"I wouldn't have struggled to bowl to Virat Kohli" : Waqar Younis

[Sam99]

Don't know about waqar but he would have struggled against mcgrath & ambrose or even asif.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

How would Rohit The Hitman Sharma fare in the 1990s?

He might be made to look a fool on some days but on select days I see him smashing Ambrose, Donald, Waqar around like no one ever could.

We were talking about Kohli’s occasional struggles, but Sharma is Amir’s bunny. Duck in Asia Cup 2016, out for 10 to Amir wt20 ‘16, duck CT 2017, and even in WC ‘19 Sharma could only manage 5 runs off of Amir in his entire 140 run innings... It was 5(8) and he made sure to rotate the strike to Rahul, letting him play Amir out with the new ball. you could see he was clearly instructed to do so. There’s a reason for that.

He’s a great modern batsman no doubt but you’re here talking about smashing Ambrose Donald and Waqar?

 

[the Great Khan]

Don't know about waqar but he would have struggled against mcgrath & ambrose or even asif.

ambrose and walsh. Kohli has a weakness outside the offstump. Ambrose would have probed him outs ide that offstump and hit him with some very sharp bouncers. After which he would crumble and get out in the slips.

we hear alot about resiliance etc, these new players know nothing about that stuff. When a bowler is out for your blood you start to feel it. Kohli can do all the swearing and pumping out of his chest but people like ambrose and co would have spat him out. This is the worst era for bowling I have seen in many years.

Hell Alan Donald vs Kohli would have ended after 5 overs in south africa.

never underestimate what Sachin did for Indian batting. The boy took things on his chest literally. Kohli is a cheap copy. Feasting on garbage like umar gul and other sub par attacks on flat nothing pitches with batsmen friendly rules.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

ambrose and walsh. Kohli has a weakness outside the offstump. Ambrose would have probed him outs ide that offstump and hit him with some very sharp bouncers. After which he would crumble and get out in the slips.

we hear alot about resiliance etc, these new players know nothing about that stuff. When a bowler is out for your blood you start to feel it. Kohli can do all the swearing and pumping out of his chest but people like ambrose and co would have spat him out. This is the worst era for bowling I have seen in many years.

Hell Alan Donald vs Kohli would have ended after 5 overs in south africa.

never underestimate what Sachin did for Indian batting. The boy took things on his chest literally. Kohli is a cheap copy. Feasting on garbage like umar gul and other sub par attacks on flat nothing pitches with batsmen friendly rules.

Dale steyn is widely considered as the greatest south african bowler, he was more complete than allan donald.
But kohli has a fine record against him there's nothing which shows that he would have struggled against donald.

Anderson is another great bowler and last time kohli toured england he didn't even get him once.

Your post is just another attempt at glorifying the past nothing else.

Kagiso rabada, steyn, pat cummins, hazlewood, johnson, anderson, Ryan harris, broad, starc, morkel, philander are all great bowlers and at the end of their career they will be rated as highly as bowlers of the 90s.(especially cummins, rabada, bumrah and steyn. )

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Ind tour of Sa 2018
Bowling attack of sa-rabada, steyn, philander, morkel, ngidi.
Now that is the absolute definition of a threatening bowling attack, i wont be wrong if i say that it was as good as any bowling attack sachin ever faced.
Kohli was the top run scorer in this series beating the second best by a margin of 70+ runs.
That series had the most difficult batting conditions and the last match was played on an absolute minefield. But guess what kohli batted beautifully yet again and won his team a match in SA.
So the flat pitch argument is just another pathetic attempt on tarnishing the great man's legacy.
A bowling attack of RABADA, STEYN, MORKEL, PHILANDER, NGIDII in SA is at par with any attack of the 90s. This series nulliifies all claim on how kohli would have performed against atg attack of the 90s.

 

[Pakhs]

Ind tour of Sa 2018
Bowling attack of sa-rabada, steyn, philander, morkel, ngidi.
Now that is the absolute definition of a threatening bowling attack, i wont be wrong if i say that it was as good as any bowling attack sachin ever faced.
Kohli was the top run scorer in this series beating the second best by a margin of 70+ runs.
That series had the most difficult batting conditions and the last match was played on an absolute minefield. But guess what kohli batted beautifully yet again and won his team a match in SA.
So the flat pitch argument is just another pathetic attempt on tarnishing the great man's legacy.
A bowling attack of RABADA, STEYN, MORKEL, PHILANDER, NGIDII in SA is at par with any attack of the 90s. This series nulliifies all claim on how kohli would have performed against atg attack of the 90s.

It does not mater! would have could have mean nothing. Waqar could have got him out everytime as he was a good bowler and same is true the other way around but we will never know and it makes no difference.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

It does not mater! would have could have mean nothing. Waqar could have got him out everytime as he was a good bowler and same is true the other way around but we will never know and it makes no difference.

Agree.
I was replying to a poster who claimed that virat would have struggled against 90s bowlers.
Waqar is an atg and so is kohli.

 

[Vegitto1]

Ind tour of Sa 2018
Bowling attack of sa-rabada, steyn, philander, morkel, ngidi.
Now that is the absolute definition of a threatening bowling attack, i wont be wrong if i say that it was as good as any bowling attack sachin ever faced.
Kohli was the top run scorer in this series beating the second best by a margin of 70+ runs.
That series had the most difficult batting conditions and the last match was played on an absolute minefield. But guess what kohli batted beautifully yet again and won his team a match in SA.
So the flat pitch argument is just another pathetic attempt on tarnishing the great man's legacy.
A bowling attack of RABADA, STEYN, MORKEL, PHILANDER, NGIDII in SA is at par with any attack of the 90s. This series nulliifies all claim on how kohli would have performed against atg attack of the 90s.

