What's new

Why is Shaun Pollock so under rated?

I've always considered him the best all rounder of his time. One my all time favorites.
 
Slog said:
For me a very basic method (and well you could say lazy but at least it gives you a picture of sorts for rudimentary comparison) of seeing the worth of an all rounder is to subtract the bowling average from the batting average and see what difference do you get. A disclaimer should be that the player should have atleast 150 wickets and 1500 runs.
Click to expand...


Should differentiate between batting and bowling allrounders while applying this method.

The difference traditionally is greater for batting allrounders than bowling ones.

For batting allrounders, since batting is their primary task, their batting average could be in 50s while bowling average in 30s would be enough to give them the difference of 20 in averages.

For bowling allrounders, their bowling average could be in early 20s while they have to average 40+ with the bat to have a difference of around 20, which is too much to ask from them specially considering that they are likely to be ATGs as a bowlers alone.

Its easier for batting allrounders to maintain high difference as compared to bowling allrounders. Averaging 40 with the bat means that they are good enough to be in the team as a batsman alone, while averaging in 30s with the ball may not be enough.


OT, Pollock was more of a work horse, used to bowl long spells for SA, used to seamed the ball and kept it tight, and mostly relied on batsman to make mistakes rather than bowl unplayable deliveries. Thats why his strike rate is on higher side as compared to other bowlers with similar averages.

Bowled in SA most of his career, where conditions would support his style of bowling. Had a good record in Asia but I usually don't give much weight to bowlers having good record against Pakistan, since our batting line-up gives wickets even to the ones who don't deserve much.

In India, yes, he have a good enough average but he has a SR of 75, shows that he can't produce wickets on will, have to rely more on batsmen making mistake.

He still is under-rated, haven't much think about how he is rated as compared to other bowling all-rounders but he surely is an ATG allrounder, not as a bowler alone.

With him and Kallis in the team, SA were easily playing with 12 high class players. They have somewhat found his replacement in Philander, but long way to go before Philander's achievements could be matched with Pollock's.

They wouldn't be able to replace Kallis, he was once in a generation allrounder. Already their team looks weaker than it used to be 3-4 years ago, but their isn't much quality teams going around so SA still is likely to keep #1 position, but it won't be a smooth ride for them hereon.
 
Shame Brett Schultz was so injury prone-can you imagine him Donald, Pollock & Ntini together?
 
TheNightWatchman said:
Me too. I've always been a bigger fan of bowling allrounders which is why I prefer Imran to Sobers and Pollock to Kallis. I was just curious why you thought so
Click to expand...

Same here, an ATG bowler with a batting average above 30 would be among the most important members in my team. Such a shame that I missed the era of those 4 great all rounders - Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil. Although, Imran was head and shoulders above the others, the rest of them were great all rounders too in their own rights.
 
Hitman said:
Same here, an ATG bowler with a batting average above 30 would be among the most important members in my team. Such a shame that I missed the era of those 4 great all rounders - Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil. Although, Imran was head and shoulders above the others, the rest of them were great all rounders too in their own rights.
Click to expand...

5-Ravi Shastri.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
Goodness me, just have a look at Shaun's batting averages. He is probably averaging higher as a batsman in few major nations than a lot of specialist batsmen.
Click to expand...

Means nothing. Just two test centuries in 108 tests tell the real story. 39 not outs out of 156 innings does too.
 
Hitman said:
Same here, an ATG bowler with a batting average above 30 would be among the most important members in my team. Such a shame that I missed the era of those 4 great all rounders - Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil. Although, Imran was head and shoulders above the others, the rest of them were great all rounders too in their own rights.
Click to expand...

He was the best bowler (with Hadlee), the second-best batter behind Botham, and the third-best fielder.

He was the best captain, though.
 
Shaun Pollock gets limited credit because of what he was.

He started off as a bowling all-rounder (like Hadlee) who could bat like a good number 8 but was a frontline bowler.

But because he was not very quick, as he aged he became a balanced all-rounder like Imran Khan or Keith Miller who could bat around number 7. But by then he wasn't really a top quality bowler in the class of Imran or Miller, so he was a fairly ordinary balanced all-rounder.

Meanwhile the team contained Jacques Kallis, who was a genuine batting all-rounder like Garry Sobers, who was just a much better cricketer than Pollock was.
 
Robert said:
Means nothing. Just two test centuries in 108 tests tell the real story. 39 not outs out of 156 innings does too.
Click to expand...

