I was thinking how our fast bowling has come along, in the last 25 years. I tried to rate the combine strength of our fast bowlers, broadly seperated in eras of 4-5 years span. During that era, I rated the individual bowler (scale 1-10) and put out sum of combined strength as total.
IMRAN’s Era (1980-85)
Imran 9.0
Sarfraz 6.5
others 5.0
total 20.5
WASIM’s Era (1985-1990)
Imran 7.0
wasim 8.0
Others 6.0
total 21.0
THE Ws Era (1990-1995)
wasim 9.5
waqar 9.5
aqib 6.5
others 4.0
total 29.5
SHOAIB’s Era (1995-2000)
wasim 7.0
waqar 6.5
Shoaib 8.5
Others 5.5 (largely Sami)
total 27.5
PRESENT ERA
Shoaib 7.5
Gul 7.0
Asif 7.5
Tanvir 7.0
total 29.0
Present total 29.0 is not bad, only problem is fitness and other controversies that have surfaced recently. So do you guys agree with my ratings?
when wasim was at his peak, i gave him 9.5 (out of 10). Later, close to his retirement, he was 7.5. You will find the proportion consistant with their performance graphs at the Price waterhouse Coopers ratings website PwC Ratings - International cricketer ratings service
I was thinking how our fast bowling has come along, in the last 25 years. I tried to rate the combine strength of our fast bowlers, broadly seperated in eras of 4-5 years span. During that era, I rated the individual bowler (scale 1-10) and put out sum of combined strength as total.
WASIM's Era (1985-1990)
Imran 7.0
wasim 8.0
Others 6.0
total 21.0
THE Ws Era (1990-1995)
wasim 9.5
waqar 9.5
aqib 6.5
others 4.0
total 29.5
SHOAIB's Era (1995-2000)
wasim 7.0
waqar 6.5
Shoaib 8.5
Others 5.5 (largely Sami)
total 27.5
PRESENT ERA
Shoaib 7.5
Gul 7.0
Asif 7.5
Tanvir 7.0
total 29.0
Present total 29.0 is not bad, only problem is fitness and other controversies that have surfaced recently. So do you guys agree with my ratings?
Today's combined score is 29 while Ws era was 29.5 and Imran/Wasim era was 21? I'd flip it other way around.
I was thinking how our fast bowling has come along, in the last 25 years. I tried to rate the combine strength of our fast bowlers, broadly seperated in eras of 4-5 years span. During that era, I rated the individual bowler (scale 1-10) and put out sum of combined strength as total.
IMRAN's Era (1980-85)
Imran 9.0
Sarfraz 6.5
others 5.0
total 20.5
WASIM's Era (1985-1990)
Imran 7.0
wasim 8.0
Others 6.0
total 21.0
THE Ws Era (1990-1995)
wasim 9.5
waqar 9.5
aqib 6.5
others 4.0
total 29.5
SHOAIB's Era (1995-2000)
wasim 7.0
waqar 6.5
Shoaib 8.5
Others 5.5 (largely Sami)
total 27.5
PRESENT ERA
Shoaib 7.5
Gul 7.0
Asif 7.5
Tanvir 7.0
total 29.0
Present total 29.0 is not bad, only problem is fitness and other controversies that have surfaced recently. So do you guys agree with my ratings?
The idea of using total ratings does not make sense to me, as you can play only 3 or 4 fast bowlers in a match, so u need to calculate the average rating per bowler for each era.
The idea of using total ratings does not make sense to me, as you can play only 3 or 4 fast bowlers in a match, so u need to calculate the average rating per bowler for each era.
actually it does make sense. Total ratings means combined strength, not the individual bowler. The great west indian attack of late 70's and 80's was the most feared one, even though each bowler could take only a couple of wickets. Not all of them were as greats as Ws, but when put together, they won 2 world cups.
actually it does make sense. Total ratings means combined strength, not the individual bowler. The great west indian attack of late 70's and 80's was the most feared one, even though each bowler could take only a couple of wickets. Not all of them were as greats as Ws, but when put together, they won 2 world cups.