You are ignoring one key part. The pitch. Pitches now are more batting friendly than ever before. They are roads. Much truer bounce. Hardly any seam movement.

Batsmen today would struggle to bat against bowlers of today on pitches from the 90s

 

[Mesozoic]

If waqar bowled to kohli on modern day pitches and rules, then kohli would come out on top more often than not.

If he bowls on 90s wickets and regulations , then it goes to 50-50.

 

[srh]

any ATG bowler at his peak can get any ATG batsman peak or not; cricket is same like baseball in this regard

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

You are ignoring one key part. The pitch. Pitches now are more batting friendly than ever before. They are roads. Much truer bounce. Hardly any seam movement.

Batsmen today would struggle to bat against bowlers of today on pitches from the 90s

I gave the south africa series example to counter that point, that series was played on difficult pitches, infact the third match was on a minefield but kohli top scored in that series.
I think u are not watching test series nowadays coz pitches these days are usually difficult to bat on, for example eng tour of sa, ind tour of sa, ind tour of eng, ind vs aus perth, ind vs aus adelaide.
The last ashes was also played on difficult pitches.
The flat track era ended in 2015 nowadays we dont get many flat pitches.
The biggest profiteers of that era were batsman like Sanga, younis, sehwag etc.

If you want an example of a pitch with deadly bounce then u should look back at ind vs aus perth 2018, and yet again kohli was the highest scorer in that test with a fine century.

Odi players of this era would surely struggle if they had to bat on 90s pitch but this assumption wont be true for great test batsmen.

 

[the Great Khan]

If waqar bowled to kohli on modern day pitches and rules, then kohli would come out on top more often than not.

If he bowls on 90s wickets and regulations , then it goes to 50-50.

Not neccessarily. just go and view the tri series vids from around 2000 india vs pakistan where waqar and wasim take india apart when they were both getting on a bit. so not peak waqar but after injury not very fast waqar. who also did well in england with massive wicket hauls in that odi series..not peak either..destroyed australia and england in a few matches..Then helped take down India and south africa again in the UAE..all using the new(ish) ODI rules and flat phatta pitches..

Now alot of members here are saying "your glorifying" the past ..my contention is this:

In the past the rules were different. I would like to see what King kohli sahib would have done in a test match in the west indies when they could bowl six bouncers per over at you..everyone knows his game is loos around the offstump..the windies would have smashed his fingers to pieces and sent him back to mumbai with a deflated chest.

Moving onto this so called south africa series where king sahib suddenly found form again..what were the pitches like? from what ive seen the south african pitches have just gotten flatter over the years. Pollock and donald for me were better than steyn and rabada. pollock would have had kohli nine times out of ten, with that nagging line just outside offstump and moving slightly away. Same with Mcgrath.

People forget the late late movement waqar used to get. Nobody can do that nowadays. I have seen no bowler do that and move the ball like that. yay bumrah shumrahs are all well and good but they are mediocre compared to the 80's and 90's attacks..same goes for the pakistani attack.

i would say the bowling has been pretty dire over the last decade or so..and the pro batting indianification of the rules doesnt help..lets bring back more bouncers per innings and faster pitches then see how these bahadurs fare..

 

[KP From India]

What were the pitches like in SA 2018 series?
It was one of the very few series in test history where all 60 wickets fallen in 3 tests. Practically any score even 150 was near impossible chase in 4th innings.
Ask Dean Elgar how was last test match wicket?

 

[Mesozoic]

Not neccessarily. just go and view the tri series vids from around 2000 india vs pakistan where waqar and wasim take india apart when they were both getting on a bit. so not peak waqar but after injury not very fast waqar. who also did well in england with massive wicket hauls in that odi series..not peak either..destroyed australia and england in a few matches..Then helped take down India and south africa again in the UAE..all using the new(ish) ODI rules and flat phatta pitches..

Now alot of members here are saying "your glorifying" the past ..my contention is this:

In the past the rules were different. I would like to see what King kohli sahib would have done in a test match in the west indies when they could bowl six bouncers per over at you..everyone knows his game is loos around the offstump..the windies would have smashed his fingers to pieces and sent him back to mumbai with a deflated chest.

Moving onto this so called south africa series where king sahib suddenly found form again..what were the pitches like? from what ive seen the south african pitches have just gotten flatter over the years. Pollock and donald for me were better than steyn and rabada. pollock would have had kohli nine times out of ten, with that nagging line just outside offstump and moving slightly away. Same with Mcgrath.

People forget the late late movement waqar used to get. Nobody can do that nowadays. I have seen no bowler do that and move the ball like that. yay bumrah shumrahs are all well and good but they are mediocre compared to the 80's and 90's attacks..same goes for the pakistani attack.

i would say the bowling has been pretty dire over the last decade or so..and the pro batting indianification of the rules doesnt help..lets bring back more bouncers per innings and faster pitches then see how these bahadurs fare..

I honestly don't even know where to start on this.

There are like a dozen things which are embarrassingly incorrect in this post. Maybe if you let go off your very obvious bias, we can try.....

Thanks.

 

[ask_analyse_act]

People talking too much about Kohli in here.. Waqar at his peak would have troubled Kohli no doubt for me..

In this era of big bats and batsman friendly phattas where KOHLI , ROOT, KANE & SMITH were feasting on would have still struggled to face those ATG bowlers in their era.. Those days we saw balance between bat and ball but now it is mostly batsman game....We can see them struggle against good bowlers like AMIR, STARC, BOULT and RABADA in true pitches even in this era....

Oldie like ANDERSON made Kohli his bunny in ENGLAND didnt we all see that before he could learn and comeback again in 2 years to score runs against him lol...

 

[ask_analyse_act]

I honestly don't even know where to start on this.

