[VIDEOS] Why did Waqar Younis have such an ordinary record against top sides?

Waqar would be today's equivalent of soda crate street bowler Haris Rauf. With zero reverse swing on offer in white ball cricket these days, he would be a complete scattergun. He would be getting a royal spanking from the likes of AB de Villiers and Jos Buttler.

That's discounting the mental strength factor which is a big factor in bowling at the top level. Haris Rauf has actually more in his arsenal that Waqar had post-injury but he's weak minded and doesn't have the will of a champion. Waqar clearly did, even at half his powers he found ways to step up and raise his game through sheer will and warrior mentality.
 
Shoaib was better than him in terms of end results. Shoaib did take wickets against top teams, and he was a top match winner for Pakistan. Waqar was a beast in his early 4-5 years, and then he caught that injury which resulted in shortening his pace, eventually exposing his bowling weaknesses to all top teams and batsmen. He was a very ordinary bowler post-1996 until he retired. Although he did manage to take some impactful wickets later in his career, he also faced more failures.

Like Saqlain, he retired very early; otherwise, they both could have lasted until the 2007 World Cup

Waqar didn't retire early, he retired in 2004 when he was perhaps 38-39 years old. He was a massive age fudger which explains his massive decline in the later stages of his career
 
Waqar didn't retire early, he retired in 2004 when he was perhaps 38-39 years old. He was a massive age fudger which explains his massive decline in the later stages of his career
He himself has confessed in the past that he is around 5 years older than his official age.
 
Average is also highlighted in the same stats and it's around 28-29. That's pretty ordinary as well.

Having said that batsmen are judged on making big tons and bowlers are judged on 5-fers in terms of how much impact they are having. Yes, some time those tons or 5-fers are not really impactful but over entire career, if you are going to have 3-4 tons or 3-4 5-fers against top sides then it's just not good enough. Top tier players perform against the top teams , it's simple as that. Performing means you score daddy tons and run through their batting line ups.

Pollock had below 25 average in first and second half of his career. But I don't put him in bracket of Donald or Steyn. He stopped taking 5-fers in his second half of career. He was in the same bracket in first half but in second half he was not a bowler who will run through sides, more like picking up 2 wickets here or 3 wickets there while average was below 25. So average is not meaningless but you got to see if bowler is able to run through sides and 5-fers are good proxy to judge that.
But not ranked.

Batsman and bowlers have different criteria.

A big ton has no limitation, while judging someone on the basis of a 5ver has its limitations has each team has 10 wickets that will fall and 5 bowlers going after them.

Saeed Ajmal played 113 odi games and 64 t20 games. he holds a bowling avg of 22 and 17 and not once he took a 5ver.

The criteria should be the bowling avg.
 
But not ranked.

Batsman and bowlers have different criteria.

A big ton has no limitation, while judging someone on the basis of a 5ver has its limitations has each team has 10 wickets that will fall and 5 bowlers going after them.

Saeed Ajmal played 113 odi games and 64 t20 games. he holds a bowling avg of 22 and 17 and not once he took a 5ver.

The criteria should be the bowling avg.
Good bowlers take 5-fers. In test format, 5-fers shows if you can run though opposition line up. Waqar's average deteriorated as his ability to take 5-fers. So they are not unrelated. Off course, you will not ignore avg. Some one taking many 5-fers but averaging 35 is not a good bowler.

We are talking about test format here and not T20/ODI. In test, you win by out bowling the opposition(picking 20 wickets). In ODI/T20, you win by outbattling the opposition.
 
He himself has confessed in the past that he is around 5 years older than his official age.

Yup, this would have made him 36-37 at the time of the 2003 ODI WC and 38-39 at the time of retirement in 2004.

His real decline started around 1999 when he was 32-33 years old which is natural for most fast bowlers. Holding and Mitchel Johnson retired from Cricket at the age of 33
 
Good bowlers take 5-fers. In test format, 5-fers shows if you can run though opposition line up. Waqar's average deteriorated as his ability to take 5-fers. So they are not unrelated. Off course, you will not ignore avg. Some one taking many 5-fers but averaging 35 is not a good bowler.

