Why are Allan Donald and Shaun Pollock underrated?

[Hasan123]

Both hardly ever get mentioned when we talk about the great bowlers of the 90s/early 00s yet there records are fantastic. Donald is one of the gutiest South Africans I have ever seen play cricket. And seeing some highlights of his spells you can see how much of a fighter he was

So question is are they are underated or not?

Discuss.....

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Pollock maybe,Donald isn't underrated though,he's regarded as one of the greatest of his era.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Donald is so under-rated that its insane.

Right up there in tests and ODI.

Pollock too was an amazing bowler in both formats (not as good as Donald).

 

[Hasan123]

Donald is so under-rated that its insane.

Right up there in tests and ODI.

Pollock too was an amazing bowler in both formats (not as good as Donald).

No one ever mentions Donald I think he is underated in both formats. Pollock is definitely underated in odis. His record is brilliant

 

[Markhor]

Donald v Atherton at Trent Bridge in 1998 was one of the great battles of the 90s for me.

Was absolutely gripping television. Donald looked like he wanted to murder Athers after he didn't walk after clearly gloving one. He was right up there with the other great 90s bowlers so wouldn't say he was underrated.

Pollock had a lot of pace when he first started but he eventually became a traditional line and length bowler, and a very good one at that. Whenever I think of Pollock however - I think of that horrible D/L miscalculation in the 2003 WC that led to a group stage exit under his captaincy

 

[Hasan123]

Pollock maybe,Donald isn't underrated though,he's regarded as one of the greatest of his era.

Ambrose and Walsh, Wasim and Waqar,Magrath are all mentioned before Donald when we talk about 90's bowlers. I don't see many on this forum talk about how good a bowler Donald was.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

No one ever mentions Donald I think he is underated in both formats. Pollock is definitely underated in odis. His record is brilliant

In tests, Pollock record is even more brilliant before his decline.

300 wickets at an average of 20 or 18 something.

 

[Bilal7]

They had it easier than the other ATG pace bowlers and thus are rightly rated below most of them. South African batsmen have it tougher than batsmen anywhere else while their pacers have it easier than anyone else.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Here we go again.

They played in easier home conditions so they must be below them.

No real reason.

Just like that.

lol.

Donald averages 17 in 1996 WC in Asia (to go with perfect allround records before his decline in ODIs) while Wasim and McGrath averaged 40+ in all the Asian WCs they played. Wasim averaged 40+ in 1987 and 1996 and McGrath averaged 40+ in 1996.

But no.....Donald is rightfully below them cos he got the easier of home conditions.

And no...Saffer batsmen don't get extra credit for batting in SA. By that logic, Kallis should be greater than SRT, Lara and Ponting but he is not given that credit too by fans.

This whole easy/tough home condition is all manufactured reasons when its hard to explain why someone is genuinely under-rated.

 

[Hasan123]

SIF stats sums up my point about Donald being underated

 

[Convict]

Struggled against Australia compared to their performances against everyone else and Australia v South Africa matches at the time were normally 1 v 2.

Donald has the added reputation of being a choker from that 1999 semi final

 

[Protea Fan]

Donald is not underrated he has been always rated along with greats but he was an underachiever i believe.He debuted at the age of 25 or 26 still got 600+ international wickets.So best 5-6 years of carrier are just ruined

In bw he was treat to watch definitely the cleanest bowling action i have ever seen,he just delivered the ball in a flow.
Seeing him bowl is ecstasy has got a great rhythm,style,passion and charisma

Pollock was always compared on lines of mcgrath with his accuracy and length but definitely falls short of pigeon's league

 

[The_Odd_One]

These are Pollock's stats:

50 matches, 210 wickets at 19.86
75 matches, 303 wickets at 20.87
100 matches, 391 wickets at 23.25

Pollock is so underrated on this forum that it is sad. He was a better bowler than a lot of ATGs but just does not get enough credit. If you add his batting too, then he was easily one of the top 5 cricketers of the last 25 years.

Donald was the second most menacing bowler after Ambrose. He literally terrorized batsmen of his time with his pace and bounce.