There are like a dozen things which are embarrassingly incorrect in this post. Maybe if you let go off your very obvious bias, we can try.....

Thanks.

Well you can start from anywhere and let those dozen things which are embarrassingly incorrect to do the talking for you..

 

[Saj]

In boxing that record would be examined for quality opponents. Mike Tyson retired 50-6 with 44 knockouts but what's the point if you don't have all time greats on your resume. Truth be told Waqar for the most part feasted on a lot of weak sides i.e. England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and a much weaker West Indies team and poor batsmen and tail enders in his prime. His record against the stronger teams at the time i.e. Australia was weak. Overall numbers might look good for him but he bottled it every time the stakes were high on the big stage.

Provide a detailed analysis of his wickets, opponents and the opposition teams then?

 

[Saj]

View attachment 100347

So let me get this straight..... they played the above matches against the same opponents, but if Waqar has better stats in all aspects, by your theory are you suggesting that wasim would take out the good opponents, but struggled against the weak? hahahaha bro you are an absolute tool... i bet you were still in your nappies when the likes of wasim and waqar were ruling the cricketing world.

Couldn't have said it any better.

Good analysis.

 

[Saj]

People here judging Waqar after reading up some stats and watching random videos. Watching him live was something else. I'd argue he won Pakistan more matches on his own than almost anyone else.

This indeed is the problem.

Youtube generation who never saw how great Waqar was as a bowler and have probably only seen him at the end of his career or as a coach.

 

[nosundries]

Kohli is mostly Good with the ball coming in which was Waqar's wicket taking delivery because he is really good with flicks and on drives .. We have seen him smash Malinga's inswinging Yorkers .. With Bats like today that have a lot of wood at the bottom fast inswinging Yorkers would be easier to handle .. Someone like Asif would have troubled Kohli with the new ball ..

 

[Majid Khan]

This indeed is the problem.

Youtube generation who never saw how great Waqar was as a bowler and have probably only seen him at the end of his career or as a coach.

Spot on , I’ve seen Waqar Younis in peak form ‘wasting’ the most unplayable deliveries against tail enders in county cricket for Surrey that could have arguably uprooted middle stump of any batsman in cricket history from Bradman to Kohli.

He’s done it against the best batsmen of his time also , so nothing to prove there - but you have to realise Waqar at his lethal best bowled with an attacking mindset and yes went for a few runs at times but does that matter if you have the strike rate as a fast bowler that Waqar had at one point that maybe still stands as one of the best ever - can some stats guru confirm.

I know that’s a bold claim but I’ve seen enough cricket to stand by that view.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Well it's harder to tamper the ball these days like you lot did Vicky bhai so let's leave aside such hypothetical contests

 

[Saj]

Spot on , I’ve seen Waqar Younis in peak form ‘wasting’ the most unplayable deliveries against tail enders in county cricket for Surrey that could have arguably uprooted middle stump of any batsman in cricket history from Bradman to Kohli.

He’s done it against the best batsmen of his time also , so nothing to prove there - but you have to realise Waqar at his lethal best bowled with an attacking mindset and yes went for a few runs at times but does that matter if you have the strike rate as a fast bowler that Waqar had at one point that maybe still stands as one of the best ever - can some stats guru confirm.

I know that’s a bold claim but I’ve seen enough cricket to stand by that view.

Waqar's motto was you might hit me for a couple of fours, but I will get you. More often than not, he did get the batsman.

An all-time great, whose record speaks for itself and someone who is mentioned by most amongst the best ever bowlers.

 

[Ab Fan]

In ODI cricket, Waqar's economy would have been 6.0 in this era. So, he didn't got hit occasionally but more often.

During Waqar's era, the economy of great bowlers used to be around 3.75. Nowadays, it's around 5.0. Hence, I don't consider Waqar an ODI ATG.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

[MENTION=2501]Savak[/MENTION]

Waqar is a tried and tested bona fide all time great bowler. He owned batsmen in 90s (with Wasim Akram, of course).
Before an almost career-ending injury he bowled 90+mph. That's fast... by any era.

What do you expect him to say? "VK would smash me around"

Waqar owned likes of Lara, I'm sure he would hold his ground against likes of VK!

 

[Buffet]

Well it's harder to tamper the ball these days ...

I am assuming thread is about Kohli playing in hypothetical era of 90s with conditions of 90s. If we are talking about Waqar bowling in current era then it's likely to be advantage Kohli.

Waqar wouldn't be Waqar. with tons of cameras allowed. Waqar did what was allowed during old era and all bowlers were free to tamper with ball.

 

[Savak]

[MENTION=2501]Savak[/MENTION]

Waqar is a tried and tested bona fide all time great bowler. He owned batsmen in 90s (with Wasim Akram, of course).
Before an almost career-ending injury he bowled 90+mph. That's fast... by any era.

What do you expect him to say? "VK would smash me around"

Waqar owned likes of Lara, I'm sure he would hold his ground against likes of VK!

Its hard to argue excessively on hypothetical scenarios. But this is an era where batsmen play reverse swing and Yorkers much better than the players in the 1980's and 90's. This is an era where Dhoni effortlessly plays a helicopter shot to a full blooded Malinga 147 km/hr Yorker for six, what's to say that Dhoni couldn't do the same to Waqar's Yorkers in this era?

Waqar benefited massively because reverse swing was a novelty from 1989 to 1994 and his performance with the old ball suffered when batsmen became well versed to handle it during the second half of his career.

 

[Buffet]

In ODI cricket, Waqar's economy would have been 6.0 in this era. So, he didn't got hit occasionally but more often.

During Waqar's era, the economy of great bowlers used to be around 3.75. Nowadays, it's around 5.0. Hence, I don't consider Waqar an ODI ATG.

