Should Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis performances against New Zealand in the 90's have any value, given they were a horribly weak side back then?

[Savak]

Mccullam's captaincy changed the nature and direction of New Zealand Cricket. New Zealand have been blessed with some extraordinary talent in the last 10 years i.e. Brendon Mccullam, Kane Williamson, Daryl Mitchell Jesse Ryder, Tom Latham, Devin Conway, Rachin Ravindra, Lockie Ferguson, Ross Taylor, Tim Southie, Trent Bolt, Kyle Jamieson, Mitchel Satner, O Keefe, Matt Henry and this team has qualified for the Semi Finals and Finals of every ICC event and they have beaten Pakistan in UAE, India in India.

In stark contrast the New Zealand team of the 1990's which Wasim, Waqar heavily feasted on in 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995 was perhaps its weakest in history. Don't believe me, just check out the batting averages of the vast majority of the batsmen who played in those series and compare them to the players New Zealand have at its disposal today. Only the 1990 team had one world class player i.e. Martin Crowe and both the W's admit he was the best player of reverse swing they had ever encountered. Martin Crowe was not in the 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995 series. I mean should the wickets of the W even be counted or have any value in these series when NZ were at its weakest?

Let's not forget Pakistan drew 1-1 against NZ at home in 1996 and in the 2001 series NZ finally had a bunch of good cricketers who were way superior that the cricketers in the early 90's team i.e. Mark Richardson, Steven Fleming, Nathan Astle, Mathew Sinclair, Daryl Tuffey, Chris Martin e.t.c and the end result was that Pakistan lost the ODI series 3-2 and the test series was drawn 1-1.

 

[sweep_shot]

NZ were still a heavyweight team. They won 2000 CT and reached 1992 semi-final.

Performances against them in 90's should definitely count.

We shouldn't try to analyse 1990's cricket through the lense of modern times.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

NZ were not a weak side back then too...but it is debatable which side is better. Current one or any from past

 

[Buffet]

Mccullam's captaincy changed the nature and direction of New Zealand Cricket. New Zealand have been blessed with some extraordinary talent in the last 10 years i.e. Brendon Mccullam, Kane Williamson, Daryl Mitchell Jesse Ryder, Tom Latham, Devin Conway, Rachin Ravindra, Lockie Ferguson, Ross Taylor, Tim Southie, Trent Bolt, Kyle Jamieson, Mitchel Satner, O Keefe, Matt Henry and this team has qualified for the Semi Finals and Finals of every ICC event and they have beaten Pakistan in UAE, India in India.

In stark contrast the New Zealand team of the 1990's which Wasim, Waqar heavily feasted on in 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995 was perhaps its weakest in history. Don't believe me, just check out the batting averages of the vast majority of the batsmen who played in those series and compare them to the players New Zealand have at its disposal today. Only the 1990 team had one world class player i.e. Martin Crowe and both the W's admit he was the best player of reverse swing they had ever encountered. Martin Crowe was not in the 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995 series. I mean should the wickets of the W even be counted or have any value in these series when NZ were at its weakest?

Let's not forget Pakistan drew 1-1 against NZ at home in 1996 and in the 2001 series NZ finally had a bunch of good cricketers who were way superior that the cricketers in the early 90's team i.e. Mark Richardson, Steven Fleming, Nathan Astle, Mathew Sinclair, Daryl Tuffey, Chris Martin e.t.c and the end result was that Pakistan lost the ODI series 3-2 and the test series was drawn 1-1.

It should be given value but with context. There is no harm in feasting against weaker sides or minnows. But you got to step up when playing against better teams as well. NZ was weak and the first 10 years of Wasim's career SL was minnow. You should not discard wickets agaisnt NZ/SL but you should see it in conext of what they did against better teams. You can also see what other pacers like McGrath, Ambrose, Donald etc did at the same time.




Before anyone brings the famous arguement about Pakistani wickets not being helpful for Wasim and Waqar,

Here is away against same teams. Wickets were suposed to be more helpful when playing away from Pakistan. You can compare where they stand up against peer group only away to not get into arguement about Pakistani flat pitches.





No one should ignore performance against NZ or minnows, but see it in context. Wasim and Waqar were comfortably below their top level peer group who played with them. Waqar simply lacked the skills, but Wasim with all his skills had less than stellar output against better teams. Wasim should have done better based on his skill set.

