What's new

Waqar Younis vs Allan Donald?

Waqar in the beginning of his career. Also Waqar was a fantastic bowler in his prime, but Donald was a better bowler throughout his career.

VOTE: Donald
 
Here is another angle to take a look:

If you exclude Minnows, Donald avg. goes to 22.50 with SR of 47.1, so there wasn't much difference.

Whereas Waqar avg. goes down to 25.16 with SR of 46.1

So Donald for me was quite better than Waqar, and he was actually better than Wasim as well.
 
No offence but this is a ridiculous comparison in my opinion.

Wasim/Waqar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Donald by miles.
 
Snow said:
Here is another angle to take a look:

If you exclude Minnows, Donald avg. goes to 22.50 with SR of 47.1, so there wasn't much difference.

Whereas Waqar avg. goes down to 25.16 with SR of 46.1

So Donald for me was quite better than Waqar, and he was actually better than Wasim as well.
Click to expand...

Which teams have you classed as minnows?
 
Except against Aus, Donald has frightening record against every country. He averages 23 and below against every country. He was equally good in even ODI. 21.78 avg with economy rate 4.15. Till arrival of Pollock , he was only world class bowler for SA.

Donald was forced to debut at 26. He played between 26-35 and went on to take 330 test wickets with 20 5-fers. Amazing when you consider that he used to beat batsmen with his pace to take wickets. Fantastic athlete with great fitness.

I just wonder what we missed by not seeing him debuting when he was 20-21 year old? Missed the prime age of fast bowler. Seeing young Donald at 20-25 age , charging towards batsmen would have been a fantastic sight.

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

Waqar was a sight to see in his first few years. We wasn't same bowler in his later half of career. His in-swinging yorkers were best I have seen. Wish he was not injured but very few can remain fit as a fast bowler and some are more prone to injury due to their action.
 
Last edited:
No disrespect to Waqar but Donald is largely more effective than him. Waqar's bowling was exotic, and mighty effective when conditions favored him. Donald was a pure fast bowler. Donald and Waqar have similar stats in Asia, but Donald has much better stats in other conditions..
In Asia:
Donald 1993-2000 9 16 291.0 82 732 36 5/69 7/69 20.33 2.51 48.5 1 0
Waqar 1989-2002 47 85 1370.0 260 4438 215 7/76 13/135 20.64 3.23 38.2 14 4


In Eng & NZ
Donald 1994-1999 11 20 427.2 119 1309 55 6/88 8/115 23.80 3.06 46.6 5 0
Waqar 1992-2001 18 31 670.0 128 2161 79 6/78 9/81 27.35 3.22 50.8 5 0

In SA & Aus

Donald 1992-2002 45 80 1607.0 387 4656 206 7/84 12/139 22.60 2.89 46.8 13 2
Waqar 1990-2003 12 20 348.3 68 1133 34 6/78 10/133 33.32 3.25 61.5 1 1



In matches both played

three were in SA and 2 were in PAK.

Donald 5 9 148.0 27 488 23 5/79 8/74 21.21 3.29 38.6 1 0
Waqar 5 9 149.3 30 478 20 6/78 10/133 23.90 3.19 44.8 1 1
 
Last edited:
Both Waqar and Donald didnt pose much trouble for Australia, Donald in particular just never delivered against us, even when it was all set up for him to do so, in home conditions. Looked threatening at times, but never consistent.
 
jaguarjack said:
No disrespect to Waqar but Donald is largely more effective than him. Waqar's bowling was exotic, and mighty effective when conditions favored him. Donald was a pure fast bowler. Donald and Waqar have similar stats in Asia, but Donald has much better stats in other conditions..
.......
Click to expand...

Too many numbers makes it difficult to read. Making it bit easier to read. You missed WI.

In Asia:

Donald: Avg 20.33 - SR 48.5
Waqar: Avg 20.64 - SR 38.2

In Eng & NZ:

Donald: Avg 23.80 - SR 46.6
Waqar: Avg 27.35 - SR 50.8

In SA & Aus:

Donald: Avg 22.60 - SR 46.8
Waqar: Avg 33.32 - SR 61.5


In WI:

Donald: Avg 20.79 - SR 43.1
Waqar : Avg 23.32 - SR 39.6


In matches both played

Donald: Avg 21.21 - SR 38.6
Waqar: Avg 23.90 - SR 44.8



I guess, Donald was lot more consistent performer everywhere. Only against Aus, Donald was not that great. Donald was more of a classical fast bowler and Waqar was unique with his in-swinging yorkers. I do think that Waqar's figures would have been better if not for injury. Anyway, that's a hypothetical situations.