 

[Bilal7]

If people think that bowling in Asia for a handful of matches in a 10-year career is the same as bowling in Asia for the entirety of one's career, they are kidding themselves.

A foreign pacer can come over to Asia and give his 100%, knowing that the grind will be over after the current series. An Asian pacer's grind never ends and if they give 100% in every home series, their career will be cut short. Case in point: Imran, Waqar, Akhtar.

 

[Pete Rose]

because they didnt win much against Australia.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Pollock is underrated coz he wasn't flashy but he is the GOAT ODI AR imo.

 

[Adijazz1706]

because they didnt win much against Australia.

No one did, not against that team.

 

[Pete Rose]

No one did, not against that team.

true. But that's how it goes. you have to win against the best to be considered the best, especially if you are looking to be rated.
Same goes for Wasim and Waqar: would go missing against Australia and South Africa.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

And yet ALL Asian pacers average better at home than away.

Imran...Wasim...Waqar...Zaheer...Srinath....Vaas....Bhuvi...Shami....Umesh....list goes on.

There is difference between acknowledging difficult conditions and making sweeping statements devoid of reality.

 

[Buffet]

Donald had a better career than Wasim. Waqar was a notch below. McGrath and Ambrose were better than Donald.

Pollock in 90s was as good as anyone in the test format. He has been one of the best bowler in ODI for his entire career.

 

[Dark Magician]

They had it easier than the other ATG pace bowlers and thus are rightly rated below most of them. South African batsmen have it tougher than batsmen anywhere else while their pacers have it easier than anyone else.

No, just no.

 

[Dark Magician]

true. But that's how it goes. you have to win against the best to be considered the best, especially if you are looking to be rated.
Same goes for Wasim and Waqar: would go missing against Australia and South Africa.

Really? Shane Warne wasn't flash against the Indians, do you still have that view?

 

[Dark Magician]

Donald had a better career than Wasim. Waqar was a notch below. McGrath and Ambrose were better than Donald.

Pollock in 90s was as good as anyone in the test format. He has been one of the best bowler in ODI for his entire career.

Both Pollock and Donald are underrated because they don't have hype machine behind them. Same with Kallis, most people on this forum will tell you that they don't have memorable test in which he dominated but there's so many it's unbelievable.

It doesn't help that we South Africans are very conservative and don't like blowing our own horn unlike other cricketing countries.

 

[Pete Rose]

Really? Shane Warne wasn't flash against the Indians, do you still have that view?

Indians are a rubbish test team historically. So I don't see Warne losing too many points for underperforming vs them.

 

[Ab Fan]

Pollock lacked the ability to turn the game on its head and struggled vs the best team in the world.Hence, he is a bit underrated.

However, I would still say he is a borderline ATG bowler.

Donald was an exceptional bowler but he had few big embarrassing moments like the one in 99 WC semis which hurts his legacy.


IMO, SA bowlers ranking would be this:

Steyn
Donald
Pollock

Rabadda has huge potential and I think he has potential to surpass Pollock and be as good as other two.

But has a long way still to go.

 

[Buffet]

Indians are a rubbish test team historically. So I don't see Warne losing too many points for underperforming vs them.

As far as spinners are concerned, that Indian line up was most difficult to bowl for any spinner and Warne failed big time.

 

[Buffet]

Both Pollock and Donald are underrated because they don't have hype machine behind them.

Spot on here. If both were Indians or English with the same performance then they would have been hyped up a lot.

 

[Adil_94]

they dont have the English and Aussie media hype machine behind them.

 

[msb314]

Struggled against Australia compared to their performances against everyone else and Australia v South Africa matches at the time were normally 1 v 2.

Donald has the added reputation of being a choker from that 1999 semi final

That was not Donald's fault by any means - as a no. 11 batsman, he should never have been in that position to begin with.

Blame Klusener's inability to finish off that match and Kallis' slow batting.

 

[Justcrazy]

Donald is right on top with bowlers like Marshal , Wasim and Macgrath. No doubts about it.

Just Imagine had Donald played in his early years , he would have reached 600 Test wickets.