We are talking about test format here and not T20/ODI. In test, you win by out bowling the opposition(picking 20 wickets). In ODI/T20, you win by outbattling the opposition.
bro if we use the same criteria, than Michael Holding becomes equal to Waqar as he only took 13 5vers while Waqar took 12, with the opposition criteria being Pakistan, India, West Indies, Australia, NZ, England, South Africa. Andy Roberts becomes similar, and even James Anderson.

Point being, 5vers is not a criteria.
 
bro if we use the same criteria, than Michael Holding becomes equal to Waqar as he only took 13 5vers while Waqar took 12, with the opposition criteria being Pakistan, India, West Indies, Australia, NZ, England, South Africa. Andy Roberts becomes similar, and even James Anderson.

Point being, 5vers is not a criteria.
13 5-fers? in ODI?

You are mixing formats.


OP had 5-fers ( 4 total) and average ( around 29) both highlighted. Both are ordinary for Waqar against top oppositions. You are free to ignore number number of 5-fers if it works for you.
 
13 5-fers? in ODI?

You are mixing formats.


OP had 5-fers ( 4 total) and average ( around 29) both highlighted. Both are ordinary for Waqar against top oppositions. You are free to ignore number number of 5-fers if it works for you.
im talking about test
 
You on purpose removed NZ and Eng to make Waqar look bad.

like even the list you posted in op there are 6 bowlers belonging from the ENG and NZ just to manipulate stats

Here are the stats that considers the 7 teams

This is why i avoid statistical discussions as it can be manipulated to make someone look good or bad.
 
bro if we use the same criteria, than Michael Holding becomes equal to Waqar as he only took 13 5vers while Waqar took 12, with the opposition criteria being Pakistan, India, West Indies, Australia, NZ, England, South Africa. Andy Roberts becomes similar, and even James Anderson.
Oh, I saw you were talking about test. My mistake.

Also, not sure why you think Holding was not in same top class. Holding was a gun bowler in both formats. Just had a shorter career.

If you can pick up similar amount of 5-fers in shorter career, then it's actually hugely positive. Just number is not enough, in how many tests , that always counts.
 
Oh, I saw you were talking about test. My mistake.

Also, not sure why you think Holding was not in same top class. Holding was a gun bowler in both formats. Just had a shorter career.

If you can pick up similar amount of 5-fers in shorter career, then it's actually hugely positive. Just number is not enough, in how many tests , that always counts.
na bro, the criteria is always bowling avgs.

I never saw Waqar play, i dont know if he is good or not. But i object to the criteria set for criticism.
 
You on purpose removed NZ and Eng to make Waqar look bad.

like even the list you posted in op there are 6 bowlers belonging from the ENG and NZ just to manipulate stats

Here are the stats that considers the 7 teams

This is why i avoid statistical discussions as it can be manipulated to make someone look good or bad.
It's clearly mentioned in OP that top 4-5 teams sorted by W/L ratio.

For example, right now some one can bully Pakistan or WI, but fails to perform against not one but collectively 4 top teams of era( Aus, Eng, Ind and NZ) then it's not that impressive.

It's not manipulation. It's called understanding the context behind stats.
 
na bro, the criteria is always bowling avgs.

I never saw Waqar play, i dont know if he is good or not. But i object to the criteria set for criticism.
I saw his entire career. I will see average in all conditions plus ability to run through sides. Both are important.

As I said earlier, Pollock lost his ability to run through sides despite having good average in second half but anyone who watched his entire career will not say that Pollock was the same bowler in first half and second half.

If pollock was picking 5-fers at same rate then he would have been rated alongside McGrath.
 
I saw his entire career. I will see average in all conditions plus ability to run through sides. Both are important.

As I said earlier, Pollock lost his ability to run through sides despite having good average in second half but anyone who watched his entire career will not say that Pollock was the same bowler in first half and second half.

If pollock was picking 5-fers at same rate then he would have been rated alongside McGrath.

