The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Perhaps not the ideal time for such comparisons, but they sort of seem inevitable at Inzamam's retirement. Good as Inzamam was, Miandad was better in my books. He had more of a mongrel in him and though much less talented than Inzamam produced some of the most riveting battles of the 70s and 80s. One thing which tilts the scale in favor of Miandad for me was his performance against the best team of their times. Both ended up with mediocre averages against WI and Australia respectively, but the '87 series in the WI when Miandad scored 2 hundreds and helped secure an improbable drawn series against the near invincible WI side at that time, puts him ahead. Link to comment
yoda Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Miandad was more serious about his wicket, Inzy had better strokes. If I had to pick one, would go for Miandad in tests and Inzy in ODIs (except if it is in Sharjah). Link to comment
Ram Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 I have not watched a lot of Miandad , but of what i have seen of him , he is the typical street-smart cricketer , in complete control of the game. Inzy definitely was the more gifted of the two and he seemed to score his runs despite his tendency to have lapses of concentration. For Miandad , the runs were because of the temperament , while for Inzy they seemed despite it. God knows how much more Inzy would have achieved if he had the mental skills of Miandad. Link to comment
kablooee87 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 I'm ony 20 years old so I was not able to watch Miandad in his prime from an analytical perspective. But from everthing I've seen, I'd pick Miandad over Inzamam. Still, I put very little weight on my opinion in the matter because I haven't seen enough of Miandad in his prime. Link to comment
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Miandad over Inzy for me. JM had to face the greatest fast bowlers in the history of the game whereas Inzy has had most of his success on flat asian wickets against average bowlers. Link to comment
jf1gp_1 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Inzi without any doubt. JM made a good pak team looked great while Inzi made ; at times below average team, look competitive. Players like Imran nazir, salman butt, sami, rana and above all afridi would never be allowed anywhere close to Pak team till mid 90s. Yet Inzi had to play in a team which features not one but all of them and Pak did alright. Link to comment
Cricketics Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Inzamam for me.. have seen miandad's game a lot.. still not as impressed as i am from inzi.. in both forms of the game inzi has helped pak win some great games... involved in some classic p'ships.. inzi for me.. Link to comment
novpj Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Inzamam had more talent and played effortlessly. Miandad was a grafter not easy on the eyes but had a shrewd cricketing brain - which is why I would rate him as a better cricketer than Inzy. Ofcourse the gap in running between the wickets between the two is enormous :-) I would rate Inzy as a better bat. Link to comment
King Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Miandad of course. It's not like Miandad didn't have as many shots or range. He was a fantastic batsman and never looked like losing a game. Inzi as good as he is has show at times he looks pretty clueless. Inzi came across as someone that wasn't too serious and win it all at any cost was not the way he played cricket. Miandad was a different type of player, gutsy and never really looked meek not with standing any type of bowling. I rate Miandad as way better than Inzi. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 I saw heaps of Miandad and Inzi .... Inzi was by faar the most talented cricketer out of the two .... miandad was a street fighter and maximised his limited talents ... Inzi was a underacheiver but still managed to go neck and neck with Miandad ... I wouldn't say neck and neck, BB. Inzamam never managed to raise his game against the best in business as Miandad did in that legendary tour to the WI in '86-'87. That itself brings a huge gulf between the two. On the other hand Inzamam was "injured" in 5 out of 7 tests he had the opportunity to play Australia and scored a grand total of 2 runs in the other 2. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 JM has a avg of 29 vs Windies ... compared to Inzis 31 vs Australia. I know that BB, but he has that one defining series against WI in their backyard which Inzamam doesn't have and Tendulkar, Lara, Gavaskar have multiple instances of those. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 came against a Bowling attack that had none of Marshall' date='Garner,Roberts,Holding playing..... Amby and Walsh were still rookies and Patterson was the bowling equivalent of Afridi ..[/quote'] Marshall didn't play the 1st test but was there for the other two and remember WI remained unbeaten at home till '94-'95. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 yeah but the Windies of JM's time was the one that had those 4 firing all cylinders ..... and the main reasons for PAks performance in that series was their bowling ... No doubt about it, bowler win tests always, never disputed it but they need some runs to bowl at and in that low scoring series Miandad's performance was superb. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 True but my whole point is that WI team of 87 was not the best team that he played against .... the best team that he played against would have had the great 4 lead by Loyd I agree. just as the one during Inzi's time would have been the one lead by Waugh featuring McWarne. It was Inzamam who shied away from the contest and not McGrath, Warne, or Waugh and even without all of them he could do nothing at Perth or Sydney, when he begged himself into the team. Link to comment
living Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Had it not been for Inzi's run outs he would have scored too many more runs than Miandad :giggle: Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now