Was Shaun Pollock an ATG bowler?

[Buffet]

Benchmark for SA is higher so he is not an ATG. Much inferior players from some countries get rated higher due to fans or media hyping them.

 

[Abdul]

Yes - his record speaks for himself! Underrated by a bunch

 

[subshakerz]

Shaun Pollock suffers from a double issue of being underrated by some and overrated by others. In many ways, he was a bowling version of Kallis.

To begin with, we must make a distinction between all-time greats and national greats. The former is someone who is cream of the crop, whose is recognized during their career to be among the best ever, and is someone who would put in a short list when selecting an all-time XI. They have a combination of impeccable records and universal renown.

The latter is someone who is recognized among the best in the world at some point during their own career and had a fairly long spell where they were world class, but lack the extra peer recognition and statistical record to elevate them beyond this category.

A good comparison would be Wasim Akram, who I would consider an all-time great as he has an impressive record but also universal acclaim, and Waqar Younis, who would be a national great as he lacks Wasim's peer recognition and his name never would come up when considering an all-time XI, though during the 90s he was seen as one of the finest bowlers around.

Pollock would be considered a national great as a bowler, but not an all-time great, though you could make a case he might be an all-time great all-rounder.

With his figures, especially if you take his batting into account, he should have received much more headlines and credit than somehow like Flintoff for example. He was successful in the subcontinent unlike so many pacers. But his style of play was not as sexy and fairly orthodox, plus he was a South African and their team was known for a defensive brand of cricket.

However, as a bowler when he was bowling alongside Donald, you could clearly see who was the bigger threat and better bowler. Pollock could be one-dimensional and stuck to tight line and length but lacked the strategy and insight of McGrath who used similar methods. His bowling figures flatter him as he was strict in restricting runs hence his low average but lacked penetration at time hence his higher strikerate. When you got on top of Pollock, he lacked a plan B. The same could be said of Donald, which is why he was never given the same status as Akram and Ambrose, but it was far more difficult to get on top of him compared to Pollock.

Still, I have no doubt if Pollock was Australian or English he would be readily seen as a modern legend and better than the recent crop of Johnson, Lee, Broad and possibly Anderson.

 

[hur rizvi]

The 90's were great for fast bowling. I think the modern generation is the closest we've gotten since that time, with SA, Eng and Aus producing a lot of good fast bowlers. Pak too, but they are off match-fixing or being worked into the ground or ignored by selectors...

SA Steyn, Rabada, Morkel, Philander
WI Taylor
Aus Starc, Hazelwood, Pattison, Cummins
Ind Aaron, Kumar
SL
Eng Anderson, Woakes, Broad
Pak Amir

LOL, other than steyn we dont have a single sub 25 bowler. 80s and 70s were better than 2010s

 

[street cricketer]

The 90's were great for fast bowling. I think the modern generation is the closest we've gotten since that time, with SA, Eng and Aus producing a lot of good fast bowlers. Pak too, but they are off match-fixing or being worked into the ground or ignored by selectors...

SA Steyn, Rabada, Morkel, Philander
WI Taylor
Aus Starc, Hazelwood, Pattison, Cummins
Ind Aaron, Kumar
SL
Eng Anderson, Woakes, Broad
Pak Amir

Lolz, I'm an Indian and even I find the inclusion of Aaron and Kumar in that list as hilarious

 

[sivaji]

Benchmark for SA is higher so he is not an ATG. Much inferior players from some countries get rated higher due to fans or media hyping them.

If Pollock isnt an ATG then I question the people's judgement.
Even decent but soft bowlers like Anderson have been glorified like the second coming of jesus by some here.

Pollock averaged something like18 whenhegot 200 wickets and his average was nly 20 when he reached 300 wickets and his decline started after he was dismissed from captaincy.

 

[sivaji]

Pollock was similar to Mcgrath but Mcgrath didnt losehis effectiveness till last day of his career. Pollock maybe should have retired earlierbuthe prolonged his career and at the end wasnt effective which cloud mind of some people who never saw him at his best.

