What's new

Shoaib Akhtar versus Waqar Younis

Shoaib Akhtar versus Waqar Younis


  • Total voters
    7

Ozeirk

Tape Ball Captain
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Runs
1,237
Shoaib Akhtar has been an absolute legend for Pakistan and has come up with some great match winning performances in his time. However, watching him on his vlogs I get the impression that he considers himself and to be a greater player than Waqar Younis with him putting himself next to Wasim and not mentioning Waqar name whenever he talks about Pakistan's greatest fast bowlers.

If we look at the overall record Waqar has played for a lot longer than Shoaib and contributed a lot more than Shoaib did due to the latter's fitness issues.

I think it's time we put this debate to rest and would love people's opinion on this forum as to who they consider to be the greater player and why?
 
This has got to be a joke. Shoaib doesn’t belong to the same ballpark as Waqar.

And no, Shoaib has never been a legend for Pakistan cricket. He has rather been an embarrassment, a primadonna, a destructive influence for his team. Even the late Tony Greig said the same.
 
This has got to be a joke. Shoaib doesn’t belong to the same ballpark as Waqar.

And no, Shoaib has never been a legend for Pakistan cricket. He has rather been an embarrassment, a primadonna, a destructive influence for his team. Even the late Tony Greig said the same.

Akhtar's record against Australia and India is better than Waqar's. Akhtar bowled to better Australian and Indian sides as well. Waqar played far too many games towards the end of his career when he was finished.
 
Both are legends.

Stop comparing and taking Akhtar's comments too seriously
 
Akhtar's record against Australia and India is better than Waqar's. Akhtar bowled to better Australian and Indian sides as well. Waqar played far too many games towards the end of his career when he was finished.

Akhtar’s record against India is better than Waqar’s, not against Australia. Waqar played just 4 matches against India.
 
Waqar Younis was much better, I generally don't mention him as highly as Wasim but there is no doubt he is still an undisputed ATG and enjoys the privilege of having one of the greatest peak ever.

Akhtar was fantastic at his peak as well but declined earlier and had suffered injury, so Waqar was better by a mile.
 
Akhtar’s record against India is better than Waqar’s, not against Australia. Waqar played just 4 matches against India.

I don't think Waqar could have delivered the performances Akhtar did against the greatest batting line up of Australia from 1999 to 2005 even at his peak.
 
Considering akhtar had to play pretty much as single man army with likes of below average or about avg bowlers, his performances were taller than Waqarz....

in isolation, waqar was a great great great bowler..much more skilled and amazing ...but he had the greatest bowler of all time on the other side..Also had Mushi and Saqlain to complement him ... so obviously tht helped ....

still Waqar > Shoaib
 
Both are terrific bowlers. Waqar overall is a much better bowler.

Akhtar was impossible to play when he got it right. 155k swinging balls will be a nightmare for any batsman.

Both did not have the longevity though. Waqar retired as a medium pacer. Akhtar retired as an express fast bowler.
 
Both are terrific bowlers. Waqar overall is a much better bowler.

Akhtar was impossible to play when he got it right. 155k swinging balls will be a nightmare for any batsman.

Both did not have the longevity though. Waqar retired as a medium pacer. Akhtar retired as an express fast bowler.

Lol Ross Taylor retired Akhtar. Akhtar wasn't express consistently at the end of his career. Waqar played on even after the bashing he received from Jadeja
 
Shoaib could've had a similar career to Waqar if he had cartilage left in his knees. But then again, Waqar would've had an even better career if he didn't overplay and injure himself twice.
 
This has got to be a joke. Shoaib doesn’t belong to the same ballpark as Waqar.

And no, Shoaib has never been a legend for Pakistan cricket. He has rather been an embarrassment, a primadonna, a destructive influence for his team. Even the late Tony Greig said the same.

Waqar is obviously better but still shoaib is a Pakistan great no doubt about that
 
I think it's time we put this debate to rest and would love people's opinion on this forum as to who they consider to be the greater player and why?

What debate buddy? :yk :)))

Got nothing but love for Shoaib but Waqar is a legend. Different league altogether.
 
Lol Ross Taylor retired Akhtar. Akhtar wasn't express consistently at the end of his career. Waqar played on even after the bashing he received from Jadeja

Akhtar was express all the time till his last game against NZ. He was the fastest of all time and was a smart bowler.
 
