Early 90s Waqar Younis'- Were these his best years as a fast-bowler?

[majiz]

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerYears.asp?PlayerID=1959


Waqar Younis maintained a bowling strike rate of under 40 for 5 years on the trot between 1990 and 1994. This is a remarkable statistic

For reference, glenn mcgrath or curtley ambrose never managed a single year achieving a strike rate under 40. wasim managed it once in 1997. even malcolm marshall only managed it twice. I know strike rate isn't everything and average is maybe more important, but you can appreciate how elite anything under 40 is. and to do that for 5 years on the trot is really, absurdly good


Is prime waqar younis the greatest of all time?

 

[Slog]

Is prime waqar younis the greatest of all time?

one of the things about greatness is maintaining your level throughout the career

Waqar is definitely a great but GOAT is a stretch even if he did not get fair shot due to injuries

One more thing which goes against Waqar is the lack of diversity in his bowling till the later end. Wasim for eg could trouble a batsman a dozen ways whereas Waqar had 2 or 3 tricks even though those usually were enough

 

[majiz]

i don't really agree. greatness is defined by peak level really. being slightly less good than somebody else for a long time doesn't make you superior. 5 years is a long stretch anyway

 

[therealAB]

No. While he was very succesful, against decent teams his records do not stack up to other ATG peaks

 

[majiz]

No. While he was very succesful, against decent teams his records do not stack up to other ATG peaks

How so? Which greats do you have in mind?

 

[Mamoon]

Biggest beneficiary of ball-tampering in history.

Nowhere near the bowler Wasim or Imran were, who would have been brilliant even without cheating.

Waqar was a good bowler who became a world beater because of the intense ball-tampering that happened at the time.

But to his credit, he was probably the most lethal bowler in history when it comes to bowling with tampered balls. Perhaps that is something to be proud of.

 

[subshakerz]

Waqar was great in his prime but somewhat overrated. He was a pretty ordinary new ball bowler at that time and would get spanked around only for him to return with the old ball and clean up the lower order. If you look at his famous 1992 England tour he hardly took any wickets with his new ball spells. I would wager that even in Waqar's prime years, his opponents would probably rate Wasim as a better bowler.

Imran Khan on the other hand in the early-mid 80s had arguably the greatest peak of any fast bowler, averaging something like 14-15 and singlehandedly ripping through strong batting lineups like England, West Indies and India.

 

[Robert]

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerYears.asp?PlayerID=1959


Waqar Younis maintained a bowling strike rate of under 40 for 5 years on the trot between 1990 and 1994. This is a remarkable statistic

For reference, glenn mcgrath or curtley ambrose never managed a single year achieving a strike rate under 40. wasim managed it once in 1997. even malcolm marshall only managed it twice. I know strike rate isn't everything and average is maybe more important, but you can appreciate how elite anything under 40 is. and to do that for 5 years on the trot is really, absurdly good


Is prime waqar younis the greatest of all time?

He was extraordinary in 1992. As fast as a young Marshall and with lavish late inswing.

But England were 180-1 plenty of times. There is a bias to lower order wickets in his tally due to when he got the reverse going.

Compare with Lillee and McGrath who struck at a lower rate but had very high numbers of top five batters in their wicket tally.

 

[Junaids]

Biggest beneficiary of ball-tampering in history.

But to his credit, he was probably the most lethal bowler in history when it comes to bowling with tampered balls. Perhaps that is something to be proud of.

Mitchell Starc 2016-18?

 

[Mamoon]

Mitchell Starc 2016-18?

The extent of ball-tampering that Australia did in 2016-18 cannot be compared to the ball-tampering Pakistan did from 1980 to 1999.

And Starc between 2016-18 was not as good as peak Waqar, so Waqar clearly benefited more from bowling with a tampered bowl. I think his action was absolutely perfect for bowling with tampered balls.

 

[Markhor]

I have to agree with the above, that insane banana swing does not seem possible without ball tampering.