What period do PPers consider as peak bowling performance by Waqar?
 
Last edited:
Donald was awesome and underrated. No problem with putting him ahead of waqar. In the 1990's when most of these players played majority of their matches, id have it

Ambrose
Akram
Donald
Waqar

as the top 4. 3 and 4 being interchangeable more or less. I don't know what others think.
 
Khaseer said:
Donald was awesome and underrated. No problem with putting him ahead of waqar. In the 1990's when most of these players played majority of their matches, id have it

Ambrose
Akram
Donald
Waqar

...... I don't know what others think.
Click to expand...

If you count McGrath as well in your 90's due to him playing half of his cricket in 90's then McGrath was a better bowler than Akram. Not very exciting to watch however better.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
McGrath was a better bowler than Akram. Not very exciting to watch however better.
Click to expand...

Perhaps his whole career yeah I'd have to agree with you, but I was mentioning the 90's specifically, where McGrath was awesome but not as good others mentioned
 
Donald may have better stats but nobody, I mean nobody could swing the ball in the air as Waqar did. Mastered the art of reverse swing. The 1992 test series against England is a treat for fast bowling fans
 
Khaseer said:
Perhaps his whole career yeah I'd have to agree with you, but I was mentioning the 90's specifically, where McGrath was awesome but not as good others mentioned
Click to expand...

Agreed. McGrath improved in 2000's when compared to 90's.
 
Last edited:
I loved donald's aggression but he just couldn't do what waqar did for fun
 
Stats donot show the entire picture. Both are very close to each other.
 
A huge fan of White Lightning but this is as easy as picking Steyn over Waqar in the other thread.

Waqar for me.
 
Random Aussie said:
No offence but this is a ridiculous comparison in my opinion.

Wasim/Waqar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Donald by miles.
Click to expand...


Wasim did better in Australia than Donald, so you rate Wasim higher.

Donald did much better than Wasim against England, home and away, so we rate Donald higher.
 
Both Waqar and Donald were more reliant on pace than the other great bowlers of the 90s. Waqar was of course a fine swing bowler too, but he was most effective with that swing when he bowled at pace. Donald maintained his pace for a longer period than Waqar and was therefore more consistent over his career, but at his peak Waqar was more destructive combining late swing with pace.

Wasim did better in Australia than Donald, so you rate Wasim higher.

Donald did much better than Wasim against England, home and away, so we rate Donald higher.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Australia were a far better team than England in the 90s.
 
Last edited:
KB said:
Yes, but Australia were a far better team than England in the 90s.
Click to expand...

True but I was making a point to RA about perception.

Overall I'd say Wasim, Waqar and Donald were all ATGs and fairly equal.
 
donald was better then waqar, but waqar was better then donald from 1990 to 1999 you can check the stats.

waqar really should have retired after 1999 world cup.
 
Both are fantastic bowlers.
I suppose what works in Donald's favour was his ability to keep things tight when he was not taking wickets. But either way there is no wrong answer its a matter of opinion. Both are my favourite bowlers.
 
Both have performed very well, both are gun players.

But I rate waqar slightly better in crunch periods, though waqar had some great support: mushys, wasim,imran
 
Last edited:
jaguarjack said:
No disrespect to Waqar but Donald is largely more effective than him. Waqar's bowling was exotic, and mighty effective when conditions favored him. Donald was a pure fast bowler. Donald and Waqar have similar stats in Asia, but Donald has much better stats in other conditions..
In Asia:
Donald 1993-2000 9 16 291.0 82 732 36 5/69 7/69 20.33 2.51 48.5 1 0
Waqar 1989-2002 47 85 1370.0 260 4438 215 7/76 13/135 20.64 3.23 38.2 14 4


In Eng & NZ
Donald 1994-1999 11 20 427.2 119 1309 55 6/88 8/115 23.80 3.06 46.6 5 0
Waqar 1992-2001 18 31 670.0 128 2161 79 6/78 9/81 27.35 3.22 50.8 5 0

In SA & Aus

Donald 1992-2002 45 80 1607.0 387 4656 206 7/84 12/139 22.60 2.89 46.8 13 2
Waqar 1990-2003 12 20 348.3 68 1133 34 6/78 10/133 33.32 3.25 61.5 1 1



In matches both played

three were in SA and 2 were in PAK.