Certainly not an ATG in ODI. Ratings have lots of flaws but if you consistenly have 500-700 ratings then, you don't belong in ATG discussion.

Just to put it in perspective bottom of Pollock was peak of Waqar. Only one player with such a drastic trend can be an ATG in that format.



Waqar was an ATG in the test format.

 

[Slog]

I think Mohammed Asif would have troubled him the most.

Lol Asif would have found his edge for fun

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Its hard to argue excessively on hypothetical scenarios. But this is an era where batsmen play reverse swing and Yorkers much better than the players in the 1980's and 90's. This is an era where Dhoni effortlessly plays a helicopter shot to a full blooded Malinga 147 km/hr Yorker for six, what's to say that Dhoni couldn't do the same to Waqar's Yorkers in this era?

Waqar benefited massively because reverse swing was a novelty from 1989 to 1994 and his performance with the old ball suffered when batsmen became well versed to handle it during the second half of his career.

Dhoni is a nobody in test cricket. Even their new wicket keepers have already played better test innings outside India than MSD's whole career.

ODI/T20 slogging overs are a different ball game: even a random Pakistani tailender smashed Malinga's yorkers for 6s. I don't even remember guy's name but I know Malinga! (And both Malinga/MSD are ODI ATGs).

Waqar was a smart bowler and he demonstrated capacity to set up batsmen. Reverse swing was just a tool for him. He's so much more than that!

 

[Nikhil_cric]

I am assuming thread is about Kohli playing in hypothetical era of 90s with conditions of 90s. If we are talking about Waqar bowling in current era then it's likely to be advantage Kohli.

Waqar wouldn't be Waqar. with tons of cameras allowed. Waqar did what was allowed during old era and all bowlers were free to tamper with ball.

Yep. Pretty much. If Kohli was playing in 90-94 it would have been advantage Waqar with that pace and reverse. Modern era - advantage Kohli.

 

[Forward Defensive Push]

Waqar’s bowling plays to Kohli‘s strength. He is good off his pads and demolishes even yorkers at will. A peak Wasim would cause more issues to Kohli like Amir and Boult. Even Asif for that matter like Anderson. Waqar, sorry not a chance like Malinga.

 

[Kroll]

The thing about playing yorkers well these days is of course due to the evolution of T20 cricket amongst some other changes like bigger bats. So there's a plethora of batsmen who can counter it and not only Kohli.

 

[Zaz]

Great post. I completely agree that Waqar was a great bowler in tests but at the same time was overrated in ODIs.

Just look at economy rate of some of the great ODI bowlers during Waqar's era.

Shaun Pollock- 3.67
Glenn McGrath- 3.88
Wasim Akram- 3.89
Curtly Ambrose- 3.48
Courtney Walsh- 3.88
Allan Donald- 4.15
Chaminda Vaas- 4.18
Kapil Dev- 3.71
Imran Khan- 3.85

Darren Gough- 4.39
Javagal Srinath- 4.44
Heath Streak- 4.51

And <B>Waqar Younis 4.68</B> and being significant in both the losses Pakistan had suffered in the World Cup match vs India. Not being able to play for Pakistan in the World Cup 1999 tells us a lot about his ODI career.

Waqar wasnt about controlling run rates His job was to take wickets and he did that more effectively than most of his time

He roughly took 2 wkts per 60 balls in odis Had the best strike rate of his era Those that watched him during the 90s know he was a gun bowler in every format including odis

Theres a reason he avged early 20s and had dozens of 4-5 wkts haul over his odi career

 

[Last Monetarist]

Dale steyn is widely considered as the greatest south african bowler, he was more complete than allan donald.
But kohli has a fine record against him there's nothing which shows that he would have struggled against donald.

Anderson is another great bowler and last time kohli toured england he didn't even get him once.

Your post is just another attempt at glorifying the past nothing else.

Kagiso rabada, steyn, pat cummins, hazlewood, johnson, anderson, Ryan harris, broad, starc, morkel, philander are all great bowlers and at the end of their career they will be rated as highly as bowlers of the 90s.(especially cummins, rabada, bumrah and steyn. )

This is a pretty questionable take in general, but can you please elaborate on the bit in bold? What does "more complete" mean exactly?

Answers on a postcard.

 

[the Great Khan]

I honestly don't even know where to start on this.

There are like a dozen things which are embarrassingly incorrect in this post. Maybe if you let go off your very obvious bias, we can try.....

Thanks.

which ones?

the 2000 series in Australia where India were destroyed by a slightly nearly done and dusted two w's?
this india included your greats. Then the same year in the uae the same team was wiped out again.
Waqar then took his best ODI bowling figures against england and then nearly repeated the feat a few days later against australia bowling between 80-85 mph. By this time he had full control over his bowling.
He would have given Kohli nightmares outside the offstump.

Moving backwards to his peak, kohli wouldnt have had a chance in the late 80's and 90's. Sorry but you can say what you want. If we had a peak Lara in this era, he would make Kohli look ordinary. Waqar gave Lara a pretty hard time in a few series.

The fact is in this era, Kohli is protected. Protected by the BCCI, protected by the new rules and the massive gaps in the field. And at the same time protected by the incompetence of the opposition.

To this day I haven't seen a single bowler in this era bowl an in-swinging yorker like waqar. It would bend in very very late..nowadays the best you get is a slight bend and a conventional yorker..Also waqar's presence in the attack would cause problems even if he wasn't taking tons of wickets.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

For those of you with memory loss about Waqar!

 

[Swashbuckler]

which ones?

the 2000 series in Australia where India were destroyed by a slightly nearly done and dusted two w's?