 

[Deewana]

ATG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Robert]

Anderson > Botham

Interesting comparison. Botham was a better bowler than Anderson for his first sixty tests, but after that cumulative injuries and a lack of attention to fitness wore him down. Anderson could only dream of taking 13 wickets in a test match in India (never mind the century in the same match).

Anderson has kept working hard at his fitness and that is how he has passed Botham's aggregate for wickets.

 

[RamLakhan]

Probably Pollock became softer (lost lot of pace) in the latter part of his career! In the beginning he used to open the bowling, used to bowl fast and accurate. After he lost his pace modern batsmen took him apart (keeper also used to come up to the stumps) Otherwise he would have been on par or better than Mc.Grath. On the other hand McGrath actually retained his pace (lost just a little) maintained better accuracy and proved to be effective until he retired/lost place in the side.

And his batting was not that good. It was something similar to Ashwin. Maybe effective in Test Matches. Same problems like Ashwin (running between the wicket, lack of power shots... Compared to the fielding standards and some of the alrounders that South Africa used to produce those days!) But his bowling in the initial part of career was good enough to pick him as bowler alone!

 

[GoUgandaCranes]

I think the reverse question is more important. Who have been the non-soft South African cricketers in the last 15-20 years.

None apart from Smith, Gibbs, Steyn and Klusener.

What makes them soft? Not winning a world cup?

 

[IcedEarth]

Pretty much this.....Also Pollock had likes of Donald and then Ntini,2 express bowlers at the other end...all he had to do was keep it tight and wickets would fall....As a batsman he was decent and that's about it.

For some reason criteria to praise Pollock ahead of Kapil and Botham disappears when it comes to Imran

Ha, do you think Pollock as a dibby dobbly medium pacer? Pollock of '96-2000 period was very quick, and very intimidating. It was later he dropped his pace and became a L & L bowler. He is out and out pacier than Ntini at similar stages of their careers.

 

[IcedEarth]

Not really.......Pollock benefitted from having Donald at the other end who was fearsome. All he had to do was keep it tight and bowl good lines...and yes he was a very good bowler too but batsman needed some respite which he benefited from,not entirely but you can call that a factor.

Not really. When SL played in SAF, the fearful bowler was Pollock, because he set batsmen up and got them out. SL had some explosive batsmen, and Donald's fire was met with fire (most of the time unsuccessfully), and some times resulting in a run glut over few overs. With Pollock (like McGrath) no such chance, he squeezed batsmen, and then knocked them down for few runs.

 

[happydavy]

Shaun Pollock | Why so underrated?

I can't recall any great cricketer selecting Shaun Pollock as an all-roudner or even as a bowler in their so called dream XI, yet his record is absolutely phenomenal.

- 421 test wickets at 23, almost 4 wickets per match, 53% in won matches
- Bowling average of less than 23 in Asia
- Consistent record across home and away matches
- Overall batting average of 32 with average over 35 in 6 away countries - Australia, NZ, Eng, Pak, WI and Zim.

This is just tests, ODI record is also no less. Yet he doesn't get spoken of in the same breath as other great cricketers of his era. Perhaps the cricket pundits need to be more charitable to him.

 

[Manunited18]

I can't recall any great cricketer selecting Shaun Pollock as an all-roudner or even as a bowler in their so called dream XI, yet his record is absolutely phenomenal.

- 421 test wickets at 23, almost 4 wickets per match, 53% in won matches
- Bowling average of less than 23 in Asia
- Consistent record across home and away matches
- Overall batting average of 32 with average over 35 in 6 away countries - Australia, NZ, Eng, Pak, WI and Zim.

This is just tests, ODI record is also no less. Yet he doesn't get spoken of in the same breath as other great cricketers of his era. Perhaps the cricket pundits need to be more charitable to him.

Yes I've always found this interesting that he's not spoken highly enough of

 

[Manunited18]

Interesting comparison. Botham was a better bowler than Anderson for his first sixty tests, but after that cumulative injuries and a lack of attention to fitness wore him down. Anderson could only dream of taking 13 wickets in a test match in India (never mind the century in the same match).

Anderson has kept working hard at his fitness and that is how he has passed Botham's aggregate for wickets.

Well put rob

 

[Hitman]

I can't recall any great cricketer selecting Shaun Pollock as an all-roudner or even as a bowler in their so called dream XI, yet his record is absolutely phenomenal.