Donald 5 9 148.0 27 488 23 5/79 8/74 21.21 3.29 38.6 1 0
Waqar 5 9 149.3 30 478 20 6/78 10/133 23.90 3.19 44.8 1 1
Click to expand...

good post but your data is all over the show. You could have left out overs bowled, best match figures, 5-fors and 10-fors etc.
Remember the main purpose of coming up with data and stats is not to confuse the end-users.
Summaries next time. Good analysis though
 
Buffet said:
If you count McGrath as well in your 90's due to him playing half of his cricket in 90's then McGrath was a better bowler than Akram. Not very exciting to watch however better.
Click to expand...

i never rated McGrath because he was ordinary against South Africa
 
soso_killer said:
i never rated McGrath because he was ordinary against South Africa
Click to expand...

McGrath did fine even against SA. He averages 27.33. That's not bad enough to be not rated. He was even better in SA, which you would have watched more, by averaging 23.62. If this was the criterion to impress you then I don't know why you will not rate him and at the same time rate other like Wasim, Waqar etc.

I was putting McGrath ahead of Wasim by mistake in 90's list. But over all, you couldn't have been more impressed with Wasim who averages 39 in SA and 29 over all against SA.

You seems to rate Waqar as well. If you think McGrath was ordinary against SA then what do you make of Waqar's records against SA over all and in SA? He was averaging 28+ in both case.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
McGrath did fine even against SA. He averages 27.33. That's not bad enough to be not rated. He was even better in SA, which you would have watched more, by averaging 23.62. If this was the criterion to impress you then I don't know why you will not rate him and at the same time rate other like Wasim, Waqar etc.

I was putting McGrath ahead of Wasim by mistake in 90's list. But over all, you couldn't have been more impressed with Wasim who averages 39 in SA and 29 over all against SA.

You seems to rate Waqar as well. If you think McGrath was ordinary against SA then what do you make of Waqar's records against SA over all and in SA? He was averaging 28+ in both case.
Click to expand...
I think that was a chirp aimed more at the Aussies, who don't rate Donald because he didn't do as well against them as he did against everyone else. Donald's record against Aus is not much worse than McGrath's record against SA.

Point being that very few people excel everywhere against everyone. There'll almost always be a blot on your record, heck even Marshall averaged 32 in NZ.
 
Jo_Don said:
I think that was a chirp aimed more at the Aussies, who don't rate Donald because he didn't do as well against them as he did against everyone else. Donald's record against Aus is not much worse than McGrath's record against SA.

Point being that very few people excel everywhere against everyone. There'll almost always be a blot on your record, heck even Marshall averaged 32 in NZ.
Click to expand...

Donald was not great but good against Aus in Aus. He did disappoint against Aus in his home grounds. Well, Donald not doing so well against Aus gets more than compensated by consistently doing great against everyone else in all conditions. He is averaging 23 or below against every other country. Has did fantastic in alien conditions in Asia and even matched Pakistani greats even though number of tests are not comparable. He was nice all around performance in variety of conditions. All that performance when he debuted at age 26. It would have been interesting to see him play when he was 20-25 age.
 
Last edited:
Donald was a more consistent all round fast bowler, waqar the more lethal and destructive both similar but different at same time too
 
At the peak of their powers Waqar was more destructive and lethal than Donald.
 
Buffet said:
McGrath did fine even against SA. He averages 27.33. That's not bad enough to be not rated. He was even better in SA, which you would have watched more, by averaging 23.62. If this was the criterion to impress you then I don't know why you will not rate him and at the same time rate other like Wasim, Waqar etc.

I was putting McGrath ahead of Wasim by mistake in 90's list. But over all, you couldn't have been more impressed with Wasim who averages 39 in SA and 29 over all against SA.

You seems to rate Waqar as well. If you think McGrath was ordinary against SA then what do you make of Waqar's records against SA over all and in SA? He was averaging 28+ in both case.
Click to expand...

McGrath was pretty ordinary against the best team who could have played i.e. South Africa.
In SA he may average 23.62 but he was hardly threatening a strike rate of 63.1 is pretty weak.
In Australia he averages 31.17 strike rate of 80.3.
Overall: average of 27.6 at a strike rate of 71.6. Which is not impressive at all.
He never performed against us in "crunch" situations. Others had to do his job for him. He plundered "inferior teams".
Even in the 2007 world cup a young AB tore him to shreds, it took a very unlucky dismissal to get him out i.e. a direct hit from the boundary
 
soso_killer said:
McGrath was pretty ordinary against the best team who could have played i.e. South Africa.
In SA he may average 23.62 but he was hardly threatening a strike rate of 63.1 is pretty weak.
In Australia he averages 31.17 strike rate of 80.3.
Overall: average of 27.6 at a strike rate of 71.6. Which is not impressive at all.
He never performed against us in "crunch" situations. Others had to do his job for him. He plundered "inferior teams".
Even in the 2007 world cup a young AB tore him to shreds, it took a very unlucky dismissal to get him out i.e. a direct hit from the boundary
Click to expand...