Waqar in those early years depended greatly on reverse swing and pace, his new ball skills didn't develop until later in his career and after his injury when he was forced to cut down his pace. So skillwise I cannot label him as the greatest.

If we're just talking about prime years, Imran's peak was even better if you look at the numbers.

 

[Savak]

Waqar's best was from 1989 to 1998. From Jan 1, 1999 he played primarily on reputation and was completely past it.

 

[Savak]

My biggest gripe is that Waqar feasted on teams and players which did not have too many all time greats. Name one world class player from the NZ side of 1992 to 1994 that Wasim, Waqar feasted on with ATG stats.

 

[Ab Fan]

A legendary bowler at its peak. No cricketer ever could replicate the fast bowling spells that Waqar did except maybe Stuart 'Freaking' Broad.

 

[therealAB]

Def a top peak, but no better than Marshall, Steyn, Davo, Curtly, Donald, Imran etc.
Still below the goat peak of Mitchell Johnson def

 

[NishanKonar]

My biggest gripe is that Waqar feasted on teams and players which did not have too many all time greats. Name one world class player from the NZ side of 1992 to 1994 that Wasim, Waqar feasted on with ATG stats.

This is true. In contrast Shoaib Akhtar ran through the legendary Australian batting twice in 2002 ( Brisbane & Colombo ). Waqar's career stats were boosted by high proportion of tailenders. No bowlers cleaned up tail as quickly as Waqar in early 90s. But his abilities with new ball was very limited. He rarely troubled batsmen in his opening spell

 

[majiz]

Still below the goat peak of Mitchell Johnson def

waqar did for 5 years what MJ did for 2

 

[majiz]

waqar's strike rate in 1993 was under 30. is this some kind of record for a year? or close to it?

 

[Buffet]

waqar's strike rate in 1993 was under 30. is this some kind of record for a year? or close to it?

Nah, can't be a record. Steyn also had a year below 30 in 2007 or 2008.

 

[Abdullah719]

waqar's strike rate in 1993 was under 30. is this some kind of record for a year? or close to it?

Nah, can't be a record. Steyn also had a year below 30 in 2007 or 2008.

Minimum 30 wickets.

 

[Bhaijaan]

One of the greatest strike bowlers ever. Slightly behind Mohammad Shami though.

 

[umarf76]

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerYears.asp?PlayerID=1959


Waqar Younis maintained a bowling strike rate of under 40 for 5 years on the trot between 1990 and 1994. This is a remarkable statistic

For reference, glenn mcgrath or curtley ambrose never managed a single year achieving a strike rate under 40. wasim managed it once in 1997. even malcolm marshall only managed it twice. I know strike rate isn't everything and average is maybe more important, but you can appreciate how elite anything under 40 is. and to do that for 5 years on the trot is really, absurdly good


Is prime waqar younis the greatest of all time?

I have not seen too many videos on youtube of Waqar Younis in 1989/90 Australasia cup. Having folllowed cricket 40 years almost, I dont recall anyone more devasting than Waqar in that series. Even Wasim Akram looked mediocre at the other end. I dont think Waqar ever bowled like that again. By 1992 he already had back issues and his pace was already down.

 

[therealAB]

waqar did for 5 years what MJ did for 2

Waqar didn’t do it against a batting lineup composing players of the caliber of Smith, Amla, De Villiers and du plessos

 

[therealAB]

waqar did for 5 years what MJ did for 2

completely agree, but in terms of the actual highest point for 8 tests Johnson was absolutely incredible. If we want to lengthen peak Marshall had a peak for 8 year so yeah

 

[Zaz]

Waqar didn’t do it against a batting lineup composing players of the caliber of Smith, Amla, De Villiers and du plessos

Theyre good players but none of them were bonafide great test match batsmen like your making out

 

[TamiL_GarvaM!]