Waqar for me. Even Shoaib looked upon Waqar as his role model. Thing with Shoaib is he gave far too many runs in every innings. Waqar after his prime when he lost much of his pace remained effective by adapting.
 
I was a kid by the time Shoaib Akhtar retired and even I'll tell you that Waqar is better.
 
Akhtar's record against Australia and India is better than Waqar's. Akhtar bowled to better Australian and Indian sides as well. Waqar played far too many games towards the end of his career when he was finished.

You're really saying Akhtar played from 2005-2011 in his prime? He was absent half the time
 
Shoaib was only good against tailenders the very few times he played. Most of the time he was an injured donkey burdening the team, nothing else. One of the most incredibly overrated fast bowlers ever.
 
Waqar was better but also believe Shoaib was miss managed

I still would have either of them now!
 
Waqar for me. Even Shoaib looked upon Waqar as his role model. Thing with Shoaib is he gave far too many runs in every innings. Waqar after his prime when he lost much of his pace remained effective by adapting.

4.76 Economy rate is not high in ODI. Bearing in mind that he was an attacking bowler and had express pace.
 
Waqar was better but also believe Shoaib was miss managed

I still would have either of them now!

He wasn't a kid that needed mothering. It is well known how he was a heavy drinker and would stay up playing cards until late with a match the following day. Would have been sacked had he been an Aussie, we just tolerate this nonsense from our so called stars further inflating their ego.
 
Generally he was always unfit carrying so much extra weight showing a complete lack of respect to the rigours of life as a sportsman. Waqar was never like this, he was never overweight during his career nor was his professionalism ever questioned. I never liked Shoaib Akhtar as a player or person, was glad when he finally retired.
 
Last edited:
Shoaib humbled Teenda, Ponting, Kallis in their primes. What was Waqar's record like against elite batsmen in his prime?
 
Waqar for me. Even Shoaib looked upon Waqar as his role model. Thing with Shoaib is he gave far too many runs in every innings. Waqar after his prime when he lost much of his pace remained effective by adapting.


Waqar was ineffective when he lost his pace. He would never have played in his final years had it not been for the captaincy.
 
Waqar was ineffective when he lost his pace. He would never have played in his final years had it not been for the captaincy.

No Waqs was good even when nearing the end of his career. I am not having it, stop it.
 
Waqar was FAR MORE talented, he's a legend. Akhtar's legend status is up for debate but what isn't it up for debate is that he is not in the same class as Waqar Younis, periodt.
 
This has got to be a joke. Shoaib doesn’t belong to the same ballpark as Waqar.

And no, Shoaib has never been a legend for Pakistan cricket. He has rather been an embarrassment, a primadonna, a destructive influence for his team. Even the late Tony Greig said the same.

Agree , this thread comparing the Waqar with Shoaib belongs to some comedy forum. Shaoib was very very good bowler, but Waqar is a legend, an ATG, not Shoaib.
 
No Waqs was good even when nearing the end of his career. I am not having it, stop it.

Yes, so good that the PCB never picked him again after the 2003 ODI WC. Lets face it, before Waqar got the captaincy, he was battling for a position in the team being picked and dropped from 1999 to 2001 and this would have continued had he not got the captaincy. He was finished as a bowler
 
Waqar was FAR MORE talented, he's a legend. Akhtar's legend status is up for debate but what isn't it up for debate is that he is not in the same class as Waqar Younis, periodt.


I think Waqar's prime gets to be over rated where he benefited massively from the novelty of reverse swing. Barring the West Indies who were in decline, Waqar mostly fed off England, NZ, Zimbabwe, teams who were not highly rated at all at the time. Besides once Waqar's pace deserted him, unlike Wasim he looked a far more ordinary bowler.
 
Shoaib humbled Teenda, Ponting, Kallis in their primes. What was Waqar's record like against elite batsmen in his prime?

Yes so humbled was Sachin that he had to knock Shoaib down in 1 over at the world cup.

What did Shoaib say to captain? Wasim bhai mere se bowling nyi ho ryi? :23: :))) :srt
 
For a clear picture,

Wasim = Imran > Waqar > Kapil > Akhtar

Top 5 Asian pace bowlers!
 
Waqar is miles ahead.

Akhtar was an under-achiever and NOT a legend for Pakistan. People who started watching cricket after he retired have this misconception.
 