Pollock was forced out by the South African selectors, he had been dropped from the South African test team in 2017 and he reached a deal with the proteas selectors where they would pick him for his final series against the West Indies in 2018 in exchange for Pollock announcing his retirement.
 
I saw his entire career. I will see average in all conditions plus ability to run through sides. Both are important.

As I said earlier, Pollock lost his ability to run through sides despite having good average in second half but anyone who watched his entire career will not say that Pollock was the same bowler in first half and second half.

If pollock was picking 5-fers at same rate then he would have been rated alongside McGrath.
if you saw his career live, than i will give you that.

but still avg is the proper criteria in cricket.
 
bro if we use the same criteria, than Michael Holding becomes equal to Waqar as he only took 13 5vers while Waqar took 12, with the opposition criteria being Pakistan, India, West Indies, Australia, NZ, England, South Africa. Andy Roberts becomes similar, and even James Anderson.

Point being, 5vers is not a criteria.
Holding was actually a bit overhyped bcoz he was fast - just like Shoaib Akhtar. He was not exactly a matchwinner unlike say Malcolm Marshall & Andy Roberts. Roberts & MArshall were more effective in all conditions bcoz they had more variation. Holding was brute pace but little else

Holding had that 14 wicket haul in the 1976 Oval test & thats basically half of his cricket legacy
 
'Guru' of Jasprit Bumrah showing his masterclass against minnows of that time.

Spineless Sachin feasted on saving his best for minnows, otherwise he quit like a coward over personal stats
 
Last edited by a moderator:
‘Always show an insect the mirror and watch them melt.’ - Chinese Proverb.
 
Spineless Sachin feasted on saving his best for minnows, otherwise he quit like a coward over personal stats
Yes Pakistan are a minnow team, he absolutely smashed your mediocre nobodies in 2003 and sent them into retirement
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes Pakistan are a minnow team, he absolutely smashed your mediocre nobodies in 2003 and sent them into retirement

What happened to Spineless Sachin and the mentally handicapped minnow India in 03, did the dog poo help everyone against Australia 🤔
 
What people hype is Waqar Younis of early 90s with wickets flying all over the place with express speed and tailenders getting into akward positions against reverse swing.

According to me though the best Waqar Younis was from around 2000-2003 when he developed some mad skills with the new ball. However he was a what in todays term we all would call a trundler (by todays standards) and hit the odd 140k if I remember.

Overall a 2nd tier ATG. Not in Wasim or Imran’s league but definitely a legend Tier over Shoaib Akthar.
 
Waqar was always a fun bowler to watch because it was very attacking. Its the main reason for his high Strike Rate. On the flip side he use to leak runs more than other top bowlers because he was always attacking. Its the main reason i don't value Waqar high SR as compared to other ATG bowlers.
At his peak waqar was genuine 150K bowler. Quicker than Imran and Wasim , but less than Akhtar. His closest modern Pakistan equivalent in terms of pace is Haris Rauf.
Still by any parameters he is a true great with nearly 800 international wickets with sub 25 average.
 
An article published by Mike Selvey in the Guardian states that he witnessed the speed gun at Lords registering 120mph when Waqar Younis was bowling.

"Actually I'm not going to argue all that much in that it certainly was rapid, although I have witnessed at very close hand Jeff Thomson, from the Pavilion End, sending down what he himself described to me as "the fastest spell I ever bowled on a slow pitch". I also recall Waqar Younis obliterating England through the air. But 100mph is a pretty significant figure, and not one with which to trifle....
During another Lord's spell from Waqar, I happened to glance at the little illuminated strip with its digital numbers, set in front of the grandstand, and one delivery read 120mph. Few seemed to see it. It was nonsense of course, an anomaly. But if that was an anomaly, how can we trust other readings.
" Mike Selvey.

 
Outstanding bowler for bilateral and lower level competitions.

Not at par with tournament GOATs like Shami, Starc, McGrath, Donald
 
An article published by Mike Selvey in the Guardian states that he witnessed the speed gun at Lords registering 120mph when Waqar Younis was bowling.