It may not be impressive but its not bad either To not rate a proven champion bowler because he avges 27 against one team is diabolical

To put that in context Nearly all the worlds bowlers today avge more than 27 in their test careers, whereas thats mcgraths worst avge against any team

For me mcgrath was the best fast bowler of the 90s/00s hands down and many would agree with me
 
Last edited:
AB and Waqar at their peak were wonders to behold. I saw both right from the start of their careers and each was brilliant but over their whole careers,Donald was better. Waqar was never the same bowler after his injury before the 92 WC and Donald missed 6 yrs of int cricket due to isolation. You could conceive that if both had uninterrupted careers- we would be looking at 2 of the greatest ever. My great memory of Waqar came early on in his career when in the semi of the Nat West trophy he bowled a lightening quick spell against Northants(including Allan Lamb) at the Oval and won the match-it was poetry in motion.My great Memory of AD was his brutal spell to Atherton at Trent Bridge in 1998-it was just amazing.
 
Donald looks the better bowler on paper but with ATGs, it is always very close. I'd pick Waqar in Asia and Donald outside of Asia.
 
Zaz said:
For me mcgrath was the best fast bowler of the 90s/00s hands down and many would agree with me
Click to expand...

IMO - Ambrose will edge it if you are considering bowlers from 90's/00s.
 
Zaz said:
It may not be impressive but its not bad either To not rate a proven champion bowler because he avges 27 against one team is diabolical

To put that in context Nearly all the worlds bowlers today avge more than 27 in their test careers, whereas thats mcgraths worst avge against any team

For me mcgrath was the best fast bowler of the 90s/00s hands down and many would agree with me
Click to expand...

yep good post. But i dont think you understand were that came from.
Anyway the are alot of double standards here on PP so i was trying to be consistent with the critics
 
AZulfi said:
1989-1996 (pre-back injury)
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Out of curiosity, I wanted to check his peak period which many, including me, consider lot more lethal than Donald. Donald was at his best from 1995 to 2000.

Waqar 44 mathces -- 1989-1996 Avg 21.33 & SR 39.9 [ Peak performance by Waqar]

Donald 44 matches -- 1995-2000 Avg 19.8 & SR 42.8 [ Peak performance by Donald]

Best years of both bowlers don't support the theory of Waqar having an unmatched peak , when we look at it objectively. In above two period, I will slightly prefer Donald's performance but I was under impression that Waqar is lot better than other ATG's when it comes to peak performance.
 
Last edited:
waqar first injury was in 93, 2nd in 95/96 so his peak should be 89-94
 
Last edited:
speed said:
you could also include 95 his average goes up by 1.
Click to expand...

Well if his commulative averages goes up by 1 by due to having 95 then I don't think we should count 95 among Waqar's peak performance year.
 
speed said:
not exactly 1 around 0.60
Click to expand...

Well if you want to include 95 then we have,

1989-1995 -- Waqar( 38 matches) : Avg 20.61 & SR 38.6.

Now for comparable 38 matches, We can remove Donald one year and it comes,

1996-2000 - Donald( 37 matches) : Avg 19.18 & SR 41.8

So again peak performance for Donald and Waqar doesn't look any different in comparable number of matches. Again for two 37/38 matchces, I will slightly prefer Donald's performance.

Anyway, point I was making that I thought Waqar had huge lead in peak performance over others. I haven't looked up for anyone else but remembered Donald doing quite well in 95-2000 so picked that period for him to see when he played same amount of matches as Waqar's peak performance period and I didn't see what I expected.

I think all of us got that impression due to Waqar doing it immediately when he started but objectively his peak performance years looks same as Donald. May be his unique in-swinging yorkers helped as well to create that impression.
 
Last edited:
are you including 95 or up to 95?

anyway 18 with a sr of 36 especially the sr is the wow factor when talking about waqars peak.
 
Last edited:
speed said:
are you including 95 or up to 95?
Click to expand...

Isn't both same? Did you mean only till 94 excluding 95? Well, let's take a look.