 

[joly]

Donald was never underrated,Pollock is a great as an all rounder but not as a bowler,not under rated at all

 

[samplepiece]

Pollock is easily one of the most underrated bowling ATGs. Probably public memory is short and everyone only remembers his last 2 years but he was the most difficult bowler to face for openers in his pomp, even ahead of McGrath, as he moved the bowl both ways with great accuracy and good pace. You dont average 20 for most of your career without being good.

 

[Dark Magician]

Pollock retired with an average below 25 yet he's no ATG? not only that, for most of his career he was averaging around 20/21 yet people still question his status?

 

[Robert]

Donald was a monster. Who knows what he would acheived if RSA had been readmitted earlier - I think he took his first test wicket aged 26.

 

[soso_killer]

I suppose they didn't do much against the best opposition of their era.
Similar to McGrath doing nothing of note against SA. His struggles in Australia are well documented.
All are below Steyn who is capable of winning matches on his own.

Marshall and Steyn are far and away the best bowlers we've ever seen.

 

[soso_killer]

Pollock pre knee injury is ahead of Donald and probably the best bowler we've ever produced.
Post 2000 he was merely a line and length bowler who could keep things tight.

When he was bowling at 140K's he could run through sides. He had a 7-for against Australia, dropped catches and an injured Donald prevented us from leveling the series in Australia in 98.

 

[Pantani]

I don't think anybody underrates Donald. He might not be as famous as some of the other '90s stars but everybody certainly acknowledges he had brilliant ability. Pollock I think is about fairly rated as a second tier great player, sort of like the bowling equivalent of guys like Damien Martyn, VVS Laxman and Jayawardene. Fantastic players, but a cut below the big three batsmen. It's a similar sort of thing with Pollock.

Steyn obviously is by far better than both and a serious contender for best fast bowler in history.

 

[Saj]

Underrated by who?

Both were world-class cricketers, not underestimated by any opponent.

 

[The_Odd_One]

I suppose they didn't do much against the best opposition of their era.
Similar to McGrath doing nothing of note against SA. His struggles in Australia are well documented.
All are below Steyn who is capable of winning matches on his own.

Marshall and Steyn are far and away the best bowlers we've ever seen.

Steyn has not done anything in England and Australia too. Why should he be rated higher based on this criterion?

 

[The_Odd_One]

I don't think anybody underrates Donald. He might not be as famous as some of the other '90s stars but everybody certainly acknowledges he had brilliant ability. Pollock I think is about fairly rated as a second tier great player, sort of like the bowling equivalent of guys like Damien Martyn, VVS Laxman and Jayawardene. Fantastic players, but a cut below the big three batsmen. It's a similar sort of thing with Pollock.

Steyn obviously is by far better than both and a serious contender for best fast bowler in history.

Martyn, Laxman, etc did not average as much as undisputed ATGs like Tendulkar, Ponting, etc. Pollock and Donald have similar if not better stats than the likes of Wasim and Waqar.

 

[MrBrownstone]

Pollock is underrated because of the belief that he was a boring line and length bowler.

Donald is rated highly though. He lost a lot of his peak years unfortunately and was past his best in the 1999 World Cup.

 

[Hasan123]

Underrated by who?

Both were world-class cricketers, not underestimated by any opponent.

They are hardly mentioned on this forum and also as a UK resident I can tell you that they are hardly discussed when media and pundits talk about great fast bowlers. Donald is only mentioned for one spell that he bowled to Atherton

 

[shaz619]

There just seems to be a general overhyping of Eng, AUS and south asian cricketers. South Africans don't have a similar machine behind them which is why guys like Donald, Pollock and Kallis will always fall under the radar

 

[Pantani]

Pollock is underrated because of the belief that he was a boring line and length bowler.

Donald is rated highly though. He lost a lot of his peak years unfortunately and was past his best in the 1999 World Cup.

McGrath was a boring line and length bowler, so too was Ambrose. Pollock comes in third as the best line and length bowler of the '90s era, so that's why he isn't so highly rated.

 

[Pantani]

Steyn has not done anything in England and Australia too. Why should he be rated higher based on this criterion?

What are you talking about? In 2008 he took a ten for at the MCG and scored a crucial 76 in the first innings. His all round performance crushed Australia in that match.