"Actually I'm not going to argue all that much in that it certainly was rapid, although I have witnessed at very close hand Jeff Thomson, from the Pavilion End, sending down what he himself described to me as "the fastest spell I ever bowled on a slow pitch". I also recall Waqar Younis obliterating England through the air. But 100mph is a pretty significant figure, and not one with which to trifle....
During another Lord's spell from Waqar, I happened to glance at the little illuminated strip with its digital numbers, set in front of the grandstand, and one delivery read 120mph. Few seemed to see it. It was nonsense of course, an anomaly. But if that was an anomaly, how can we trust other readings.
" Mike Selvey.

120 MPH???

That is not true. Waqar was fast but not 120MPH fast.
 
120 MPH???

That is not true. Waqar was fast but not 120MPH fast.

Waqar even in his prime barely touched 150 kph which is still nothing. There have been like 12 bowlers in Bharat alone who have been faster than that.
 
Waqar even in his prime barely touched 150 kph which is still nothing. There have been like 12 bowlers in Bharat alone who have been faster than that.
Yes. That speed gun must have been broken. Waqar was never even a 100mph bowler let alone 120MPH.
 
120 MPH???

That is not true. Waqar was fast but not 120MPH fast.
He was extremely destructive pre-back injury and used to blow batting lineups away. His record during that period is incredible. Much better than Wasim Akram's during any stage of his career.
 
300+ Test wickets, 400+ ODi wickets and this guy was average bowler against top sides 😂

His record only against Australia ain't good in both tests and odis.

Against India he played only 2 tests and that also coming back from back injury.

and some people are saying he wasn't a 150 bowler , that's a big lol 😆 😆 😆
 
He was extremely destructive pre-back injury and used to blow batting lineups away. His record during that period is incredible. Much better than Wasim Akram's during any stage of his career.

His career as a pacer ended when Jadeja smashed to all parts of the ground in 1996 World Cup QF at the biggest stage.

After that he lived the rest of his life as a baby pace swing bowler like Asif, Rana Naved. Bitter truth.
 
Waqar was a freak of nature pre injuries. Afrer the Aus tour in 1990, he picked up serious pace, so much so that He was amongst the quickest ever before the injury in 1991. After that injury, he was generally solid and many good moments but never reached the heights he had threatened to reach.
 
I was watching highlights of a Pak vs Aus test from the late 90s-early 2000s recently on my YouTube feed.

I noticed Waqar was bowling in low 120s, I thought it was maybe speedgun issue, then Shoaib started bowling and speed guns where showing 150-155 or Brett Lee at 145-150. At best Waqar was hitting early 130s.

Obviously some obscure game is not a benchmark of how fast he was but I swear I always saw him as a 130 clicks bowler with great skills until i noticed everyone on PP rate him as a speed demon.

I missed the 1-2 years Of his careers where he was apparently express or was too young to observe speed guns.

I feel Once batsmen figured out his reverse swiing and TV cameras came into play, he was done, once he figured out new ball skills and became a extremely skillful bowler he was what we call a trundler (in terms of pace)

I would definitely say he is a 2nd tier AtG though. No debate.
 
His career as a pacer ended when Jadeja smashed to all parts of the ground in 1996 World Cup QF at the biggest stage.

After that he lived the rest of his life as a baby pace swing bowler like Asif, Rana Naved. Bitter truth.
Agreed

his decline started after 1996 world cup otherwise in early 90s he was almost unplayable with his reverse swing and pace.

he ended up bowling 130s by the end of his career
 
I was watching highlights of a Pak vs Aus test from the late 90s-early 2000s recently on my YouTube feed.

I noticed Waqar was bowling in low 120s, I thought it was maybe speedgun issue, then Shoaib started bowling and speed guns where showing 150-155 or Brett Lee at 145-150. At best Waqar was hitting early 130s.

Obviously some obscure game is not a benchmark of how fast he was but I swear I always saw him as a 130 clicks bowler with great skills until i noticed everyone on PP rate him as a speed demon.

I missed the 1-2 years Of his careers where he was apparently express or was too young to observe speed guns.