1989-1994 Waqar - (Total 33 matches in 5 year): Avg 19.15 & SR 36.0

SR is better but not a huge lead in over all performance over Donald because both are picking up wickets at similar rate. Here we are only taking Donald as a comparison. I don't know if others have also comparable peak performance but with Donald it doesn't seem like a huge lead to me. Now we are going less and less number of matches for Waqar here.

If we start picking very few number of matches as peak performance then I think we can find more bowlers who performed in same range as Waqar. One example - 5 peak years of IK.

1982-1986 Imran Khan - ( Total 24 Matches in 5 year): Avg 14.31 & SR 39.1

I will take 5 peak performance years of IK over Waqar's 5 peak years in a heartbeat. Just talking objectively here because I haven't watched IK in those years.
 
Last edited:
speed said:
stats I posted above are upto 94 so his first 4 years of cricket.

I must have messed it up on the stat filter.
Click to expand...

Even if you take his first 4 years as his peak performance,

1989-1993 - Waqar (26 matches): Avg 18.55 & 36.2

Vs

1982-1986 Imran Khan - ( 24 Matches): Avg 14.31 & SR 39.1

IK peak performance looks better even if we keep reducing number of matches for Waqar. Our impression of Waqar having unmatched peak performance looks wrong.
 
endymion248 said:
Do you expect him to average even less than 18 while bowling in Karachi-like phatta wickets? :yk
Click to expand...

Frankly, I didn't have any fixed expectation for a specific average. I was only looking for how much better he was when compared to few other ATGs.

Having watched Waqar and also listening to everyone else, I had an impression that he had huge lead over other ATG's for his peak performance. I didn't know what other consider his peak years so asked and compared. He looked comparable or slender lead over many depending on how many matches we count and one example which I put where he is clearly behind.

IK also took wickets on same Pakistani wickets. I will take that peak performance over Waqar's. I didn't watch IK for that period so only talking objectively here.
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
True but I was making a point to RA about perception.

Overall I'd say Wasim, Waqar and Donald were all ATGs and fairly equal.
Click to expand...

Fair enough you are entitled to your opinion.

I dont consider Donald an ATG and I think he was a far inferior bowler to Waqar and Wasim.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
Even if you take his first 4 years as his peak performance,

1989-1993 - Waqar (26 matches): Avg 18.55 & 36.2

Vs

1982-1986 Imran Khan - ( 24 Matches): Avg 14.31 & SR 39.1

IK peak performance looks better even if we keep reducing number of matches for Waqar. Our impression of Waqar having unmatched peak performance looks wrong.
Click to expand...

yh Ik is better then wasim and waqar.
 
Buffet said:
Frankly, I didn't have any fixed expectation for a specific average. I was only looking for how much better he was when compared to few other ATGs.

Having watched Waqar and also listening to everyone else, I had an impression that he had huge lead over other ATG's for his peak performance. I didn't know what other consider his peak years so asked and compared. He looked comparable or slender lead over many depending on how many matches we count and one example which I put where he is clearly behind.

IK also took wickets on same Pakistani wickets. I will take that peak performance over Waqar's. I didn't watch IK for that period so only talking objectively here.
Click to expand...
Waqar's peak actually lasted about 18 months from 93-94. Prior to that he was building up to that, and post 94 he started declining and never recovered to the same heights. Imran Khan was much more consistent once he peaked.

eZ31gpH.jpg
 
Also, I'd just like to throw in the freak that is Steyn. Started peaking in ~Feb 2008 and is still at his peak 5 years later.

UZT5Ko7.jpg
 
Donald over Waqar for me.

Remove the minnows Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and have a look at their stats.
 
Jo_Don said:
Waqar's peak actually lasted about 18 months from 93-94.
Click to expand...

Good perspective with rating graphs. Rating graph is actually more meaningful than simply looking at raw numbers because it takes account of relative strengths of opposition and other factors. Not perfect but bit better than raw figures.

Rating graphs posted by you shows that IK had higher peak and Steyn has similar peak when compared to Waqar ( Ignoring duration of peak here). A quick look at rating graphs for Marshall, Ambrose and McGrath shows that they all had similar peak. I think Waqar having unmatched peak impression is mainly due to him taking most of his wickets by unique in-swinging yorkers. That looked more dangerous to me personally. But he doesn't have unmatched peak performance among ATG's. Impression doesn't look true when we see objectively.
 
