> : Hahahahahahhahahhahahahaha gotta be the funniest statement
> : made on rec.sport.cricket. Have you considered getting
> : your head examined? Next time you will say that Kapil in his prime
> : was faster than Waqar. Kapil was a wonderful bowler in
> : his prime but he was never genuinely quick. Wasim
> : Akram on the other hand has been universally recognized
> : as a genuine fast bowler. Even when he bowls well within
> : himself off a short run-up Wasim is able to generate
> : genuine pace. Srinath is quicker than Kapil, and he is
> : not as quick as Wasim Akram so there is your comparison.
> I agree that it is a joke to say Kapil was as quick as Akram. However I
> heard that Akram tends to be fast only in his first few overs.
mood or the situation. He can bowl an opening spell
in which the ball will thud into the wicketkeeper's
gloves even if he is 30 yards away. However, he is
as likely to bowl a mild first spell and make the ball
absolutely explode off the wicket in his later spells.
Consistently he does not bowl as quick as he can
because of the role he plays in the Pakistani side
as both a stock and shock bowler. I am almost
certain that if he was playing for West Indies or
a team with a pack rather than a pair of genuine
***s he would have gone flat out more often.
> tends to be fast medium ( of course much faster then Kapil). This was
> pointed out even by Imran in 1987. To quote him - "We have Wasim Akram who in
> his first spell can bowl as fast as Marshall".
Pakistan-West Indies series of 1988 when Marshall, Walsh,
Ambrose, Bishop, Patrick Patterson, Winston Benjamin, Imran, and
Jaffer all played. Quite distinguished company would you not say.
I honestly believed at that time Wasim was the fastest
bowler in the world.
> in spells. This was right after Manjerkar's great series in Pakistan in
> 1989. He told that only in the Sailkot test was Akram really fast.
> To me Akram appears to be in the mould of Allan Donald. Fast in first few
> overs and fast medium later.
spells> Not consistently as fast as he can be because
he does not strive for too much but even then he is
quick enough to be classified as a genuine ***.
Wasim and Allan Donald are completely different
bowlers. Waqar Younus is more in Donald's mould.
Donald and Waqar tend to blast the batsmen out whereas
Wasim is less likely to blast them out, and more
likely to prise them out with his Pandora like
bowling repetoire. Each one unique but extremly
lethal. As Ambrose says, "Waqar is very fast but
Wasim can do things with the ball..." and he demonstrates
this with contortions of his wrist and hands and fingers....
> I have seen Imran in peak (1978 , 1982) and also Akram (1987). I can say
> with utmost confidence that Akram never bowled at same speed like Imran.
brilliantly consistent fast bowling that has ever been
put on display. A friend of mine told me that Sunil
said," People talk about Holding's 14 wickets on that
dead track at the Oval, but they should really see
this performance by Imran...." Imran in 1978
was a tearaway but Wasim of 1988-1990 definitely
matches him for pace in certain spells, if not
> bowler with bewildering variety. Who says that you have to be fast to be
> great. Hadlee is the best example.
definitely if he wants a longer career he will
have to think about conserving his body. However,
that will not really take much away from his bowling.
His variety will allow him to do that. What still
bugs me is the fact that in his attempt to do
too much with the ball Wasim does not consistently have
the pin point control of a Richard Hadlee. Anyways,
who I am to comment on his game. After all he knows
his game better than amybody else
> Could you please clarify on Akram's speed.
certainly not as quick as he used to be. All this with a remarkably short
run up. Wasim is an enigma and certainly the greatest left arm pace
bowler of all times.