I feel Once batsmen figured out his reverse swiing and TV cameras came into play, he was done, once he figured out new ball skills and became a extremely skillful bowler he was what we call a trundler (in terms of pace)

I would definitely say he is a 2nd tier AtG though. No debate.
He was of course not as quick as Shoaib or even Lee. But I saw his clips when he was younger. He was quick. 145+ range easily if I had to point. The reason i think he was so deadly is because of his reverse swing and his ability to nail the toe crushing yorkers.
 
Agreed

his decline started after 1996 world cup otherwise in early 90s he was almost unplayable with his reverse swing and pace.

he ended up bowling 130s by the end of his career
I don't know if he declined that much after 96. Below clip was after 96 WC after he took that legendary beating from jadeja.



However it was Brian Lara afterall In the above clip and he had a terrible technique hence he could never score a 100 in tests vs Donald, wasim, waqar etc..
 
Waqar is definitely an all time great of the game. It is not a joke to pick 700 international wickets as a genuine fast bowler in a 14 years career.
 
What Jadeja did to him in the 96' WC and Tendulkar did to him the 03' WC will remain with me forever.

Ajay Jadeja ‘changed’ Waqar Younis that day.


Metaphorically speaking; he took his mojo from him. Much like how Ramsay Bolton changed Theon Greyjoy to Reek.
 
Ajay Jadeja ‘changed’ Waqar Younis that day.


Metaphorically speaking; he took his mojo from him. Much like how Ramsay Bolton changed Theon Greyjoy to Reek.

Reek is what was left of India after the British Raj / Bolton left.
 
Ajay Jadeja ‘changed’ Waqar Younis that day.


Metaphorically speaking; he took his mojo from him. Much like how Ramsay Bolton changed Theon Greyjoy to Reek.
Yea of course, that’s why he starred in the series vs England that summer.
 

Usain Bolt - "I looked up to Waqar Younis and Pakistan was my team".​


To view Waqar Younus as overrated because he was “only effective with doctored balls” is pretty myopic. Clearly, you have no eye for athleticism. Nothing… nothing comes close to the Waqar of 90-92 doctored balls or no doctored balls.
 
Waqar was a good bowler, rather intimidating in his peak, but OP does have a point. Usain Bolt or some former Cricketer making a statement doesn't change the fact that he was ordinary against top side, almost Munaf Patel level.

But for the longevity and initial destructive phase of his career, I would say he is a 3rd to 2nd tier great who is remembered more on hyperbole than actual performances.
 
Waqar needed Wasim to be destructive. Waqar was deadly with those inswinging yorkers but he always needed wasim to make it happen.
 
That was shoaib akhtar not waqar younis
True, my point is simply that a lot of Indians magnify some random thing. They celebrate those edges as if it means anything.

I mean Sherwin Campbell could have said I hit shoaib’s first World Cup ball for six cos he top edged a scorcher for 6 too. But sherwin knows what’s up - there’s realism there
 
Waqar has excellent longevity but purely on skill and performance vs top teams, he is no match to Bumrah or Shami.
What do you guys call top teams? Who was the top team in early 90s?

Waqar destroyed West Indies, England. Even in his first test vs Aus in the 90s he took 8 wickets at Karachi.

Waqar destroyed all comers in the Australasia Cup in 1990.

When Waqar was ruled out of the World Cup it made headlines not only in Pakistan, but England too. I remember it clearly “Pakistan shock, Waqar ruled out”.

All this recent hype about Mark Wood (who I’m a big fan of btw) destruction of West Indies, Waqar did that week in, week out!

Bumrah, Shami lol. Please let’s see where they’re at at the end of their careers. Good fast medium bowlers, it’s not a like for like comparison. Bring up an express pacer please. No baby pace please
 
For Shami and Bumrah to replicate him, they'll have to match his phantaastic performance against Australia in Tests.
 
Waqar has excellent longevity but purely on skill and performance vs top teams, he is no match to Bumrah or Shami.
Bumrah vs Waqar is debatable on odi since waqar benefitted from the one ball reverse swing rule and their was ball tampering in that era

Waqar is 100x better then bumrah in test though.