Last edited:
Buffet said:
Good perspective with rating graphs. Rating graph is actually more meaningful than simply looking at raw numbers because it takes account of relative strengths of opposition and other factors. Not perfect but bit better than raw figures.

Rating graphs posted by you shows that IK had higher peak and Steyn has similar peak when compared to Waqar ( Ignoring duration of peak here). A quick look at rating graphs for Marshall, Ambrose and McGrath shows that they all had similar peak for longer duration. I think Waqar having unmatched peak impression is mainly due to him taking most of his wickets by unique in-swinging yorkers. That looked more dangerous to me personally. But he doesn't have unmatched peak performance among ATG's. Impression doesn't look true when we see objectively.
Click to expand...

Yep, Waqar is one of my favourite bowlers ever, along with Donald. Part of their appeal was the nature in which they took their wickets - Waqar by toe crushers and Donald by sheer aggression. However it is a bit of a misconception that Waqar peaked higher than anyone else - he peaked very early in his career where others took a few years, but he didn't peak higher.
 
Jo_Don said:
However it is a bit of a misconception that Waqar peaked higher than anyone else - he peaked very early in his career where others took a few years, but he didn't peak higher.
Click to expand...

Bold statement pretty much sums it up.
 
I have lots of respect for Waqar. But as far as this comparison goes, Allan Donald is my favorite fast bowler ever, so I'll go with him. The difference isn't much though. Both are greats/legends of the game.
 
Random Aussie said:
Fair enough you are entitled to your opinion.

I dont consider Donald an ATG and I think he was a far inferior bowler to Waqar and Wasim.
Click to expand...

Hmm, 400+ test wickets @ average 22, s/r < 50 indicates otherwise to me.
 
It has to be Donald for me.

It was a sheer pleasure to watch Donald run and jump high right before delivering the ball. One of the best bowling actions I have ever seen.
 
mithun_minhas said:
It has to be Donald for me.

It was a sheer pleasure to watch Donald run and jump high right before delivering the ball. One of the best bowling actions I have ever seen.
Click to expand...

He is one of those rare bowlers who really scared me as a fan. It's a shame he could make his debut at the age of 26, not earlier. Would have loved to see him get to 450-500 wickets, which he deserved as per his talent.
 
Robert said:
Hmm, 400+ test wickets @ average 22, s/r < 50 indicates otherwise to me.
Click to expand...

Donald was a genius, class bowler. The only blemish in his career is his mediocre record against the Aussies. But then Waqar has an even worse record against the Aussies.


330 wickets @ 22.25 (ave), SR - 47


ICON!!
 
Last edited:
This is a real tough comparison.

I would say at his best :waqar was better then Donald , but overall Donald has edge. He was far more consistent than :waqar.
 
Hitman said:
He is one of those rare bowlers who really scared me as a fan.
Click to expand...

Sure, remember that duel with Atherton, where he actually seemed to be trying to hurt the batter.
 
Romali_rotti said:
On what basis did you come to this conclusion ?
Click to expand...

Watched them bowl, their impact on games, what they did at big moments, their legacies.

Wasim would make many all time XI and Waqar would be in contention for some. I doubt Donald would be in anyone's team.
 
Difference is S/R edges it for Waqar

SA now has Steyn....and Steyn is better than Donald

in Tests.....Steyn = Waqar NO DOUBT
in Odi's Steyn isn't as effective or lethal.

Steyn and Donald are kind of bowlers who'll bowl consistent line and length (i.e McGrath type, but not as super-consistent) and get you out (very effective in tests (not too much in Odi's)

then you have Waqar and Shoaib type bowlers.....who will just run through you. (Steyn also has that ability, but not as strong incoming delivery).
 
Steyn much better in Aus than Waqar.
Waqar much better in England that Steyn.

WEIRD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Dale Steyn vs Waqar Younis: Who’s the better Test bowler?
2
Replies
84
Views
2K
Swashbuckler
Swashbuckler
Ab Fan
Joel Garner vs Waqar Younis - Better Test bowler?
Replies
49
Views
705
Justcrazy
Justcrazy
Buffet
Why did Waqar Younis have such an ordinary record against top sides?
2 3
Replies
188
Views
6K
jeetu
jeetu
hoshiarpurexpress
[VIDEO] ‘ICC, BCCI Providing Special Balls for Indian Bowlers Making Them Look Extraordinary’: Hasan Raza
2
Replies
98
Views
4K
YousafTheBeast
YousafTheBeast
L
Mother-in-law as Head Coach
Replies
4
Views
223
LordJames
L
Back
Top