I guess from his debut till about 94 iguess when he had his first back stress fracture , he was unplayable....
i dont know about the GOAT part, but definately one of the ATG's of pace bowling as far as this indian fan of your pace bowlers is concerned, I'd for sure watch any match he was bowling against anyone at any level....a true champ

 

[therealAB]

Theyre good players but none of them were bonafide great test match batsmen like your making out

Agreed, but in total a very strong lineup, the best of this decade easily (slightly better with Kallis though). Much better than who Waqar bowled to during his peak

 

[Nikhil_cric]

The extent of ball-tampering that Australia did in 2016-18 cannot be compared to the ball-tampering Pakistan did from 1980 to 1999.

And Starc between 2016-18 was not as good as peak Waqar, so Waqar clearly benefited more from bowling with a tampered bowl. I think his action was absolutely perfect for bowling with tampered balls.

I have to agree with the above, that insane banana swing does not seem possible without ball tampering.

Waqar in those early years depended greatly on reverse swing and pace, his new ball skills didn't develop until later in his career and after his injury when he was forced to cut down his pace. So skillwise I cannot label him as the greatest.

If we're just talking about prime years, Imran's peak was even better if you look at the numbers.

I agree with these posts but tampering was very common back then(think Atherton's dirt in pockets incident). Waqar was effective because he had the pace to go along with reverse swinging "skills" . The only issue i have is when people assume that Waqar would have had a similar career in today's test cricket considering the playing conditions and cameras today.

 

[Asif khan]

Hard to find any clips but his season for Surrey in 1991 was ther stuff of legends - reminiscent of Brazilian Ronaldo in his solitary season at Barcelona....basically on a different planet!

 

[gazza619]

Biggest beneficiary of ball-tampering in history.

Nowhere near the bowler Wasim or Imran were, who would have been brilliant even without cheating.

Waqar was a good bowler who became a world beater because of the intense ball-tampering that happened at the time.

But to his credit, he was probably the most lethal bowler in history when it comes to bowling with tampered balls. Perhaps that is something to be proud of.

Mate you need to get your soul purified as it is filled with a lot of hatred for some real GEMS.

It seems like you have not seen how Waqar used to bamboozle the batsmen even with the new ball. I can perhaps find a gazillion video clips and share but wont waste my time on this.

I reckon Waqar would have taken a 1000 international wickets if he hadnt broken his back at the peak of his career or if there was DRS back then.

 

[therealAB]

Mate you need to get your soul purified as it is filled with a lot of hatred for some real GEMS.

It seems like you have not seen how Waqar used to bamboozle the batsmen even with the new ball. I can perhaps find a gazillion video clips and share but wont waste my time on this.

I reckon Waqar would have taken a 1000 international wickets if he hadnt broken his back at the peak of his career or if there was DRS back then.

So you do not think he tampered?

 

[gazza619]

So you do not think he tampered?

That was not my point if you read my post.

 

[Mamoon]

Mate you need to get your soul purified as it is filled with a lot of hatred for some real GEMS.

It seems like you have not seen how Waqar used to bamboozle the batsmen even with the new ball. I can perhaps find a gazillion video clips and share but wont waste my time on this.

I reckon Waqar would have taken a 1000 international wickets if he hadnt broken his back at the peak of his career or if there was DRS back then.

Most of Waqar’s wickets during his peak came against weaker batting lineups. He was not able to ‘bamboozle’ the top class top order batsmen of his era.

His new ball skills were clearly not at the level of Wasim and Imran, but he was more dangerous than both with a tampered ball.

If there was DRS back then, it would mean there would also be HD cameras, which means the designated ball-tamperers would regularly get caught on camera.

Waqar was no Wahab or Junaid, he was a great bowler in his own right, but he greatly benefited from ball-tampering. Perhaps more so than any other bowler in history.

His mediocre record against the batting lineups is not surprising. Even during his peak from 1989 to 1993, he averaged 50+ in Australia and almost 40+ vs India.

He was devastating against weak lineups of Sri Lanka and New Zealand (but Crowe dominated him) and a rapidly fading West Indies lineup.

He was good against England, but the ball-tampering in the 1992 series couldn’t be anymore blatant.

 

[Mamoon]

That was not my point if you read my post.