 

[Bilal7]

Pollock is underrated because of the belief that he was a boring line and length bowler.

Donald is rated highly though. He lost a lot of his peak years unfortunately and was past his best in the 1999 World Cup.

That isn't a belief, it's a fact. Boring bowlers, just like boring batsmen are not remembered too fondly. Chanderpaul would testify.

 

[Suleiman]

It's a travesty that Pollock missed out in the greatest ODI bowler poll behind less deserving candidates. Was a great bowling allrounder in ODIs.

 

[Chrish]

Donald was a scary bowler.. and his attitude was even more frightening

A prototype of what pace bowler should be.. blistering pace with steam coming from the ears when bowling and didn't mind giving batsmen earful

 

[soso_killer]

Steyn has not done anything in England and Australia too. Why should he be rated higher based on this criterion?

LOL, yeah sure......
Absolutely nothing, pathetic bowler

 

[soso_killer]

That isn't a belief, it's a fact. Boring bowlers, just like boring batsmen are not remembered too fondly. Chanderpaul would testify.

Like McGrath?
With only one five-for in Asia?

 

[Dark Magician]

That isn't a belief, it's a fact. Boring bowlers, just like boring batsmen are not remembered too fondly. Chanderpaul would testify.

See, it's this kind of thinking that's detrimental to cricket. Pollock was far better than some of you people are willing go acknowledge. If he was Asian we wouldn't even have to argue this.

 

[Dark Magician]

I've also noticed that most here only judge him before his knee injury. Look it up folks, before 2000 Pollock was a monster who plundered wickets against all sides bar Australia and not only that he'd basically come in at 8 or 9 and score crucial runs to take the game away from your teams. Ask any South African and they'd tell you he's done everything requested of him.

 

[Dark Magician]

It's actually even kind of stupid to follow this logic that a player should be underrated simply because he had a bogey team. Madness.

 

[samplepiece]

Pollock was just a boring line and length bowler? Maybe my memory is not serving me well but I do recall him being good at moving the ball both ways consistently to go with the accuracy.

Or maybe the definition of boring is someone who isnt a genuine fast bowler?

 

[Varun]

Whenever I think of Pollock however - I think of that horrible D/L miscalculation in the 2003 WC that led to a group stage exit under his captaincy

And when you think of Donald, do you look back to 1999?

 

[Khaseer]

Problem with Pollock is he comes in direct comparison to McGrath, who's basically better at everything than him. Donald on the other hand deserves to be held in same regard as Wasim and company.

 

[Suleiman]

It's ironic that McGrath and Donald's contributions as world class fast bowlers are shunned for being "boring line and length" bowlers.

All that goes out the window though when the discussion is about Younis Khan being an ATG despite being "boring", and aesthetically inferior to a myriad of other batsmen. Same with Misbah.

 

[Suleiman]

Donald is def not underrated. He is basically the archetypical image of a fast bowler. Aggressive, fast, and in your face. As a kid I found him quite scary with the sun screen which looked like war paint and his aggressive facial expressions.

 

[Suleiman]

It's ironic that McGrath and Donald's contributions as world class fast bowlers are shunned for being "boring line and length" bowlers.

All that goes out the window though when the discussion is about Younis Khan being an ATG despite being "boring", and aesthetically inferior to a myriad of other batsmen. Same with Misbah.

*Pollock

 

[Mamoon]

As pointed out already, there are multiple reasons for why the likes of Pollock, Donald and some other SA players are apparently underrated, and some of the SA posters have also played the victim card of not having media power, fanbase etc. like the other teams.

The truth is that they are not underrated; they are rated just fine, and the reason is that they have lacked spine and have not delivered for SA in World Cups.

Forget winning the World Cup, they don't even have memorable, match-winning performances in World Cup knockouts.

I know that Test is the premier format, but when you compare SA players who have done brilliantly at Test level but haven't delivered in World Cups to players who have achieved both, how do you expect them to be rated higher?

How can you expect Kallis to be remembered in the same vein as Tendulkar or Ponting?

How can you expect Donald and Pollock to be rated as high as Wasim and McGrath?