Top 10 fast bowlers from 1990-2010:-

McGrath
Wasim
Ambrose
Donald
Steyn
Waqar
Pollock
Walsh
Bishop
Bond

that's top 10 fast bowlers and Akhtar nowhere to be found. Add in spinners- Murali, Warne, Kumble AND Saqlain. 14 names!
 
Shoaib had the potential to be great, but no one can be great after playing just 40 tests, he was an underacheiver due to injuries and his own fault too (drugs and other controversies).
 
For a clear picture,

Wasim = Imran > Waqar > Kapil > Akhtar

Top 5 Asian pace bowlers!

as much as it hurts me to say it but this seems right. I will still choose shoaib over all because I like him personally.

Remember shoaib played with a weak team compared to past greats. He had to carry the entire workload on his shoulders.
 
as much as it hurts me to say it but this seems right. I will still choose shoaib over all because I like him personally.

Remember shoaib played with a weak team compared to past greats. He had to carry the entire workload on his shoulders.

The second part would have made sense if he played 100 tests and got 400 wickets. It makes sense for Kapil Dev or Hadlee, not for Shoaib. He played only 40 games and not that he played in a very weak Pak team. They still had Inzy, Yousuf and Younis.
 
The second part would have made sense if he played 100 tests and got 400 wickets. It makes sense for Kapil Dev or Hadlee, not for Shoaib. He played only 40 games and not that he played in a very weak Pak team. They still had Inzy, Yousuf and Younis.

fair enough. yea I agree about kapil. I wonder how good his figures would be if he played with those great Pakistani bowlers. Would be as good as imran I guess. But imran was a better batsman in terms of technique.
 
If Imran and Kapil had played in same team, IMO Kapil would have ended up becoming a 39-40 averaging batsman with 32-33 bowling avg and new ball specialist + stock 4th seamer role. His Wkts per match also.would be more like 2.7-3 levels

Imran would have been freed up to be a primary strike bowler and improved his hitting skills for LOI cricket. Probably ended up with a 17-18 bowling average and 25-26 batting avg in Tests becoming the undisputed GOAT test bowler
 
Last edited:
Shoaib had the potential to be great, but no one can be great after playing just 40 tests, he was an underacheiver due to injuries and his own fault too (drugs and other controversies).

Shane Bond is regarded as a great in NZ
 
Shane Bond is regarded as a great in NZ

Bond also had the potential to be great, and he's not considered a great here by the way. He is considered a very good bowler, and for the very few people here that see him as a great the only reason is because NZ didn't have and never anyone to call great at that time, apart from Hadlee.

Bond has an excellent record in the amount of matches he did play, but again, no one can be great in such a short career.
 
Bond also had the potential to be great, and he's not considered a great here by the way. He is considered a very good bowler, and for the very few people here that see him as a great the only reason is because NZ didn't have and never anyone to call great at that time, apart from Hadlee.

Bond has an excellent record in the amount of matches he did play, but again, no one can be great in such a short career.

absolutely not. bond is and never will be a great bowler. He only played like 18 tests. Plus he was beyond mediocre in sub continent. check his record vs sri lanka. He skipped the india tour because he knew his average would rocket up. Hate players like these. philander is another dud fodder outside Sena countries.

Shoaib over bond anyway. shoaib is better than zaheer khan too and broad and Anderson.

only waqar wasim and kapil are better out of the Asian bowlers.

Bumrah has potential to be a GOAT bowler but he has to play for another 7 years. Let's see.

shaheen afridi is another one with serious potential
 
As a pure strike bowler is take akhter over both

maybe kapil was a better bowler but definitely no my vaas.I would choose shoaib over both too.

Depends on what the team needs.

Bigger question is wasim vs waqar vs mcgrath vs ambrose?

I would say ambrose in tests and wasim in odi.

Ambrose
wasim
mcgrath
waqar?
 
As a pure strike bowler is take akhter over both

Agreed. But see we have a bowler who started off as a next big thing but couldn't have a full-fledged career due to injury and his own controversies.

And then you have another bowler who started off as a good bowler, kept on improving and learnt with time, led their team for a long period, ended with 400 wickets and had a great career.

I am sure I am gonna pick the latter.
 
absolutely not. bond is and never will be a great bowler. He only played like 18 tests. Plus he was beyond mediocre in sub continent. check his record vs sri lanka. He skipped the india tour because he knew his average would rocket up. Hate players like these. philander is another dud fodder outside Sena countries.