Remember that tournament, Pakistan won 3/4 encounters, India won one where Ganguly scored a 140. One of the matches Pakistan won could have gone either way, won in the last ball of their innings with 2 wickets left. Too many clowns in that Indian side while Pakistan was the 3rd best side in the world behind SA and Aus. But have to say the Ws weren't that big a problem for us, especially Waqar, it was Razzaq and Shoaib who helped you win especially Razzaq who was very successful against Tendulkar. These 2 lesser bowlers were the ones who would pick the big wickets and halt our momentum.

 

[Swashbuckler]

i would say the bowling has been pretty dire over the last decade or so..and the pro batting indianification of the rules doesnt help..lets bring back more bouncers per innings and faster pitches then see how these bahadurs fare..

Last decade has seen average scores in tests plummet, only in Australia has batting become easier. In all other countries trend is towards more result oriented pitches, making this a tougher era for batting, far tougher than the 00s. Pitch doctoring has gone to a different level, even making draws overseas is a challenge. Sample this, how SA is making pitches for Asian sides compared to when they host Aus,Eng.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?279824-South-African-Test-pitches-against-Asian-sides-since-2017

 

[Swashbuckler]

Kohli would have been troubled by Wasim and Asif, from other countries legends like Ambrose, McGrath, Gillespie, Vaas, Pollock, Warne etc. He has weakness against LH quicks who can bring the ball back in, 4th/5th stump line uncertainty corridor taking ball further away and wristies. He does well against genuine pace, short pitched stuff, yorkers, incoming deliveries, off spin, SLA, mystery spin. Match up wouldn't be an issue for him in this contest, however Waqar would enjoy bowling to someone like Pujara. Individual encounters is always about match ups, that is why a 16 years old Nadal on his weaker surface gave peak Federer more pain than peak Djokovic on his favorite surface against an inferior Federer.

 

[Mesozoic]

which ones?

the 2000 series in Australia where India were destroyed by a slightly nearly done and dusted two w's?

He would have given Kohli nightmares outside the offstump.

If we had a peak Lara in this era, he would make Kohli look ordinary. Waqar gave Lara a pretty hard time in a few series.

The fact is in this era, Kohli is protected. Protected by the BCCI, protected by the new rules and the massive gaps in the field. And at the same time protected by the incompetence of the opposition.

Just because Waqar dominated the 2000s Indian team , doesn't mean he'll give kohli "nightmares". Kohli is a far better player than the ones that played in that series (barring SRT).

Waqar's strength was mainly about fast inswinging (reverse) yorkers and bouncers against which kohli is quite comfortable with. Kohli's weakness is against left armers bringing it back in and outswing. Someone like Wasim would/may have given him "nightmares" but most certainly not Waqar.

Brian Lara is a completely different batsman to kohli. You can't just say A troubled B so A would also trouble C.

And no. Kohli is not protected by anyone lol. Don't know what you are on about. He doesn't even need it. It's just you finding excuses (lame ones at it) to downplay his achievements. Massive gaps ??

 

[Ab Fan]

Waqar wasnt about controlling run rates His job was to take wickets and he did that more effectively than most of his time

He roughly took 2 wkts per 60 balls in odis Had the best strike rate of his era Those that watched him during the 90s know he was a gun bowler in every format including odis

Theres a reason he avged early 20s and had dozens of 4-5 wkts haul over his odi career

I agree with your points but In ODI format, economy also plays a major part. Waqar's economy was far too high for his era of cricket because other great bowlers were having economy under 4 with similar averages. There are numerous such examples, even Gough and Srinath have better economy than Waqar.

Someone like Ajit Agarkar has strike rate of 32 in ODIs but no way will I rate him a better ODI bowler than a Zaheer or Srinath.

In a same way, Waqar can't be rated as a better ODI bowler than a Shaun Pollock or Allan Donald who average about same or even better and has lesser economy than Waqar. ICC rankings gives a lot of clarity on that as [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] already explained.

 

[ammar_merry]

Great post. I completely agree that Waqar was a great bowler in tests but at the same time was overrated in ODIs.

Just look at economy rate of some of the great ODI bowlers during Waqar's era.

Shaun Pollock- 3.67
Glenn McGrath- 3.88
Wasim Akram- 3.89
Curtly Ambrose- 3.48
Courtney Walsh- 3.88
Allan Donald- 4.15
Chaminda Vaas- 4.18
Kapil Dev- 3.71
Imran Khan- 3.85

Darren Gough- 4.39
Javagal Srinath- 4.44
Heath Streak- 4.51

And <B>Waqar Younis 4.68</B> and being significant in both the losses Pakistan had suffered in the World Cup match vs India. Not being able to play for Pakistan in the World Cup 1999 tells us a lot about his ODI career.

Waqar st rate 30 4w 14 5w 13. He is one of the best and competitor of all the bowlers you have mentioned and a match winner on his day more often.Even in his off peak years he had the abilty to pick 4 and 5 wickets more than any other bowler.

Pollack st rate 39 4w 12 5w 5
Mcgrath st rate 34 4w 9 5w 7
Wasim st rate 36 4w 17 5w 6
Ambrose st rate 41 4w 6 4w 4
walsh st rate 47 4w 6 5w 1
Donald st rate 31 4w 11 5w 2

 

[ammar_merry]

I agree with your points but In ODI format, economy also plays a major part. Waqar's economy was far too high for his era of cricket because other great bowlers were having economy under 4 with similar averages. There are numerous such examples, even Gough and Srinath have better economy than Waqar.

Someone like Ajit Agarkar has strike rate of 32 in ODIs but no way will I rate him a better ODI bowler than a Zaheer or Srinath.

In a same way, Waqar can't be rated as a better ODI bowler than a Shaun Pollock or Allan Donald who average about same or even better and has lesser economy than Waqar. ICC rankings gives a lot of clarity on that as [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] already explained.