That is not 'underrating', it is rating them according to their achievements which are below the other players. Same will happen to the likes of Amla, de Villiers etc. in the future and some folks will call them underrated in respect to players like Kohli and Dhoni etc.

The general public in Asia cares about World Cups more than Test cricket, which is why on a forum like PakPassion, SA players will appear to be underrated because nobody cares about their Test exploits and their failures in World Cups every 4 years stands out.

If you ask any casual cricket follower in Pakistan, he would rank someone like Starc above Steyn because he still has memory of Starc powering Australia to a World Cup win while Steyn got owned in the semifinal by Elliot.

The point is that as long as SA players don't get the guts to deliver in World Cups, they will always be in the shadows of players who have done it all, and there is nothing wrong with that.

As far Donald is concerned, yes he has the distinction and the honor of pulling off the biggest individual choke in cricket history. I complete disagree with [MENTION=137804]msb314[/MENTION], that it wasn't Donald's fault.

It has nothing to do with being a number 11. It is common sense and you would expect even a 15 year old who has only played at an amateur level to not freeze the way Donald did.

A player playing at that level should know that ball watching is a crime and when the ball is in-front of the wicket, it is the striker's call.

Doing it at any level is a choke, let alone a World Cup semifinal when 1 run was required in 3 deliveries. It was an unbelievably dumb mistake and there is no defense for it, except that Donald was a massive, massive bottler.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

i also disagree with the notion that Pollock was ever quick. He was a medium pacer even as early as 1998. he must have rarely clocked even 140 kph and did well primarily because of helpful green mambas at home. He was accurate and miserly but lacked penetration

 

[kingusama92]

It has nothing to do with being a number 11. It is common sense and you would expect even a 15 year old who has only played at an amateur level to not freeze the way Donald did.

A player playing at that level should know that ball watching is a crime and when the ball is in-front of the wicket, it is the striker's call.

Doing it at any level is a choke, let alone a World Cup semifinal when 1 run was required in 3 deliveries. It was an unbelievably dumb mistake and there is no defense for it, except that Donald was a massive, massive bottler.

The "bottler" picked up 4-32 in the same match. Took wickets of Ponting and Lehmann.

Plus, he took a catch to dismiss Gilchrist.

You make it sound like the man had no impact on the game at all.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Both were world class bowlers in there own way and paired together were a great combination as well. Enjoyed watching both bowlers in the 90s an era where fast bowling stocks around the world were really high.

 

[Mamoon]

The "bottler" picked up 4-32 in the same match. Took wickets of Ponting and Lehmann.

Plus, he took a catch to dismiss Gilchrist.

You make it sound like the man had no impact on the game at all.

Donald actually has a good record in World Cups in general, but that one brain-freeze defines his legacy in World Cups now, due to which he has the honor of producing the single biggest individual choke in history of cricket.

Whatever his impact on that match was, he lost his team the semifinal and probably the World Cup with a moment of madness which is just too difficult to explain.

I'm surprised it didn't result in match-fixing/spot-fixing charges, none that I'm aware of at least.

 

[hk031992]

Donald actually has a good record in World Cups in general, but that one brain-freeze defines his legacy in World Cups now, due to which he has the honor of producing the single biggest individual choke in history of cricket.

Whatever his impact on that match was, he lost his team the semifinal and probably the World Cup with a moment of madness which is just too difficult to explain.

I'm surprised it didn't result in match-fixing/spot-fixing charges, none that I'm aware of at least.

one mistake does not diminish a great career. I don't think any knowledgable fan would ever see it that way.

 

[The_Odd_One]

As pointed out already, there are multiple reasons for why the likes of Pollock, Donald and some other SA players are apparently underrated, and some of the SA posters have also played the victim card of not having media power, fanbase etc. like the other teams.

The truth is that they are not underrated; they are rated just fine, and the reason is that they have lacked spine and have not delivered for SA in World Cups.

Forget winning the World Cup, they don't even have memorable, match-winning performances in World Cup knockouts.

I know that Test is the premier format, but when you compare SA players who have done brilliantly at Test level but haven't delivered in World Cups to players who have achieved both, how do you expect them to be rated higher?