That pretty much nails it regarding batting. Especially when compares to other prominent A/R.
Pollock - 108 test ,avg 32.31 , 100's 2 , 50's 16
Hadlee - 86 test , 27.16 avg , 100's 2 , 50's 15
Kapil - 131 test ,avg 31.05 , 100's 8 , 50's 27
Botham - 102 test ,avg 33.54 , 100's 14 , 50's 22
Imran - 88 test ,avg 37.69 , 100's 6 , 50's 18
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
Means nothing. Just two test centuries in 108 tests tell the real story. 39 not outs out of 156 innings does too.
Click to expand...

Worth remembering he had an incredibly strong batting line-up coming in ahead of him-Gibbs, Kirsten, Cullinan, Cronje, Kallis, Rhodes, & either of Boucher or Kluenser for instance. Botham generally batted six for England & didn't have a great top five ahead of him most of the time & probably Knott & Emburey behind him for support so was able to spend more time at the crease whereas Pollock was coming in at eight with only one batsman left for company & then guys like Donald & Nitini as the tail.
 
jimbob5 said:
Worth remembering he had an incredibly strong batting line-up coming in ahead of him-Gibbs, Kirsten, Cullinan, Cronje, Kallis, Rhodes, & either of Boucher or Kluenser for instance. Botham generally batted six for England & didn't have a great top five ahead of him most of the time & probably Knott & Emburey behind him for support so was able to spend more time at the crease whereas Pollock was coming in at eight with only one batsman left for company & then guys like Donald & Nitini as the tail.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call that incredibly strong. It was hardly the Windies of the fifties, for instance.

Botham usually had Boycott, Gooch, Gower, Lamb and Gatting ahead of him. He forced his way up the order from #8 by sheer weight of runs. Pollock never did that.
 
Last edited:
jeetu said:
That pretty much nails it regarding batting. Especially when compares to other prominent A/R.
Pollock - 108 test ,avg 32.31 , 100's 2 , 50's 16
Hadlee - 86 test , 27.16 avg , 100's 2 , 50's 15
Kapil - 131 test ,avg 31.05 , 100's 8 , 50's 27
Botham - 102 test ,avg 33.54 , 100's 14 , 50's 22
Imran - 88 test ,avg 37.69 , 100's 6 , 50's 18
Click to expand...

Wow, look at Bothman's figures, 14 Test centuries is no joke for someone who was primarily a bowling all rounder. Add to that he scored his runs at an SR of 60, fantastic SR to have in Tests even by today's standards. Lara played at an SR of 60, so you can imagine how valuable an SR of 60 in Tests is.
 
Hitman said:
Wow, look at Bothman's figures, 14 Test centuries is no joke for someone who was primarily a bowling all rounder. Add to that he scored his runs at an SR of 60, fantastic SR to have in Tests even by today's standards. Lara played at an SR of 60, so you can imagine how valuable an SR of 60 in Tests is.
Click to expand...

Kapil's S/R was 81 at about the same batting average of Botham! And Dev made three 100s and a 98 against the WI team (three of these knocks were in the WI and two of them against the likes of Marshall, Roberts,Holding and Garner) and most of these knocks were at over a run a ball!
 
IndianWillow said:
Kapil's S/R was 81 at about the same batting average of Botham! And Dev made three 100s and a 98 against the WI team (three of these knocks were in the WI and two of them against the likes of Marshall, Roberts,Holding and Garner) and most of these knocks were at over a run a ball!
Click to expand...

Kapil was a devastating batsman of his time, although inconsistent.
 
IndianWillow said:
Kapil's S/R was 81 at about the same batting average of Botham! And Dev made three 100s and a 98 against the WI team (three of these knocks were in the WI and two of them against the likes of Marshall, Roberts,Holding and Garner) and most of these knocks were at over a run a ball!
Click to expand...

Those three centuries are remarkable. He didn't get any against Australia though, while Botham got five.

I see them as equals really - I'll put Botham a bit ahead as a batter and Kapil a bit ahead as a bowler.

My abiding memory of Kapil are those four sixes off successive balls to avoid the follow-on at Lord's. Botham would have hit three sixes and then pinched the strike, but Kapil went for the fourth and got it. Extraordinary audacity!
 
Robert said:
I wouldn't call that incredibly strong. It was hardly the Windies of the fifties, for instance.

Botham usually had Boycott, Gooch, Gower, Lamb and Gatting ahead of him. He forced his way up the order from #8 by sheer weight of runs. Pollock never did that.
Click to expand...