Your post implied that Waqar did not greatly benefit from ball-tampering. It appears that you are confused over what the point of your post was.

 

[gazza619]

Your post implied that Waqar did not greatly benefit from ball-tampering. It appears that you are confused over what the point of your post was.

The thread is about the greatness of Waqar as a deadly fast bowler which he was. Its like I passed my exams with flying colours and your failed, and you take away my credit by saying that my mom feed me an amazing breakfast on the day of the exam which helped me boost my numbers. I know its a silly example but the point of the matter is that there are no ifs and no buts in life. Waqar was great and thats the end of it.

 

[gazza619]

Most of Waqar’s wickets during his peak came against weaker batting lineups. He was not able to ‘bamboozle’ the top class top order batsmen of his era.

His new ball skills were clearly not at the level of Wasim and Imran, but he was more dangerous than both with a tampered ball.

If there was DRS back then, it would mean there would also be HD cameras, which means the designated ball-tamperers would regularly get caught on camera.

Waqar was no Wahab or Junaid, he was a great bowler in his own right, but he greatly benefited from ball-tampering. Perhaps more so than any other bowler in history.

His mediocre record against the batting lineups is not surprising. Even during his peak from 1989 to 1993, he averaged 50+ in Australia and almost 40+ vs India.

He was devastating against weak lineups of Sri Lanka and New Zealand (but Crowe dominated him) and a rapidly fading West Indies lineup.

He was good against England, but the ball-tampering in the 1992 series couldn’t be anymore blatant.

Pretty amazing how you cherry pick for your agenda.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ab Fan]

Most of Waqar’s wickets during his peak came against weaker batting lineups. He was not able to ‘bamboozle’ the top class top order batsmen of his era.

His new ball skills were clearly not at the level of Wasim and Imran, but he was more dangerous than both with a tampered ball.

If there was DRS back then, it would mean there would also be HD cameras, which means the designated ball-tamperers would regularly get caught on camera.

Waqar was no Wahab or Junaid, he was a great bowler in his own right, but he greatly benefited from ball-tampering. Perhaps more so than any other bowler in history.

His mediocre record against the batting lineups is not surprising. Even during his peak from 1989 to 1993, he averaged 50+ in Australia and almost 40+ vs India.

He was devastating against weak lineups of Sri Lanka and New Zealand (but Crowe dominated him) and a rapidly fading West Indies lineup.

He was good against England, but the ball-tampering in the 1992 series couldn’t be anymore blatant.

I agree with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] here. If he would have played in this era, he would have still been a good bowler but I don't think he would have been any better to Mohammad Shami, whose reverse swing skills are of virtually inexistent in today's generation.

 

[gazza619]

I agree with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] here. If he would have played in this era, he would have still been a good bowler but I don't think he would have been any better to Mohammad Shami, whose reverse swing skills are of virtually inexistent in today's generation.

Comparing Shami to Waqar? You clearly didnt grow up in the Waqar era and so I dont blame you for that.

 

[therealAB]

That was not my point if you read my post.

My point is that you completely ignored his argument. The bottle cap usage was ridiculous. Waqar is a great bowler, but his peak is vastly overrated as it came about as a combination of tampering and weak opposition.

 

[gazza619]

My point is that you completely ignored his argument. The bottle cap usage was ridiculous. Waqar is a great bowler, but his peak is vastly overrated as it came about as a combination of tampering and weak opposition.

How do you know that his peak was overrated by tampering and weak opposition. Can you prove your argument? In another post of yours you compared Waqar to Shami, can you prove that too?

 

[Mamoon]

The thread is about the greatness of Waqar as a deadly fast bowler which he was. Its like I passed my exams with flying colours and your failed, and you take away my credit by saying that my mom feed me an amazing breakfast on the day of the exam which helped me boost my numbers. I know its a silly example but the point of the matter is that there are no ifs and no buts in life. Waqar was great and thats the end of it.

The amazing breakfast that your mom fed is not directly related to your performance in the exam. On the contrary, if your mother would have written some formulas on your arm which helped you boost your score, then it would be cheating.