How can you expect Kallis to be remembered in the same vein as Tendulkar or Ponting?

How can you expect Donald and Pollock to be rated as high as Wasim and McGrath?

That is not 'underrating', it is rating them according to their achievements which are below the other players. Same will happen to the likes of Amla, de Villiers etc. in the future and some folks will call them underrated in respect to players like Kohli and Dhoni etc.

The general public in Asia cares about World Cups more than Test cricket, which is why on a forum like PakPassion, SA players will appear to be underrated because nobody cares about their Test exploits and their failures in World Cups every 4 years stands out.

If you ask any casual cricket follower in Pakistan, he would rank someone like Starc above Steyn because he still has memory of Starc powering Australia to a World Cup win while Steyn got owned in the semifinal by Elliot.

The point is that as long as SA players don't get the guts to deliver in World Cups, they will always be in the shadows of players who have done it all, and there is nothing wrong with that.

As far Donald is concerned, yes he has the distinction and the honor of pulling off the biggest individual choke in cricket history. I complete disagree with [MENTION=137804]msb314[/MENTION], that it wasn't Donald's fault.

It has nothing to do with being a number 11. It is common sense and you would expect even a 15 year old who has only played at an amateur level to not freeze the way Donald did.

A player playing at that level should know that ball watching is a crime and when the ball is in-front of the wicket, it is the striker's call.

Doing it at any level is a choke, let alone a World Cup semifinal when 1 run was required in 3 deliveries. It was an unbelievably dumb mistake and there is no defense for it, except that Donald was a massive, massive bottler.

What did I just read!

1999 WC semi-final, Pollock's figures read 10-36-5 and Donald's 10-32-4. That's 9 out of 10 wickets. They dismissed Australia for just 213 runs and had done their part. What does choking as batsmen has to do with their bowling? Are we rating them as all-rounder? No. Are we rating them as bowlers? Yes.

Same match McGrath went for 51 runs and took just 1 wicket of Mark Boucher.

SA as a team has not done well in big tournaments but you can't underrate their players just because they did not win those trophies.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

What did I just read!

1999 WC semi-final, Pollock's figures read 10-36-5 and Donald's 10-32-4. That's 9 out of 10 wickets. They dismissed Australia for just 213 runs and had done their part. What does choking as batsmen has to do with their bowling? Are we rating them as all-rounder? No. Are we rating them as bowlers? Yes.

Same match McGrath went for 51 runs and took just 1 wicket of Mark Boucher.

SA as a team has not done well in big tournaments but you can't underrate their players just because they did not win those trophies.

Leave it bhai.

This thread is full of manufactured reasons.

Even if we assume the reasons, no one can explain why test loving Western media under-rates them. And what did Lara do in ODIs in WC to warrant supreme hype in general (if we go by that reasoning)?

This is like deciding on the answer and seeking the path.

Shocking really. But maybe not.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Is Broad's legacy decided by the 6 sixes off Yuvi?

Is Stokes's legacy decided by the epic choke job in WT20 finals?

Is Warne's legacy decided by being utterly destroyed by Aravinda and co in 1996 WC finals?

Is Tendulkar's legacy decided by the hook shot gone wrong in 2003 WC?

Is Kohli's legacy decided by the horrible hook shot to Johnson in 2015 WC?

Is Misbah's legacy decided by losing to India in WC 2011?

And the list goes on.....and on....and on....and on....and on.....forever.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Leave it bhai.

This thread is full of manufactured reasons.

Even if we assume the reasons, no one can explain why test loving Western media under-rates them. And what did Lara do in ODIs in WC to warrant supreme hype in general (if we go by that reasoning)?

This is like deciding on the answer and seeking the path.

Shocking really. But maybe not.

Yeah, just like Kallis scored soft runs, somebody who has 45 test centuries scored soft runs. Give me a break!

SA cricketers are criminally underrated despite their team always staying in the top 3 in both formats since their return in 1992.