Sure-because Botham despite his lack of footwork was a tremendous batsman-his 14 test tons is testament to that & was probably better than Gatting who took about 8 years to hit his first test hundred. Pollock was never going to be at that level & who were you going to move down the order to allow him to bat top six?
 
Robert said:
Those three centuries are remarkable. He didn't get any against Australia though, while Botham got five.

I see them as equals really - I'll put Botham a bit ahead as a batter and Kapil a bit ahead as a bowler.

My abiding memory of Kapil are those four sixes off successive balls to avoid the follow-on at Lord's. Botham would have hit three sixes and then pinched the strike, but Kapil went for the fourth and got it. Extraordinary audacity!
Click to expand...

wasn't Kapil so great against WI with bat and bowl? I think he had one or two pretty good series against them who were the best team around those times.
 
Robert said:
I wouldn't call that incredibly strong. It was hardly the Windies of the fifties, for instance.

Botham usually had Boycott, Gooch, Gower, Lamb and Gatting ahead of him. He forced his way up the order from #8 by sheer weight of runs. Pollock never did that.
Click to expand...

that line up is not strong like WI or Aus but the thing is they were all proper batsman so he is going to bat after them being a bowler.
 
jeetu said:
That pretty much nails it regarding batting. Especially when compares to other prominent A/R.
Pollock - 108 test ,avg 32.31 , 100's 2 , 50's 16
Hadlee - 86 test , 27.16 avg , 100's 2 , 50's 15
Kapil - 131 test ,avg 31.05 , 100's 8 , 50's 27
Botham - 102 test ,avg 33.54 , 100's 14 , 50's 22
Imran - 88 test ,avg 37.69 , 100's 6 , 50's 18
Click to expand...


compares very well with Hadlee though.

Botham, what a beast. He was the best all round talent, maybe after Miller. Miller is the greatest all rounder talent wise and stats wise.
 
Massive facepalm at people saying Pollock wasn't threatening as a bowler. They probably have forgotten his bullying days. Pollock was a massive challenge for all.
 
Pollock, when he got his 200th wicket, averaged something like 18 and when he got his 300th wicket, he averaged something like 20. He deteriorated after he was sacked from captaincy. You can check his year to year record and you will notice he started his slide since his sacking. The last 3 years of his career pulled down his career and lot of people tend to remember him by that. But he was a fantastic bowler who bowled line and length to get his wickets. If he has the record he has but bowled yorker, swingers ala Akram, he would have been rated higher by people who have no understanding of cricket.
 
If i were to buy a cricketer back in 90s, i'd put all my money on Pollock. Pollock + Fab 4 + Indian spinners = Mayhem
 
sivaji said:
wasn't Kapil so great against WI with bat and bowl? I think he had one or two pretty good series against them who were the best team around those times.
Click to expand...

One thing I rate about Kapil is that he travelled better than Botham with the ball, getting good returns in both AUS and WI.

Botham's spell as skipper was a disaster, but he did have to cope with ten tests in a row against WI at pretty much their all-time summit. The side he took to WI was very weak in the bowling, with no Willis, a tyro Dilley and Robin Jackman running in at Greenidge, Haynes, Richards and Lloyd in their yard.
 
Kapil was the top performer against West Indies among all great all rounders. Reason why people rate him that high, pretty gusty performer. His resume is rather impressive.
 
Imran was undoubtedly the best batsman-if he had just played as a batsman he probably would have averaged 50 rather than the near 38 he did. Hadlee was the best bowler followed by Imran. Botham was the best all-rounder & fielder.
 
jimbob5 said:
Imran was undoubtedly the best batsman-if he had just played as a batsman he probably would have averaged 50 rather than the near 38 he did. Hadlee was the best bowler followed by Imran. Botham was the best all-rounder & fielder.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I was thinking of something in the 55-58 range.
 
SA with Pollock , Kallis and klusner in same team could not win a WC is really baffling.
 
jimbob5 said:
Imran was undoubtedly the best batsman-if he had just played as a batsman he probably would have averaged 50 rather than the near 38 he did. Hadlee was the best bowler followed by Imran. Botham was the best all-rounder & fielder.
Click to expand...
You are way off Imran was the best bowler better then Hadlee but Botham was the best batsman
 
jimbob5 said:
Imran was undoubtedly the best batsman-if he had just played as a batsman he probably would have averaged 50 rather than the near 38 he did. Hadlee was the best bowler followed by Imran. Botham was the best all-rounder & fielder.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. He was a test-class batter, but let's not get carried away. He was not in the class of Richards, Miandad and Border.

