Andre Russell vs Kieron Pollard: Who would you pick for your T20 team in their prime?

[BunnyRabbit]

Don't know if it has ever been discussed or not, but two very similar batting allrounders who both played majority of their international career alongside each other. Both known for their power hitting ability and effortless sixes on the worst of the pitches.

Who would you pick between the two if you had a chance? And who do you think was a better batter between the two (Russell was clearly a more gifted bowler)

For me, having Russell in the team would give a viable 5th bowling option in his prime. But his batting felt something of a hit or miss. Felt like he could get out the next delivery. Pollard usually seemed more assured at the crease. Both had their destructive mode set at infinity so the debate of their respective SR doesn't really work for me. Russell had a higher SR, but in a match, Pollard could match it neck to neck.

 

[Local.Dada]

Russell is a bowling allrounder.

Pollard is a batting allrounder.

Can’t compare both. Russell used to bowl 140+ in his prime. Pollard was more of a 6th bowler/ part timer.

Pollard can bat in top order, Russell is middle-lower middle order.

Both have some similarities but different roles I guess.

 

[sweep_shot]

Russell definitely.

I think he is a better hitter and a better bowler too.

 

[BouncerGuy]

I think they both have a different role but i would go with russel...he is a powerhouse

 

[sweep_shot]

I think they both have a different role but i would go with russel...he is a powerhouse

Yes. Russell was a better hitter.

Also, Russell is a proper frontline bowler (he started his career as a bowler too). Pollard is a part-time bowler.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Yes. Russell was a better hitter.

Also, Russell is a proper frontline bowler (he started his career as a bowler too). Pollard is a part-time bowler.

Yep... Russel can bowl some heat... I think he can go 145+

 

[Bhaijaan]

Pollard is the original mega star of T20 cricket. Lets not forget that.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Two different types of players.

If I have to pick one I'd Russell.

 

[RidiculousMan]

Russell type of players are very rare. Super athletic, can hit sixes from ball one, capable of bowling in all phases, specially at death with that heavy yorker.

Pollard is a powerful middle order batter with useful bowling. But there are many other power hitters you can have in your team.

I would pick Russell

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Russell is the type of cricketer that you can see fitting in to some of the great West Indian line-ups from the 70s and 80s. I mean how many cricketers do you see that are built like a tank, super athletic, can bowl at 140+ and just murder the cricket ball with their power-hitting? Sadly it just so happened that he came up during a time when West Indies cricket was finished for all intents and purposes.

Pollard is great power hitter and found ways to get better with age and experience. Interms of pure T20 league experience nobody comes close to him with his 733 T20 caps. But I don't think you can really compare him and Russell as cricketers. As batsmen, you can, but Andre Russell is a rare type of a player that doesn't come around very often. And its truly unfortunate that he never reached his full potential as an international cricketer because of obvious reasons.

 

[NishanKonar]

Andre Russel could have been a 5000 runs + 300 test wickets player - like the great allrounders of the 80s

Too bad bad he was born in West Indies

 

[Ab Fan]

Russell as athlete and overall cricketer. His bowling is much better than Pollard, who is a 2 overs bowler.

 

[Kianig89]

Russell was more of an overall package, better fielder and bowler , though can hit monsterly

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Andre andar gend bahar …

 

[Rajdeep]

Russel anyday. He had the potential to be a genuine ATG all rounder. However, T20 cricket ruined him