Shoaib over bond anyway. shoaib is better than zaheer khan too and broad and Anderson.

only waqar wasim and kapil are better out of the Asian bowlers.

Bumrah has potential to be a GOAT bowler but he has to play for another 7 years. Let's see.

shaheen afridi is another one with serious potential

I didn't say Bond was better than Shoaib, I just said he is considere to be a very good bowler in NZwho's career was cut short. He would have improved over time. I didn't bring the topic of Bond up, I was replying to a comment regarding Bond.
 
Last edited:
absolutely not. bond is and never will be a great bowler. He only played like 18 tests. Plus he was beyond mediocre in sub continent. check his record vs sri lanka. He skipped the india tour because he knew his average would rocket up. Hate players like these. philander is another dud fodder outside Sena countries.

Shoaib over bond anyway. shoaib is better than zaheer khan too and broad and Anderson.

only waqar wasim and kapil are better out of the Asian bowlers.

Bumrah has potential to be a GOAT bowler but he has to play for another 7 years. Let's see.

shaheen afridi is another one with serious potential

Now you started judging bowlers by looking stats,there are more factors other than watching stats.
Bumrah hasn't played a match in subcontinent and you started praising him.
 
Now you started judging bowlers by looking stats,there are more factors other than watching stats.
Bumrah hasn't played a match in subcontinent and you started praising him.

bumrah has serious talent. There is no doubting there. Can he sustain this form for another 7 years is the question.
 
bumrah has serious talent. There is no doubting there. Can he sustain this form for another 7 years is the question.

Similarly bond also had that talent when he knocked off ATG Australia batting line upso many times,it's due to injuries he can't able to play.Bond hasn't played a test match in England.
You said that bond skipped tours,If you said same about Ryan Harris (if you remove those 2 tests in Srilanka,he hasn't played in subcontinent apart from 2 tests) what will be your opinion?
 
Similarly bond also had that talent when he knocked off ATG Australia batting line upso many times,it's due to injuries he can't able to play.Bond hasn't played a test match in England.
You said that bond skipped tours,If you said same about Ryan Harris (if you remove those 2 tests in Srilanka,he hasn't played in subcontinent apart from 2 tests) what will be your opinion?

he is not an all time great obviously? Ryan Harris was cannon fodder in subcontinent.

All time greats are guys like ambrose waqar mcgrath wasim who played well everywhere. I know some people will bring up wasim and waqar's figures in subcontinent but it only dipped when they were past their peak. At their respective primes waqar and wasim had a terrific average unlike chumps like bond and Ryan Harris who are a mere nothing compared to those Greats.

Cummins if he does well in subcontinent has potential to be an all time great. Same with bumrah. Have to be consistent though.
 
he is not an all time great obviously? Ryan Harris was cannon fodder in subcontinent.

All time greats are guys like ambrose waqar mcgrath wasim who played well everywhere. I know some people will bring up wasim and waqar's figures in subcontinent but it only dipped when they were past their peak. At their respective primes waqar and wasim had a terrific average unlike chumps like bond and Ryan Harris who are a mere nothing compared to those Greats.

Cummins if he does well in subcontinent has potential to be an all time great. Same with bumrah. Have to be consistent though.

Harris took a 5-fer in Srilanka and won a test match in subcontinent.
You are just a man who looks only at stats.
 
Last edited:
he is not an all time great obviously? Ryan Harris was cannon fodder in subcontinent.

All time greats are guys like ambrose waqar mcgrath wasim who played well everywhere. I know some people will bring up wasim and waqar's figures in subcontinent but it only dipped when they were past their peak. At their respective primes waqar and wasim had a terrific average unlike chumps like bond and Ryan Harris who are a mere nothing compared to those Greats.

Cummins if he does well in subcontinent has potential to be an all time great. Same with bumrah. Have to be consistent though.

Ambrose?
According to your theory Ambrose shouldn't be included because he didn't played a test match in India and played only few test matches in subcontinent.
 
maybe kapil was a better bowler but definitely no my vaas.I would choose shoaib over both too.

Depends on what the team needs.

Bigger question is wasim vs waqar vs mcgrath vs ambrose?

I would say ambrose in tests and wasim in odi.

Ambrose
wasim
mcgrath
waqar?

I'd take akhter over kapil any day on a road, mgrath been the most effective test bowler I've seen, as for best pakistan test bowlers il say imran and waqar over wasim
 
Agreed. But see we have a bowler who started off as a next big thing but couldn't have a full-fledged career due to injury and his own controversies.