He is no ajit. And remind you only Great murali has 15 4w and 10 5w no one else is close.
There is a reason waqar is ICC Hall of fame player.

 

[Ab Fan]

Waqar st rate 30 4w 14 5w 13. He is one of the best and competitor of all the bowlers you have mentioned and a match winner on his day more often.Even in his off peak years he had the abilty to pick 4 and 5 wickets more than any other bowler.

Pollack st rate 39 4w 12 5w 5
Mcgrath st rate 34 4w 9 5w 7
Wasim st rate 36 4w 17 5w 6
Ambrose st rate 41 4w 6 4w 4
walsh st rate 47 4w 6 5w 1
Donald st rate 31 4w 11 5w 2

He leaked a lot of runs in ODIs and I showed it with my post of economy comparison of players of his era.

Economy plays a massive role in ODI cricket while strike rate and averages play major role in tests where economy don't matter as much. Otherwise Ajit Agarkar would have been better ODI bowler than Zaheer or Srinath.

 

[Ab Fan]

He is no ajit. And remind you only Great murali has 15 4w and 10 5w no one else is close.
There is a reason waqar is ICC Hall of fame player.

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

 

[DRsohail]

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

Are you any cricket expert or did you play any International cricket that he is no ATG per your opinion.The world cricket considers him as ATG . Your opinion does not carry any importance.. Kuch loog bhi yaha par bus....

 

[Ab Fan]

Are you any cricket expert or did you play any International cricket that he is no ATG per your opinion.The world cricket considers him as ATG . Your opinion does not carry any importance.. Kuch loog bhi yaha par bus....

Just to spice up things a bit more, Shaun Pollock is better than Waqar.

 

[ammar_merry]

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

You have still not answered why he has picked more 4w and 5w than even murli and still not ATG. Surely fifers make you win more matches.

 

[Ab Fan]

You have still not answered why he has picked more 4w and 5w than even murli and still not ATG. Surely fifers make you win more matches.

I will give you one example. Ajit Agarkar used to leak a lot of runs as well but his strike rate is 32, he has got 10 4-fers while Imran Khan got 3 4-fers and his strike rate was 40. So, can we say that Mr. Agarkar is a better ODI bowler than Mr. khan because he has got more 4-fers and has better strike rate than Imran Khan?? Do give me an answer on this and the economy part of Waqar that you still have to answer?

The point is that its not test cricket that we are discussing so fi-fers are not as important. In ODIs, if you end with figures of say, 5-69, that's not what we call great performance. Waqar Younis ICC ranking trend tells us all that we have to know about his career.

 

[ammar_merry]

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

Just to spice up things a bit more, Shaun Pollock is better than Waqar.

Just to make thing bitter.
waqar has 15 MOM away from home.3 MOS away 2 in triangulars and 1 in austral asia cup.
Shaun has 8 MOM away with 1 MOS against westindies in bilateral.

 

[ammar_merry]

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

Just to make thing bitter.
waqar has 15 MOM away from home.3 MOS away 2 in triangulars and 1 in austral asia cup.
Shaun has 8 MOM away with 1 MOS against westindies in bilateral.

shaun performed at home and his avg also drops at away venues

 

[Buffet]

Surely fifers make you win more matches.

In some cases yes, they do make you win. Even if they make you win in most cases, it doesn't mean much if you get hit around all the time and lose lot more matches. That's why rating trend is so poor for Waqar in ODI format.

Test is won by picking 20 wickets

ODI is won by scoring more runs.

 

[Buffet]

shaun performed at home and his avg also drops at away venues

Shaun won a lot more matches away and home both due to not giving runs and that's how ODI's are won.

 

[Saj]

You have still not answered why he has picked more 4w and 5w than even murli and still not ATG. Surely fifers make you win more matches.

But, but, but, he only took the wickets of numbers 9, 10 and 11 and against very weak teams

 

[ammar_merry]

Who is saying he is Ajit, lol?

But Waqar is not an ATG ODI bowler for me, just a great one. He has economy of 4.75 when Wasim, McGrath and Pollock had it under 4.00 and hsi average is not much better than them either.

In some cases yes, they do make you win. Even if they make you win in most cases, it doesn't mean much if you get hit around all the time and lose lot more matches. That's why rating trend is so poor for Waqar in ODI format.

Test is won by picking 20 wickets

ODI is won by scoring more runs.

out of waqar's 14 4w 10 are in winning cause.
and out of 13 fifers 11 are in winning matches.
Does some cases means winning 80% of the matches where he takes 4fer/5fer. I will take it anyday.

 

[Buffet]

out of waqar's 14 4w 10 are in winning cause.
and out of 13 fifers 11 are in winning matches.
Does some cases means winning 80% of the matches where he takes 4fer/5fer. I will take it anyday.

You could win 90% with 4-fers, but it doesn't matter much if you are also going to lose tons of matches due to getting hit around all the time.

ODI is won by making sure your team scores more and bowlers getting hit all the time are not going to help their team in ODI. In test, it's opposite. ER is not relevant if you can pick up wickets at good average.

There is a reason that his rating trend in ODI is 500-700 points. That's not an ATG rating trend. Ratings are highly objective with flaws we all are aware, but long term trend tells a decent story about each player in each format.

 

[Buffet]

out of waqar's 14 4w 10 are in winning cause.
and out of 13 fifers 11 are in winning matches.
Does some cases means winning 80% of the matches where he takes 4fer/5fer. I will take it anyday.

You are ignoring the flip side to that.

Waqar has lost 30-35 matches by going over 6+ ER in ODI. When your main bowler went for 6+ in 90s then it was very hard to win ODI's. Waqar career ER is 4.7 and it's very high for 90s. Picking one and half wicket pet match won't compensate if you are leaking so many runs.