Remember that 37 average included a great number of not-outs - one innings in every five, compared to about one-in-25 for Botham and one-in-twelve for Kapil.

He did get a century against Clarke-Croft-Marshall-Garner at Lahore, which was his finest hour with the bat.

Usually, his strength was making sure that the tail was not blown away and getting gritty fifties. He had a problem in that his left hand would not close properly, and that probably hampered him as a batter. He had to put several rubber sleeves on the top of the bat-handle so that it was thick enough for him to grip it.

Regarding bowling I would put him in the same league as Hadlee or maybe even slightly ahead as the Kiwi's nerve sometimes went if the Windies or Botham got after him, and he would start bowling line and length and put the field back, while Imran kept attacking no matter what.
 
Justcrazy said:
SA with Pollock , Kallis and klusner in same team could not win a WC is really baffling.
Click to expand...

They were easily the best team in 1999. Problem was they kept bringing Lance in too late-it worked in the group games when he came in & bludgeoned a quick 40 or 50, but look what he did in the semi-final batting at 8, they really should have bought him in at 6 & dropped Kallis who had a strike rate of 57 odd in that game down behind Rhodes, him & Pollock who also belted quick runs at 7.
 
Robert said:
I doubt it. He was a test-class batter, but let's not get carried away. He was not in the class of Richards, Miandad and Border.

Remember that 37 average included a great number of not-outs - one innings in every five, compared to about one-in-25 for Botham and one-in-twelve for Kapil.

He did get a century against Clarke-Croft-Marshall-Garner at Lahore, which was his finest hour with the bat.

Usually, his strength was making sure that the tail was not blown away and getting gritty fifties. He had a problem in that his left hand would not close properly, and that probably hampered him as a batter. He had to put several rubber sleeves on the top of the bat-handle so that it was thick enough for him to grip it.

Regarding bowling I would put him in the same league as Hadlee or maybe even slightly ahead as the Kiwi's nerve sometimes went if the Windies or Botham got after him, and he would start bowling line and length and put the field back, while Imran kept attacking no matter what.
Click to expand...

I did say probably, but you could see him getting better & better with the bat as he got older & his bowling duties decreased or when he wasn't bowling at all in some cases. He had a great technique which the others didn't & a calmness/level head they didn't. He was such a steadying influence like when he carried Wasim through in that great partnership that saved a test against Australia & the WC Final where he pushed himself up to 3 after the openers went early & played a brilliant innings of accumulation with Javed that set the foundation for Inzy & Wasim to come in & blast the last 10 overs.
 
jimbob5 said:
I did say probably, but you could see him getting better & better with the bat as he got older & his bowling duties decreased or when he wasn't bowling at all in some cases. He had a great technique which the others didn't & a calmness/level head they didn't.
Click to expand...

I'd say he was about equivalent to Mudasser Nazar and Qasim Omar as a batter, but behind Zaheer Abbas and Salim Malik.

I agree that Imran's batting got gradually better. Botham's went the other way which was frustrating. After the Englishman's injuries stared to pile up from 1983 onwards, he could have turned himself into a test match #4 and Collingwood-type bowler, giving his skipper ten tidy overs a day and breaking a few partnerships. Could have finished on twenty test centuries. He didn't work hard enough on his craft.
 
Under-rated? Not IMO.

He should have done more with the bat though. He could actually bat.
 
Robert said:
Thaty does count against him.

Mind you, many top bowlers have an Achilles heel against some oppo or other.

- Wasim was not very good vs England, home or away.

- Steyn has not done much against us either

- Botham did poorly against WI

- Warne was not great in India.
Click to expand...

Looking at this thread shows how biased most posters are. Almost all players have their bogey team yet South Africans are underrated because Australia was better than them? How sway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
How did Shaun Pollock manage to achieve so much success as a bowler?
2
Replies
158
Views
3K
Van_Sri
Van_Sri
T
Is Imran Khan the greatest Test cricketer since 1970?
Replies
39
Views
771
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
mominsaigol
Why do some Test greats struggle in White-Ball cricket and vice versa?
Replies
65
Views
986
kron
K
T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
20
Views
692
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
mominsaigol
[PICTURES] A message for Babar Azam and his fans: Focus on ODIs and retire from Test and T20I
2 3 4
Replies
295
Views
6K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
Back
Top