As for shami, Lol
 
Bumrah vs Waqar is debatable on odi since waqar benefitted from the one ball reverse swing rule and their was ball tampering in that era

Waqar is 100x better then bumrah in test though.

As for shami, Lol

Waqar is a poor man's Bumrah. Had to remove himself from the XI in any of the World Cups for his team's chance to qualify in finals.
 
Waqar is a poor man's Bumrah. Had to remove himself from the XI in any of the World Cups for his team's chance to qualify in finals.
And yet career wise he's been superior on every metric
 
Waqar is a poor man's Bumrah. Had to remove himself from the XI in any of the World Cups for his team's chance to qualify in finals.
You’re talking as if waqar’s whole career was 1999-2003.

I mean, do better. You want to analyse then analyse without cherry picking.
 
Yes if your metrics are home umpires and tampered balls.
Right, cause India made fair pitches during 2023 wc lol.

2024 t20 victory they earned it, however they were curating each and every pitch for 2023 wc to aid their batters and bowlers, something even rohit admitted to for curating the final pitch saying he made a mistake for curating it to be a slow pitch lol
 
I was watching highlights of a Pak vs Aus test from the late 90s-early 2000s recently on my YouTube feed.

I noticed Waqar was bowling in low 120s, I thought it was maybe speedgun issue, then Shoaib started bowling and speed guns where showing 150-155 or Brett Lee at 145-150. At best Waqar was hitting early 130s.

Obviously some obscure game is not a benchmark of how fast he was but I swear I always saw him as a 130 clicks bowler with great skills until i noticed everyone on PP rate him as a speed demon.

I missed the 1-2 years Of his careers where he was apparently express or was too young to observe speed guns.

I feel Once batsmen figured out his reverse swiing and TV cameras came into play, he was done, once he figured out new ball skills and became a extremely skillful bowler he was what we call a trundler (in terms of pace)

I would definitely say he is a 2nd tier AtG though. No debate.

Waqar first showed visible loss of pace from 1997 and he started to focus more on swinging the new ball but it was in by early 1999 where he was really struggling for rhythm and he was totally ineffective with the new ball. Wasim made the decision to replace him with Shoaib and rest was history.
 
Waqar was more lethal, thrilling to see than Wasim in the early 90s, but had sharp decline after the 1996 World Cup. He just did not have that Yorker or swing any more. He became predictable and was sad to watch considering his peak was so good. He did not have the skill to change matches anymore.
 
In the earlier parts of his career and during his peak, he was lethal. Have seen videos of his bowling dismantling batting line ups in a hurry but towards the end of his career, he was totally neutralized for the most part. Had few good performances but they were not in big numbers as compared to others.

He was a great bowler though, no doubts about it. He and wasim are surely ATG duos ever.
 
I was watching highlights of a Pak vs Aus test from the late 90s-early 2000s recently on my YouTube feed.

I noticed Waqar was bowling in low 120s, I thought it was maybe speedgun issue, then Shoaib started bowling and speed guns where showing 150-155 or Brett Lee at 145-150. At best Waqar was hitting early 130s.

Obviously some obscure game is not a benchmark of how fast he was but I swear I always saw him as a 130 clicks bowler with great skills until i noticed everyone on PP rate him as a speed demon.

I missed the 1-2 years Of his careers where he was apparently express or was too young to observe speed guns.

I feel Once batsmen figured out his reverse swiing and TV cameras came into play, he was done, once he figured out new ball skills and became a extremely skillful bowler he was what we call a trundler (in terms of pace)

I would definitely say he is a 2nd tier AtG though. No debate.
Great essay, but you only have to look at 2001 at Lords where he bowled a spell hitting 90-91mph very regularly. In the home England series 2000-2001 karachi in the dark match he was hitting 88mph. In the 2003 World Cup he was hitting 87-88mph. In 1999 test at Hobart, he hit 91mph a few times.

He could still bowl sharpish post 1997, but he chose his moments due to his injuries.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out he was a 95mph+ bowler at peak.