Wasim was a tier above Waqar despite getting clubbed together.

 

[topspin]

Mccullam's captaincy changed the nature and direction of New Zealand Cricket. New Zealand have been blessed with some extraordinary talent in the last 10 years i.e. Brendon Mccullam, Kane Williamson, Daryl Mitchell Jesse Ryder, Tom Latham, Devin Conway, Rachin Ravindra, Lockie Ferguson, Ross Taylor, Tim Southie, Trent Bolt, Kyle Jamieson, Mitchel Satner, O Keefe, Matt Henry and this team has qualified for the Semi Finals and Finals of every ICC event and they have beaten Pakistan in UAE, India in India.

In stark contrast the New Zealand team of the 1990's which Wasim, Waqar heavily feasted on in 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995 was perhaps its weakest in history. Don't believe me, just check out the batting averages of the vast majority of the batsmen who played in those series and compare them to the players New Zealand have at its disposal today. Only the 1990 team had one world class player i.e. Martin Crowe and both the W's admit he was the best player of reverse swing they had ever encountered. Martin Crowe was not in the 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995 series. I mean should the wickets of the W even be counted or have any value in these series when NZ were at its weakest?

Let's not forget Pakistan drew 1-1 against NZ at home in 1996 and in the 2001 series NZ finally had a bunch of good cricketers who were way superior that the cricketers in the early 90's team i.e. Mark Richardson, Steven Fleming, Nathan Astle, Mathew Sinclair, Daryl Tuffey, Chris Martin e.t.c and the end result was that Pakistan lost the ODI series 3-2 and the test series was drawn 1-1.

You've come with some good threads in the past but this isn't one of them.

New Zealand had some batsmen who were very good at negotiating swing and seam bowling. Despite their limitations they've always punched above their weight because they prepare very well.

In World Cups played during the 90s, they made 2 of the 3 semi-finals. Misbah captained Pakistan in 2 x ICC tournaments; 2013 CT and 2015 World Cup however failed to get his side through to the semis.

 

[Buffet]

NZ were not a weak side back then too...but it is debatable which side is better. Current one or any from past

NZ was a poor test side in 90s.





NZ in the last 10 years,





NZ in the last 10 years is vasly better side than NZ of 90s. It's not debatable. It shows up in results. I don't think NZ had better test team than last 10 years in anytime in their history.

 

[RyanRyan10]

Even the unbiased fans are falling in trap @Rana

 

[Justcrazy]

No.

A test playing nation cannot be underestimated. Wasim and Waqar were all time greats , and I doubt Pakistan will see any like them again.

 

[NishanKonar]

It should be given value but with context. There is no harm in feasting against weaker sides or minnows. But you got to step up when playing against better teams as well. NZ was weak and the first 10 years of Wasim's career SL was minnow. You should not discard wickets agaisnt NZ/SL but you should see it in conext of what they did against better teams. You can also see what other pacers like McGrath, Ambrose, Donald etc did at the same time.

View attachment 151884


Before anyone brings the famous arguement about Pakistani wickets not being helpful for Wasim and Waqar,

Here is away against same teams. Wickets were suposed to be more helpful when playing away from Pakistan. You can compare where they stand up against peer group only away to not get into arguement about Pakistani flat pitches.

View attachment 151885



No one should ignore performance against NZ or minnows, but see it in context. Wasim and Waqar were comfortably below their top level peer group who played with them. Waqar simply lacked the skills, but Wasim with all his skills had less than stellar output against better teams. Wasim should have done better based on his skill set.

Wasim was a tier above Waqar despite getting clubbed together.

always maintained Wasim & Waqar were slightly overrated

Yes both produced excellent highlights packages - so any yound guys watching their reels / videos on youtube wud get excited. Who wont get excited by those banana inswing toe crushers

But if u go deeper into those games - their actual impact is highly debatable. Like they generally struggled against Australia or South Africa - never won a test series against either Australi / SOuth Africa - even though both nations are considered a paradise for pace bowlers

Also they took heaps of wickets against England / NZ when they wer not that great

In contrast McGrath was head & shoulders above everyone - when it came to winning test matches for Australia. He delivered in every country - home & away and with ridiculous consistency. Just like Bumrah is doing nowadays. Or Dale Steyn was doing a a decade back