 

[zulfiqar]

Unlike the Hayden thread (who is totally overrated), this is a good one! Donald was as good as anyone in his time... and I think the only reason these guys get underrated is because they never managed to win a World Cup. Unlike other sports, where teams have regular chances to win trophies yearly (some sports offer multiple trophies for grabs), cricketers in the 90s only had one premier tournament: World Cups '92, '96, '99. South Africa failed to even reach the finals on each occasion. I think that's the #1 reason these guys get underrated.

Nowadays, we have T20s, and soon we'll have Test Championships, and Player of the Years are more decorated (or at least the ICC tries). In the 90s, if you didn't win the World Cup, and if your name wasn't Sachin Tendulkar, you were a nobody, with the exception of a few West Indian players, who were still living on the glory of the WI teams of the past.

 

[Hasan123]

As pointed out already, there are multiple reasons for why the likes of Pollock, Donald and some other SA players are apparently underrated, and some of the SA posters have also played the victim card of not having media power, fanbase etc. like the other teams.

The truth is that they are not underrated; they are rated just fine, and the reason is that they have lacked spine and have not delivered for SA in World Cups.

Forget winning the World Cup, they don't even have memorable, match-winning performances in World Cup knockouts.

I know that Test is the premier format, but when you compare SA players who have done brilliantly at Test level but haven't delivered in World Cups to players who have achieved both, how do you expect them to be rated higher?

How can you expect Kallis to be remembered in the same vein as Tendulkar or Ponting?

How can you expect Donald and Pollock to be rated as high as Wasim and McGrath?

That is not 'underrating', it is rating them according to their achievements which are below the other players. Same will happen to the likes of Amla, de Villiers etc. in the future and some folks will call them underrated in respect to players like Kohli and Dhoni etc.

The general public in Asia cares about World Cups more than Test cricket, which is why on a forum like PakPassion, SA players will appear to be underrated because nobody cares about their Test exploits and their failures in World Cups every 4 years stands out.

If you ask any casual cricket follower in Pakistan, he would rank someone like Starc above Steyn because he still has memory of Starc powering Australia to a World Cup win while Steyn got owned in the semifinal by Elliot.

The point is that as long as SA players don't get the guts to deliver in World Cups, they will always be in the shadows of players who have done it all, and there is nothing wrong with that.

As far Donald is concerned, yes he has the distinction and the honor of pulling off the biggest individual choke in cricket history. I complete disagree with [MENTION=137804]msb314[/MENTION], that it wasn't Donald's fault.

It has nothing to do with being a number 11. It is common sense and you would expect even a 15 year old who has only played at an amateur level to not freeze the way Donald did.

A player playing at that level should know that ball watching is a crime and when the ball is in-front of the wicket, it is the striker's call.

Doing it at any level is a choke, let alone a World Cup semifinal when 1 run was required in 3 deliveries. It was an unbelievably dumb mistake and there is no defense for it, except that Donald was a massive, massive bottler.

Yes I understand that they have to achieve something at the world cup but look at Donalds record in world cups it's amazing.

That semi final run out was bad but the whole batting line up choked well before to even get SA in that position, even in them days 213 wasn't an impossible score to chase, so the rest of the line up choked even more than Donald. Donald figures in the match were decent as someone posted them.

My point is someone with his record in tests and odis and in icc tournaments deserves more recognition. He's hardly ever talked about when we talk about 90s bowlers. All I hear about is Wasim and Magrath. Donald,Pollock, Ambrose are hardly mentioned which is a shame.

 

[kingusama92]

Donald actually has a good record in World Cups in general, but that one brain-freeze defines his legacy in World Cups now, due to which he has the honor of producing the single biggest individual choke in history of cricket.

Whatever his impact on that match was, he lost his team the semifinal and probably the World Cup with a moment of madness which is just too difficult to explain.

I'm surprised it didn't result in match-fixing/spot-fixing charges, none that I'm aware of at least.

His legacy shouldn't be impacted by a brain freeze while batting.

1) He was a full out tailender (avg of 4)
2) He's the reason Australia ended on 213 in the first place.
3) What the hell were specialist batsmen doing above him? They bottled it.

If this is the reason he's being underrated, it's highly unfair considering the bowler he was.

 

[Bilal7]

South African batsmen are definitely not underrated. They play in the most difficult conditions for batting which allows them to be prepared for almost any playing condition overseas, which is why they have superbly balanced records.