- 421 test wickets at 23, almost 4 wickets per match, 53% in won matches
- Bowling average of less than 23 in Asia
- Consistent record across home and away matches
- Overall batting average of 32 with average over 35 in 6 away countries - Australia, NZ, Eng, Pak, WI and Zim.

This is just tests, ODI record is also no less. Yet he doesn't get spoken of in the same breath as other great cricketers of his era. Perhaps the cricket pundits need to be more charitable to him.

Charity is when you take pity on a player. Shaun Pollock is a legit great of the game, and one of the best bowlers of his time.

 

[andy0204]

He was as good as Wasim,Donald,Ambrose in his prime.
A great bowler nonetheless.

 

[Ab Fan]

Definitely an ATG.

 

[MenInG]

Born: July 16, 1973 (age 48 years), Gqeberha, South Africa

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">&#55357;&#56632; 829 wickets in international cricket <br>&#55357;&#56632; 7386 runs &#55356;&#57295;<br><br>A very happy birthday to South Africa legend <a href="https://twitter.com/7polly7?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@7polly7</a> &#55356;&#57218; <a href="https://t.co/V4taD5uwrR">pic.twitter.com/V4taD5uwrR</a></p>— ICC (@ICC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ICC/status/1415936792554057728?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 16, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[jeetu]

Shaun Pollock was mostly the second best bowler in the team so he doesn't get that high respect that he should have.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">“He helped usher South Africa cricket into and through a very important stage."<br><br>Happy birthday to one of the greatest all-rounders – Shaun Pollock!</p>— ICC (@ICC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ICC/status/1548225926755799041?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 16, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Robert]

I can't recall any great cricketer selecting Shaun Pollock as an all-roudner or even as a bowler in their so called dream XI, yet his record is absolutely phenomenal.

- 421 test wickets at 23, almost 4 wickets per match, 53% in won matches
- Bowling average of less than 23 in Asia
- Consistent record across home and away matches
- Overall batting average of 32 with average over 35 in 6 away countries - Australia, NZ, Eng, Pak, WI and Zim.

This is just tests, ODI record is also no less. Yet he doesn't get spoken of in the same breath as other great cricketers of his era. Perhaps the cricket pundits need to be more charitable to him.

Padded by not outs, though. Only hit two test centuries. Hadlee level with the bat, not a test match batter.

 

[sweep_shot]

He was not an ATG. But, definitely a South African great.

 

[wrongun]

Really good cricketer.

Stats have him as an atg. It's true he doesn't get spoken about in the same breath as Hadlee, Bothom , Imran, Sobers etc. I'm not sure why.

I guess his bowling style was similar to, but overshadowed by McGrath. And if you were watching SA, Donald was the eye catching bowler. Batting he was a good #8/capable #7 even, but again SA were stacked with allrounders at the time.

He probably does get under-rated. The SA players who missed careers due to bans (so a form slump or weakness was never seen), tend to get over-rated a bit imo. Modern Pollock gets the opposite. Not my favourite all rounder to watch (Imran, Freddie, even Kapil was fluid and fun, or Johnson if you stretch all rounder).

 

[Ab Fan]

He was brilliant in 90s but post 2001-02, he was more of a second fiddle bowler to Ntini and Steyn. In 90s, he got support from Donald but he was still magnificent in his own right.

Also, a good enough batsman. Definitely an ATG cricketer for me.

 

[therealAB]

He was not an ATG. But, definitely a South African great.

An ATG on fast bowling alone. Only bowlers clearly ahead of him are:
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Garner

Steyn
Donald

Lillee
McGrath
Davidson

Wasim
Imran

Trueman

Hadlee

, in a tier with Lindwall, Waqar, Roberts, Walsh, Adcock.

And then he averaged more than 30. Don't really see it can be argued that Kapil is better than him - Pollock just clearly a step above as a test player

 

[TheSultan]

Pollock when he was captain was sneaky and a statpadder. I remember when the going was tough he would not bowl for hours until 9, 10 and Jack were at the crease. He just wanted to finish with 1-20 or 2-40 to maintain his 20 odd average.