And then you have another bowler who started off as a good bowler, kept on improving and learnt with time, led their team for a long period, ended with 400 wickets and had a great career.

I am sure I am gonna pick the latter.

I'm looking towards conditions, if I'm captain and I'm presented with a flat road il take akhter over kapil and vaas
 
I have problems with both bowlers. Both underperformed for different reasons at various times and both led to terrible dressing room environments. Waqar was an awful strategist and captain to boot. Plus he carried on way longer than he should have, diminishing his legacy. Shoaib was the most unreliable bowler a team could have. He would rarely bowl throughout the innings, sat out second innings bowling when up against it and spent half his career huffing and puffing to the wicket, clearly unfit.

Taking out these factors, on the field, both were most amazing assets a team could have. Quick, lethal and armed with unplayable deliveries on all lengths. Shoaib could have reached Waqar's greatness if he carried on long enough and had Waqar's commitment. One can make certain allowances for injuries but Shoaib simply didn't have it in him to work hard for himself and his country. His loss, in the final reckoning.
 
Harris took a 5-fer in Srilanka and won a test match in subcontinent.
You are just a man who looks only at stats.

that's a one off test. did he win a series there? and how did he do against Pakistan or India? I don't think so. he got smashed or dint play.
 
Ambrose?
According to your theory Ambrose shouldn't be included because he didn't played a test match in India and played only few test matches in subcontinent.

in that case waqar and wasim are greater than him. So is imran and so is mcgrath who is the greatest.
 
he is not an all time great obviously? Ryan Harris was cannon fodder in subcontinent.

All time greats are guys like ambrose waqar mcgrath wasim who played well everywhere. I know some people will bring up wasim and waqar's figures in subcontinent but it only dipped when they were past their peak. At their respective primes waqar and wasim had a terrific average unlike chumps like bond and Ryan Harris who are a mere nothing compared to those Greats.

Cummins if he does well in subcontinent has potential to be an all time great. Same with bumrah. Have to be consistent though.

Harris played 2 matches in the sub continent adn averages 14 with a 5fer.
 
I think Waqar's prime gets to be over rated where he benefited massively from the novelty of reverse swing. Barring the West Indies who were in decline, Waqar mostly fed off England, NZ, Zimbabwe, teams who were not highly rated at all at the time. Besides once Waqar's pace deserted him, unlike Wasim he looked a far more ordinary bowler.

Genius!

What were the two strongest batting line ups 1989-1992?
 
Mohammad Asif and Amir are more talented than Akhtar, don't be fooled by the record as he got to play more games but in terms of pure talent the duo is far ahead of him.
 
Shoaib is my favourite bowler but come on you can't compare him with waqar. Waqar had one of the best peaks in history of game where he was ranked #1 for 5-6 years.

He has achieved a lot of more than Shoaib. At the end of the day comparisons are based on performances and not potential or talent and waqar wins this easily.
 
maybe kapil was a better bowler but definitely no my vaas.I would choose shoaib over both too.

Depends on what the team needs.

Bigger question is wasim vs waqar vs mcgrath vs ambrose?

I would say ambrose in tests and wasim in odi.

Ambrose
wasim
mcgrath
waqar?

Yeah exclude Vaas!
 
He was a show off. Had/s a terrible girly hair cut and looked and still appears like a junky.

He is a gangsta and backed up his attitude with come crazy on ground performances . It ain't show off if you can back it up.Sachin use to shiver in his pants when he had to face a shoaib in his prime.People like you would call Mohammad Ali a show off . Even now Ponting rates him as the most difficult bowler to face .
 
Peak Waqar was arguably the greatest bowler of all time (only matched in stats by Sydney Barnes). Akhtar was better than post-peak Waqar though.
 
He is a gangsta and backed up his attitude with come crazy on ground performances . It ain't show off if you can back it up.Sachin use to shiver in his pants when he had to face a shoaib in his prime.People like you would call Mohammad Ali a show off . Even now Ponting rates him as the most difficult bowler to face .

ponting even rates vernon philander as the most difficult bowler to face,so does it means that philander is a better bowler?
 
On his day Shoaib was a match-winner capable of blowing away any batting line-up, sadly those days were not too often.

With Waqar, he was brilliant for most of his career and a frightening talent.

For me Waqar would be the better choice as he was more reliable and performed on a more regular basis.
 
Back
Top