Waqar was a deadly fast bowler but his record is inflated because of bowling with heavily tampered balls. Without ball tampering he would have been a lesser bowler. That is the whole point.

 

[Mamoon]

Pretty amazing how you cherry pick for your agenda.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This breakdown does not reflect performances against individual teams. Waqar consistently struggled against the top sides of his era.

Imran and Wasim were much better bowlers against the best sides.

 

[gazza619]

The amazing breakfast that your mom fed is not directly related to your performance in the exam. On the contrary, if your mother would have written some formulas on your arm which helped you boost your score, then it would be cheating.

Waqar was a deadly fast bowler but his record is inflated because of bowling with heavily tampered balls. Without ball tampering he would have been a lesser bowler. That is the whole point.

I agree but the formulas were written is Waqar’s brains not arm. The formula was to keep one side of the ball shiny. To bowl with a slightly bend sling arm. To fox the batsmen with an occasional slower one. To bounce him when he gets to comfy on the front foot. To out swing. To in swing. Waqar was a legend, and you dont me to confirm that. His stats says it all and this has also been confirmed by all the big names who have played alongside him. I am only saying what the whole world is saying. A full time poster and a part time doctor (or whatever) cannot undo Waqar’s record.

 

[Muhammad Saad]

A nobody like Mamoon can't harm the reputation of The Great Waqar Younis , let him have his fun

 

[Muhammad Saad]

Its like saying UnderTaker was not a wrestling legend and all his success comes because he covered his face with his long hair and once he got bald his greatness finished.

 

[therealAB]

How do you know that his peak was overrated by tampering and weak opposition. Can you prove your argument? In another post of yours you compared Waqar to Shami, can you prove that too?

Please show me the Shami post
I can def prove the opposition, just look it up on Statsguru
Re the bottle caps it is common knowledge

 

[Mamoon]

I am only saying what the whole world is sayiA full time poster and a part time doctor (or whatever) cannot undo Waqar’s record.

A nobody like Mamoon can't harm the reputation of The Great Waqar Younis , let him have his fun

Do not get offended after making poor arguments.

 

[Mamoon]

Its like saying UnderTaker was not a wrestling legend and all his success comes because he covered his face with his long hair and once he got bald his greatness finished.

All of Undertaker’s success is because of the character that Vince McMahon gave him. You couldn’t have chosen a worse example.

 

[Mamoon]

I agree but the formulas were written is Waqar’s brains not arm. The formula was to keep one side of the ball shiny. To bowl with a slightly bend sling arm. To fox the batsmen with an occasional slower one. To bounce him when he gets to comfy on the front foot. To out swing. To in swing. Waqar was a legend, and you dont me to confirm that. His stats says it all and this has also been confirmed by all the big names who have played alongside him. I am only saying what the whole world is saying. A full time poster and a part time doctor (or whatever) cannot undo Waqar’s record.

Your analogies are getting worse and worse. First you did well in the exam because of a yummy breakfast, now the formulas were written in your brain. You don’t seem to be listening to yourself.

Ball-tampering is not equivalent to memorizing formulas. Like chucking, it is a direct form of cheating. It is equivalent to writing formulas on your hand.

Waqar’s trademark banana swing yorkers were not possible without a tampered ball.

It is also a fact that his record against the best batting lineups is not great and is clearly inferior to the records of Imran and Wasim, who were both superior bowlers and bigger legends.

The point is not that Waqar was not an excellent bowler; the point is that Waqar’s record is inflated because of heavy ball-tampering and thus he was a beneficiary of ball-tampering.

You have not provided any argument that refutes that. All you have done is deflect around it.

Waqar is rated by his peers but he doesn’t get nearly the same respect and adulation as Imran and Wasim. Everyone within the cricket fraternity is aware of the fact that Pakistan’s ball-tampering was extreme and among all our bowlers, Waqar was the one to benefit the most.

Ball-tampering is cheating. There are now two ways about it. Does it need skill? Of course - every form of cheating needs skill. If you are not smart, you will get caught easily.