Again, you can play only 4 bowlers in a match, so even if you have 10 bowlers with 7.0 each (total bowler ratings 70.0), you will still be 28.0 in a match (7.0 X 4). Whereas, if West Indies also has 10 bowlers with 10, 10, 9, 9, 8, 7, 6, 4, 4, 3 (total bowler ratings 70.0), they can their top 4 bowlers and have a match bowler rating of 9.5 ((10+10+9+9)/4). Of course, they cannot play their best 4 bowlers in every match, but still atleast 2 or 3 of them will always play.
In addition to that, Akhtar misses matches due to injuries, Asif due to bans, so they should be counted as half bowlers.
At his peak IMRAN KHAN was better than both Wasim and Waqar IMHO. Imran (late 70s to mid 80s) was genuinely fast and pacier than Wasim Akram if not Shoaib Akhter and Waqar Younis. His in-dipper was deadly and he could outswing the ball as well. Remember Imran took 40 wickets at a quite astonishing bowling average of 13.95 in 6 tests (most of which did not have more than one completed innings!) on the batsman-friendly dead home pitches against India in 1983. No one-else apart from Kapil Dev took more than 20 wickets in that series! And that was quite a formidable Indian batting line-up; the ever-dependable Gavaskar, Vishwanath, Vengsarkar, Mohinder Amarnath, Ravi Shastri and Sandeep Patil. Look at the test batting averages in that series and you really begin to appreciate how well he bowled then. Imran suffered a stress fracture (ankle) soon after the India series forcing him to miss 2.5 of his peak test years. After Zia (his best gift to Pakistan!!) persuaded him to come out of retirement in 1988, Imran then aged 35+ took 23 wickets in three tests in the Caribbean against a West Indies side boasting the likes of Greenidge, Haynes, the mighty Viv Richards and Richie Richardson. Imran had an aura and presence which the two W’s did not quite have even in their prime.
Imran had an aura and presence which the two W's did not quite have even in their prime.
I have seen him in his prime, he sure had the presence. However, I think Wasim and Waqar were the next level. Specially waqar in test cricket (1990-1995) was breathtaking.
Sorry but I'll call the analysis results rubbish. Full marks for trying though... but I think the logic is flawed.
Lets first get one thing straight... are we talking the pace attack you would have for a match or just your bench strength?
For pace attack, what you should do is stick to maybe 2 (3max) pacers at a time and take their average... which would give you a 7 out of 10 for the current team, and a much higher one for other eras.
If you are talking your strength sitting on the bench, you still cant put in more 7out of 10s and rate them better than three 9 out of 10s and a 6 out of 10.
When you're playing a match, currently you'll just have one or two mediocre 7/10 rickshaws playing for pakistan and their combined affect is just that... a lame 7/10 at best.. nothing more (probably a 6/10 for having no brutal pressure right at the start that a 9.5 would put).
And you're rating Aqib a 6.5 and Sohail Kukri Tanvir a 7? Give me a break... the guy was an 8 atleast... he always had the W's around who were better so we never saw how devastating he could be... If you bring an Aqib in prime in todays team... he might be touching 8.5. He was too good to be a 6.5, we just never got to appreciate him thanks to the W's.
Looking at your analysis, looks like we have nothing to worry about! We are doing just as fine as the W's era. Are we??
I have seen him in his prime, he sure had the presence. However, I think Wasim and Waqar were the next level. Specially waqar in test cricket (1990-1995) was breathtaking.
I w'd agree with you there. A prime Waqar was more destructive than a prime Wasim although the latter had more variety in his armoury. Waqar's trademark delivery was his fast toe-crushing yorker. I remember the 1992 and 1996 series in England. Hick, Stewart, Robin Smith and even Gooch were usu. clueless once he really got his reverse swing going