 

[msb314]

As pointed out already, there are multiple reasons for why the likes of Pollock, Donald and some other SA players are apparently underrated, and some of the SA posters have also played the victim card of not having media power, fanbase etc. like the other teams.

The truth is that they are not underrated; they are rated just fine, and the reason is that they have lacked spine and have not delivered for SA in World Cups.

Forget winning the World Cup, they don't even have memorable, match-winning performances in World Cup knockouts.

I know that Test is the premier format, but when you compare SA players who have done brilliantly at Test level but haven't delivered in World Cups to players who have achieved both, how do you expect them to be rated higher?

How can you expect Kallis to be remembered in the same vein as Tendulkar or Ponting?

How can you expect Donald and Pollock to be rated as high as Wasim and McGrath?

That is not 'underrating', it is rating them according to their achievements which are below the other players. Same will happen to the likes of Amla, de Villiers etc. in the future and some folks will call them underrated in respect to players like Kohli and Dhoni etc.

The general public in Asia cares about World Cups more than Test cricket, which is why on a forum like PakPassion, SA players will appear to be underrated because nobody cares about their Test exploits and their failures in World Cups every 4 years stands out.

If you ask any casual cricket follower in Pakistan, he would rank someone like Starc above Steyn because he still has memory of Starc powering Australia to a World Cup win while Steyn got owned in the semifinal by Elliot.

The point is that as long as SA players don't get the guts to deliver in World Cups, they will always be in the shadows of players who have done it all, and there is nothing wrong with that.

As far Donald is concerned, yes he has the distinction and the honor of pulling off the biggest individual choke in cricket history. I complete disagree with [MENTION=137804]msb314[/MENTION], that it wasn't Donald's fault.

It has nothing to do with being a number 11. It is common sense and you would expect even a 15 year old who has only played at an amateur level to not freeze the way Donald did.

A player playing at that level should know that ball watching is a crime and when the ball is in-front of the wicket, it is the striker's call.

Doing it at any level is a choke, let alone a World Cup semifinal when 1 run was required in 3 deliveries. It was an unbelievably dumb mistake and there is no defense for it, except that Donald was a massive, massive bottler.

Klusener ran a non-existant run in the SF which was simply suicidal however you look at it.

Even if Donald had ran - Mark Waugh could have easily ran either Klusener or Donald out at either end. The ball was just too close to the fielder and there were two balls remaining anyway.

Klusener should bear larger responsibility for that defeat imo.

 

[PakLFC]

A good side but many if not most people for some reason find South Africa very boring to watch. Shaun Pollock was a good but boring player, just my opinion. I don't think Donald is under rated.

 

[street cricketer]

Donald I don't think is underrated. He is one of the best ever fast bowlers to play the game.

Pollock though is criminally underrated. I still don't know how he couldn't make even the nominations for the GOAT-ODI bowler poll.

 

[Bilal7]

Lol

Billoo, you are required to give your opinion on this. [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

I reply to posts that quote me.

What reply should I give? Younis Khan is not rated as highly as some of the other greats because he isn't as exciting to watch.

 

[Hasan123]

Donald I don't think is underrated. He is one of the best ever fast bowlers to play the game.

Pollock though is criminally underrated. I still don't know how he couldn't make even the nominations for the GOAT-ODI bowler poll.

Donald is also underated. Look at his world cup record.

 

[The_Odd_One]

In tests, Donald averages under 24 against all teams except Australia.

<b>If I remove Australia from Donald's record, he averages 20 at 44 SR against all other teams with 227 wickets in just 58 tests. These are remarkable stats considering that he started bowling when he was 26.</b>

Australia was the only opposition team against which Donald failed. However, almost every cricketer has failed against some country. Check Ponting's and Lara's average against India.

Not sure why should not Donald be rated higher just because his failure against one country.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Yeah, just like Kallis scored soft runs, somebody who has 45 test centuries scored soft runs. Give me a break!

SA cricketers are criminally underrated despite their team always staying in the top 3 in both formats since their return in 1992.

Kallis was a brute of a test bat.

Boring as hell but effective and clutch too.