 

[gazza619]

Please show me the Shami post
I can def prove the opposition, just look it up on Statsguru
Re the bottle caps it is common knowledge

You need to prove your argument mate, not me.

 

[gazza619]

Your analogies are getting worse and worse. First you did well in the exam because of a yummy breakfast, now the formulas were written in your brain. You don’t seem to be listening to yourself.

Ball-tampering is not equivalent to memorizing formulas. Like chucking, it is a direct form of cheating. It is equivalent to writing formulas on your hand.

Waqar’s trademark banana swing yorkers were not possible without a tampered ball.

It is also a fact that his record against the best batting lineups is not great and is clearly inferior to the records of Imran and Wasim, who were both superior bowlers and bigger legends.

The point is not that Waqar was not an excellent bowler; the point is that Waqar’s record is inflated because of heavy ball-tampering and thus he was a beneficiary of ball-tampering.

You have not provided any argument that refutes that. All you have done is deflect around it.

Waqar is rated by his peers but he doesn’t get nearly the same respect and adulation as Imran and Wasim. Everyone within the cricket fraternity is aware of the fact that Pakistan’s ball-tampering was extreme and among all our bowlers, Waqar was the one to benefit the most.

Ball-tampering is cheating. There are now two ways about it. Does it need skill? Of course - every form of cheating needs skill. If you are not smart, you will get caught easily.

First you were downing Waqar and now you are comparing Waqar to Imran & Wasim. Of course the latter were better.

You (and your aide real AB) need to prove your argument with stats, rather than beating around the bush.

 

[Ashmal]

People are talking as if only Waqar and Pakistan used to tamper the ball.

Ball-tampering was pretty common back then and still is (lesser than pre-2000 though). Every team used to tamper the ball and many players of past have acknowledged it.

Waqar is an ATG and should be given full credit. No other bowler has that kind of stat inspite of all the tampering going around.

Later on after injuries he rediscovered himself as a very good swing bowler which further shows his character and greatness.

 

[therealAB]

You need to prove your argument mate, not me.

Show me the Shami post

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

Against Aus he was rubbish, and against England he was good but not brilliant. West Indies had a decent batting lineup, but not amazing. The rest were obviously very poor. Proven

Everyone knows that Waqar tampered in the early 90's. That is common knowledge and to not think so is incredibly thick

 

[IMMY69]

Disgraceful posts maligning a true great of the game.

No understanding of reverse swing and the fact that he took new ball wickets when fit (1992 Oval Test Match)...

Took 100 wickets in a season for Surrey when no other Surrey bowler came close (using the same ball)!!!

 

[therealAB]

Theyre good players but none of them were bonafide great test match batsmen like your making out

Agreed, but better than who Waqar did it against as a lineup

 

[therealAB]

Disgraceful posts maligning a true great of the game.

No understanding of reverse swing and the fact that he took new ball wickets when fit (1992 Oval Test Match)...

Took 100 wickets in a season for Surrey when no other Surrey bowler came close (using the same ball)!!!

Who were the other Surrey bowlers?

 

[Markhor]

Waqar's record in Australia (avg of 40) and India (avg of 76) are definitely blemishes on his career. Imran and Wasim outperformed him considerably there.

Imran and Wasim's bowling averages never averaged above 40 in any country, infact Imran doesn't average above 30 anywhere in the world !

Also, Waqar never had a defining World Cup performance unlike Wasim. In 1992 he was injured, in 1996 he was manhandled by Jadeja at the death, he was peripheral in 1999 and we all know what happened in 2003.

 

[gazza619]

Show me the Shami post

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

Against Aus he was rubbish, and against England he was good but not brilliant. West Indies had a decent batting lineup, but not amazing. The rest were obviously very poor. Proven

Everyone knows that Waqar tampered in the early 90's. That is common knowledge and to not think so is incredibly thick

So basically just because a raw Waqar had 3 forgettable tests against Australia in 1990, you have degraded him. If ever anybody wanted to know the true meaning of clueless, they need to look at your analysis.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Savak]

Waqar feasted on weak batting line ups. From 1990 to 1994, he feasted routinely against New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe. The great teams of that era i.e England and West Indies had players who were way past their best. Name me one all time great player from the NZ side he routinely feasted on in that time period and he already admitted that he found it very tough to bowl to Martin Crowe

 

[Mamoon]

First you were downing Waqar and now you are comparing Waqar to Imran & Wasim. Of course the latter were better.

