklain >>>> Bhajji
Guest BossBhai
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

Posted

Saqlain was brilliant in a few series but so was Bhajji. And Bhajji is still going, while Saqi bhai is content getting hit for sixes in local paki and brit T20 leagues publishing new papers on choutha, paanchwa and chata balls etc, while watering his beard 5 hours a day.

Posted
Saqlain was brilliant in a few series but so was Bhajji. And Bhajji is still going' date=' while Saqi bhai is content getting hit for sixes in local paki and brit T20 leagues publishing new papers on choutha, paanchwa and chata balls etc, while watering his beard 5 hours a day.[/quote'] Saqlain came, saw, sehwaged :cantstop:
Guest BossBhai
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

Posted
In ODIs : Saqlain In Tests : Bhajji
What about T20's .. I think Bhaji would be better in that too .. just dont ask him to bowl the last over :hysterical::hysterical: IIRC Saqlain was the first spinner who would regularly bowl the death overs.
Posted
I hope you are not using Lahori logic for your comparison. In ODI's Mushtaq was much better than Bhajji, but in tests he wasnt that effective at all Bhajji has taken 393 test wickets compared to Sucklain's 208. The average difference is less than 1.5. Bhajji's strike rate is better than Mushtaq's. So in effect, Bhajji has maintained a better strike rate and a very similar average but over a much larger time period and also taken 185 more wickets. So in tests Bhajji >>>> Sucklain In ODIs Sucklain >>>> Bhajji
"Dude It is not even a contest. In a Better system Saqi probably would have ended up with 500 Test wickets whereas Harbhajan wouldn;t have been picked to play test cricket in a better system. Saqlain you get the feeling was stopped by injury more than anything, whereas Harbhajan recently has begun to struggle even in conditions you once saw him dominate in." here a external link about this look at the scores lol: http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/38062-saqlain-mushtaq-vs-harbhajan-singh.html

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...