 

[Buffet]

Imagine a main bowler of a team going for 70-80 runs in 30-40 matches in current era. Also, many times going for 55-65 runs.

Bowler may also pick one and half wickets per match on average. The bowler may win you 20 matches with 4-fers/5-fers, but with above mentioned stats, bowler will lose you a lot more matches. We won't be callinng such bowler an ATG bowler in ODI format.

A bowler picking 5 wickets per test makes SR a lot more important in Test format than a bowler picking one and half wickets per ODI. SR is simply not as important in ODI. Sure, if other things are similar, you will highly prefer a bowler with great SR because quicker you take wickets, less likely opposition will score heavily.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

I don’t think you guys realize. This thread is about whether he would have troubled Kohli, not whether Kohli wouldn’t have hit him for a couple of fours first or whether he would win or lose the ODI. The truth is, he would get Kohli out 9 times out of 10 whether or not Kohli hit him for a few boundaries first. In fact, Waqar often set batsmen up this way, including Brian Lara if you see the video I linked earlier. He very clearly probes wide of Lara’s off stump, swinging the ball away slightly and allowing him two fours, before swinging what seemed like an initially identical ball back into him to uproot his leg stump. Bringing him to his knees! Kohli wouldn’t stand a chance, given how big of a step outside his off stump Kohli takes while looking to play a drive through the covers.

 

[ammar_merry]

Imagine a main bowler of a team going for 70-80 runs in 30-40 matches in current era. Also, many times going for 55-65 runs.

Bowler may also pick one and half wickets per match on average. The bowler may win you 20 matches with 4-fers/5-fers, but with above mentioned stats, bowler will lose you a lot more matches. We won't be callinng such bowler an ATG bowler in ODI format.

A bowler picking 5 wickets per test makes SR a lot more important in Test format than a bowler picking one and half wickets per ODI. SR is simply not as important in ODI. Sure, if other things are similar, you will highly prefer a bowler with great SR because quicker you take wickets, less likely opposition will score heavily.

You strategy of lesser wickets in ODI is flawed.You are talking about lost matches so i find both averaging differently.
In the won matches Waqar avg 18
shaun avg 19
In lost maches waqar avgs 34
shaun avg 39.

does avg 34-39 in lost matches same?

ODI cricket is all about impact players.And waqar win you more matches.
just like jayasuria, Gilchrist won more matches than dravid and yousuf in ODIs impact bowlers win more matches.
Try Restricting jaya or lara and means he will hurt you at some time in the match more often than not.
Waqar got jaya 13 times,lara 6 times also means he will risk some runs but eventually get impact players out.

 

[Buffet]

You strategy of lesser wickets in ODI is flawed.You are talking about lost matches so i find both averaging differently.
In the won matches Waqar avg 18
shaun avg 19
In lost maches waqar avgs 34
shaun avg 39.

does avg 34-39 in lost matches same?

ODI cricket is all about impact players.And waqar win you more matches.
just like jayasuria, Gilchrist won more matches than dravid and yousuf in ODIs impact bowlers win more matches.
Try Restricting jaya or lara and means he will hurt you at some time in the match more often than not.
Waqar got jaya 13 times,lara 6 times also means he will risk some runs but eventually get impact players out.

How much impact a bowler can have on average if bowlers pick one and half wickets per match in ODI?

How much impact a bowler will have on result if bowlers gets hit around most of the times?


Just ask those questions and you can see why picking isolated examples won't make a good bowler an ATG bowler in ODI format. That's the reason his rating trend is 500-700 range and that's not a trend line for any ATG player.

 

[Ab Fan]

Waqar's ODI average is 23 which is great but his economy rate is far too high for an ATG player.

During his own era,not just great bowlers like Wasim, McGrath, Pollock or Ambrose but even Srinath and Gough were more economical than Waqar. I am not saying only economy matters but it does makes a difference when it comes to ODI format.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

Waqar's ODI average is 23 which is great but his economy rate is far too high for an ATG player.

During his own era,not just great bowlers like Wasim, McGrath, Pollock or Ambrose but even Srinath and Gough were more economical than Waqar. I am not saying only economy matters but it does makes a difference when it comes to ODI format.

This average is greatly inflated by the fact that he played for half a decade after he was past his prime.

 

[Danyaalr01]

Every batsmen's wekaness is an inswinging yorker at or above 150 kph.

 

[Last Monetarist]

I am inclined to agree with some views here that Kohli would have dominated Waqar in modern white ball cricket. Kohli's too good a batsman to not take advantage of the loose deliveries that Waqar was wont to bowl given his tendency to overpitch and miss the mark while striving for the yorker. Two white balls would also have made Waqar's job at the death a whole lot tougher as there would have been no reverse swing to exploit.

Test cricket, I'd hazard a guess that Waqar would have had his number as the behaviour of the red ball hasn't really changed much over the last two decades, even allowing for more scrutiny on ball management practices these days. You only need one good delivery to get a good batsman out, and only a fool would gamble against a bowler of Waqar's calibre and skill to not bowl sufficient exceptional deliveries in an innings.

 

[subshakerz]

Kohli doesnt have a weakness against pace. He would only be vulnerable to Waqar if its an old ball spell and he is new to the crease. Otherwise, I would back Kohli to get used to his swing and eventually counterattack. This is how Martin Crowe and Haynes took apart Waqar in his prime. Waqar even in his prime was not that great of a new ball bowler.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

Kohli doesnt have a weakness against pace.