Before the Rawalpindi express, there was the Burewala Express - that was Waqar. They didn’t name him that for no reason
 
Bumrah and Shami are two extremely hideous handicapped actions, and they are always smiling. They will be rated by those of a similar ilk mostly due to their insecurities. Outside their country, very few will remember these pansies. There is no excitement or thrill in watching them bowl, they lack aura and they are very fortunate to inflate their stats from bowling to mediocre batsman of our time on unsporting pitches.
Thread is not about Bumrah or Shami...
 
Bumrah and Shami are two extremely hideous handicapped actions, and they are always smiling. They will be rated by those of a similar ilk mostly due to their insecurities. Outside their country, very few will remember these pansies. There is no excitement or thrill in watching them bowl, they lack aura and they are very fortunate to inflate their stats from bowling to mediocre batsman of our time on unsporting pitches.
The likes of Klaseen, Miller, Travis head(who bumrah dismissed in the cup) are not medicore by any metric especially Travis.

Waqar younis in his prime 1992-1996 was defo superior to Bumrah but Bumrah and Shami are not bad bowlers
 
New zealand in the 90s and early 2000s were petrified of pace bowlers. If you look at the 90s almost all the fast bowlers had their best numbers against NZ. Akram, Sohaib, Brett Lee, Waqar... even Mohammad Sami, Mohammad zahid got his best numbers against NZ. They had this weakness against raw pace. So when you talk about top side , NZ's weakness of this made them a poor side.


From 1990-2005

Best bowling performance of pakistanis in Tests. Vast majority came against NZ

Screenshot-2024-07-31-053050.png
 
New zealand in the 90s and early 2000s were petrified of pace bowlers. If you look at the 90s almost all the fast bowlers had their best numbers against NZ. Akram, Sohaib, Brett Lee, Waqar... even Mohammad Sami, Mohammad zahid got his best numbers against NZ. They had this weakness against raw pace. So when you talk about top side , NZ's weakness of this made them a poor side.


From 1990-2005

Best bowling performance of pakistanis in Tests. Vast majority came against NZ

Screenshot-2024-07-31-053050.png
Lol - so now it’s about individual innings. What other metric will satisfy your statistical gymnastics?

btw, West Indies were the “top side” up to 1995. In the tests up to that point, Waqar took 35 wickets in 6 tests. Not too shabby I’d say?
 
The likes of Klaseen, Miller, Travis head(who bumrah dismissed in the cup) are not medicore by any metric especially Travis.

Waqar younis in his prime 1992-1996 was defo superior to Bumrah but Bumrah and Shami are not bad bowlers

I hate the coach, but the player is a hall of famer who broke into the main stream. You look at players at their best and his peak was something, more than that for me, he was an entertainer and it had to take someone truly special to be a fitting replacement, only Akhtar could have filled the void, no one else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bumrah and Shami are two extremely hideous handicapped actions, and they are always smiling. They will be rated by those of a similar ilk mostly due to their insecurities. Outside their country, very few will remember these pansies. There is no excitement or thrill in watching them bowl, they lack aura and they are very fortunate to inflate their stats from bowling to mediocre batsman of our time on unsporting pitches.
By the same account Waqar Younis got a lot of wickets with a ball that had all kind of violations done to it too and hapless goras on dusty home pithes were left to fend on their own . We can go on the nitpicking rabbit hole mate.
 
Not sure what the argument is- Waqar is a great bowler: a 2nd tier great below Ambrose, Mcgrath, Wasim, Anderson, Steyn, Marshall etc.

He was a good bowler who was nippy and had crazy skills with the ball.

He isn’t a speed demon but just a 130-145 bowler (at best)

What exactly is the issue on that take?
 
By the same account Waqar Younis got a lot of wickets with a ball that had all kind of violations done to it too and hapless goras on dusty home pithes were left to fend on their own . We can go on the nitpicking rabbit hole mate.
No aura at all, dead personalities and inflated numbers against mediocre opposition on unhelpful tracks, I have to point this out since you lot started the absurd nitpicking mate. All the lads idolised Waqar including Bolt, He bought excitement to the game. Bumrah and Shami are mainly being advocated by the EE customer service lot and other than that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top