You (and your aide real AB) need to prove your argument with stats, rather than beating around the bush.

The stats are in front of you. Waqar feasted I’m weak lineups and failed against Australia and India. I am afraid you are the one who is beating around the bush.

 

[majiz]

mamoon raises a compelling point actually, never realised how bad waqars stats in certain countries are. malcolm marshall is surely the best of all time all things considered

 

[BreadPakoda]

The stats are in front of you. Waqar feasted I’m weak lineups and failed against Australia and India. I am afraid you are the one who is beating around the bush.

90s was a solid era. Even the weak lineups had some very good batsmen.

Tbh West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, etc. had good batting line ups. Iirc Waqar troubled Lara a lot.

Yes, Waqar was a big beneficiary of ball tampering but I won’t comment any further on that as you can’t discuss his performance if you keep circling back to the ball tampering issue.

 

[Buffet]

90s was a solid era. Even the weak lineups had some very good batsmen.

Tbh West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, etc. had good batting line ups. Iirc Waqar troubled Lara a lot.

Yes, Waqar was a big beneficiary of ball tampering but I won’t comment any further on that as you can’t discuss his performance if you keep circling back to the ball tampering issue.

Waqar's peak performance will bring ball tampering discussion.

Here is an intersting read of ball tampering in ESPN,

-------------

On the morning of the first day of the final Test at Faisalabad, Pringle decided to put what he had learned into practice. He found an old bottle top, cut it into quarters, covered the serrated edge with tape, leaving a sharp point exposed. At the first drinks interval the umpires did not ask to look at the ball and, with Pakistan making sedate progress, Pringle started scratching the ball with the bottle top. Pakistan crashed from 35 for 0 to 102 all out. Pringle finished with his Test-best figures of 7 for 52.

"Neither umpire showed any concern or took any notice in what we were doing even though, at the end of the innings, the ball was very scratched," Pringle noted. "One side was shiny but there were lots of grooves and lines and deep gouges on the other side. It was so obvious. It was ripped to shreds ... one side of the ball had been demolished. The umpires were walking across to each other and talking quite a lot. I sensed that they could tell what was going on ... but they didn't want to get involved in anything controversial."

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22991390/as-old-hills

---------------

 

[therealAB]

90s was a solid era. Even the weak lineups had some very good batsmen.

Tbh West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, etc. had good batting line ups. Iirc Waqar troubled Lara a lot.

Yes, Waqar was a big beneficiary of ball tampering but I won’t comment any further on that as you can’t discuss his performance if you keep circling back to the ball tampering issue.

Their batting lineups were decent as best. He struggled vs the top. That is a fact
While he is an ATG, that is the difference between him and McGrath, Hadlee, Marshall

 

[therealAB]

90s was a solid era. Even the weak lineups had some very good batsmen.

Tbh West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, etc. had good batting line ups. Iirc Waqar troubled Lara a lot.

Yes, Waqar was a big beneficiary of ball tampering but I won’t comment any further on that as you can’t discuss his performance if you keep circling back to the ball tampering issue.

What do you mean we can't discuss his performance. It was an integral part of his peak and as such our view of his peak should be changed

 

[therealAB]

So basically just because a raw Waqar had 3 forgettable tests against Australia in 1990, you have degraded him. If ever anybody wanted to know the true meaning of clueless, they need to look at your analysis.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He struggled against aus for his whole career. He was lucky he never played them during his peak as it is highly unlikely he would have improved his performance against them

 

[sweep_shot]

I believe years from early-90's were his best years. He was past his prime in late-90's and early-2000's.