Then why does he fail to smash around Amir or get out for low scores against Kylie Jamieson, Tim Southee, Trent Boult and even Colin de Grandhomme or Hamish Bennett? He’s great but he wouldn’t have survived against the 90s bowling greats. Maybe in India, but not anywhere with remotely pacer friendly conditions

 

[Mesozoic]

Then why does he fail to smash around Amir or get out for low scores against Kylie Jamieson, Tim Southee, Trent Boult and even Colin de Grandhomme or Hamish Bennett? He’s great but he wouldn’t have survived against the 90s bowling greats. Maybe in India, but not anywhere with remotely pacer friendly conditions

"Failing to smash around" is not considered a weakness. He is just going through a lean patch and failed against those kiwi bowlers you mentioned. This is the guy who dominated Johnson, Starc, Steyn, Morkel, Rabada , Anderson etc in their own backyard. No reason why he'd fail against "90s greats on remotely pacer friendly conditions". Our last tours of South Africa and England had more than remotely pace friendly conditions. And guess who the top scorer was in both those series'..

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Oh some indian trolls are at it again.

Waqar rates Sachin more than he does Kohli. There is nothing wrong in it. Trolls shouldn't get hurt because Sachin is also an Indian.

Waqar doesn't hate Kohli either. Here is an article from 2017. Read it.

Waqar Younis deems Sachin Tendulkar as the toughest batsman he bowled to

Waqar also tipped Virat Kohli to break all the batting records in future.

https://circleofcricket.com/categor...endulkar-as-the-toughest-batsman-he-bowled-to

 

[big_gamer007]

Then why does he fail to smash around Amir or get out for low scores against Kylie Jamieson, Tim Southee, Trent Boult and even Colin de Grandhomme or Hamish Bennett? He’s great but he wouldn’t have survived against the 90s bowling greats. Maybe in India, but not anywhere with remotely pacer friendly conditions

Kohli has a weakness against left arm fast bowlers who bring ball in. Not just Kohli, most batsmen have weakness against such bowlers.

Also, Kohli has another weakness with right hand fast bowlers who bowl 4th stump line and cane take ball away from right handers.

He practices really hard to hide the weakness but sometimes it just doesn't work.
If you watch Kohli you will understand that.

Waqars strength (reverse inswinging at pace) is not Kohli's weakness so should not be an issue for Kohli.

 

[DRsohail]

Just to spice up things a bit more, Shaun Pollock is better than Waqar.

lolz. Ajit Agarkar d Prasad are also better.. Serinath is way above him.0

 

[DRsohail]

Oh some indian trolls are at it again.

Waqar rates Sachin more than he does Kohli. There is nothing wrong in it. Trolls shouldn't get hurt because Sachin is also an Indian.

Waqar doesn't hate Kohli either. Here is an article from 2017. Read it.

Waqar Younis deems Sachin Tendulkar as the toughest batsman he bowled to

Waqar also tipped Virat Kohli to break all the batting records in future.

https://circleofcricket.com/categor...endulkar-as-the-toughest-batsman-he-bowled-to

Indians are selftrolling here.

 

[Ab Fan]

lolz. Ajit Agarkar d Prasad are also better.. Serinath is way above him.0

Seems very easy riling you up lol..Far too emotional, just can't accept the fact that Shaun is better than Waqar.

 

[Rajdeep]

I doubt Waqar would have got those banana swings playing in modern era with so many cameras around. M.Asif and Wasim perhaps would have troubled Kohli more. Having said all that, Virat is a champion batsman and have got the class to tackle any bowler that ever played the game.

 

[Saj]

Show some people Waqar's stats and they will say that is a legendary bowler. Tell them that the stats belong to Waqar Younis and they will say he was mediocre.

The sad reality.

 

[Zaz]

Waqar wasnt aesthetically pleasing but he got the job done as effectively as wasim if not more

Like imran said to wasim i want wickets because thats what won you games back then

Amrbose walsh pollock and co gave nothing away but could be seen out in odis (where a good score back then was 260) without making an impact

Waqar would regularly decimate and and turn a game on his head more than all pace bowlers of his era The number of 4-5 wkts prove the fact he was a match winner

But for his near career ending injuries waqars record wouldve been even better

A stike rate of 30 in the 90s the highest for a pace bowler of his era is true testament to the fact that waqar was a great force of nature and one of the very best to have graced the game

 

[tyron_woodley]

who cares about odi? he never performed in big games vs top teams in the world cup stages anyway.

Test is what matters. Virat would figure him out. waqar ppst 93 lost his ability to swing due to the ball tampering scandal.

advanced sporting analytic software and other forms of technology of the modern days would help true greats like virat figure out waqar without any difficulty. Waqar will have some success initially as all new bowlers do and from.then on it will be downhill.

 

[PakPhenom]

Kohli is mostly Good with the ball coming in which was Waqar's wicket taking delivery because he is really good with flicks and on drives .. We have seen him smash Malinga's inswinging Yorkers .. With Bats like today that have a lot of wood at the bottom fast inswinging Yorkers would be easier to handle .. Someone like Asif would have troubled Kohli with the new ball ..

Again. People here just assume Waqar had the inswinging yorker and thats it. He rarely bowled inswing with the new ball and had as big an outswinger as he had an inswinger. And while Malinga is perhaps the closest in similarity to Waqar with the yorkers, he doesn't swing it nearly as much. You only have to go and see Waqar's old videos to see that. And he did that pretty much every match.

 

[PakPhenom]

who cares about odi? he never performed in big games vs top teams in the world cup stages anyway.

Test is what matters. Virat would figure him out. waqar ppst 93 lost his ability to swing due to the ball tampering scandal.

advanced sporting analytic software and other forms of technology of the modern days would help true greats like virat figure out waqar without any difficulty. Waqar will have some success initially as all new bowlers do and from.then on it will be downhill.

Waqar never lost the ability to swing. If anything he got better with the new ball with age. The only thing he lost was a yard of pace. Go and see any of his late spells and he got wickets with swing more than pace.