Wasim or Waqar

[Matt79]

If you could only have one, which would you have. The best response under 100 words will receive a wonderful prize. (not really)

In the context of selecting a best-ever XI, most times I'd go for Wasim as the leftie would provide some extra variety, but head to head?

 

[luckyeddie]

Waqar had a far more deadly beamer.

 

[howardj]

Akram.

They were both largely on a par in terms of what they could do with a cricket ball.

But, like you say Matt, Akram offers something different (his left-handedness).

Moreover, he could bowl off such a short run, and yet be as quick as anyone.

Therefore, I'd take him, as he could perhaps bowl longer spells.

 

[Matt79]

I wonder whether Waqar ever took Symonds up on the offer to show him the best way to smuggle a Kookaburra Beast through Customs...

 

[Top_Cat]

Waqar. Wasim had a greater air of 'brilliance' about him but Waqar wanted to knock your freakin' teeth out. He even looks like a street brawler. He just had an incredible aggression about him in his demeanor and raw speed in the early days. He gave fast bowling its ***.

Wasim was Ritchie Cunningham, Waqar was the Fonze. Ayeeee.......

 

[silentstriker]

Waqar, just because I think the game needs a few more beamers.

 

[benchmark00]

Waqar on his commentary prowess alone.

"Right in the slot, that's a booooodiful shot"

 

[howardj]

'what a booody'

 

[Pedro Delgado]

If we saying at their best, Waqar easily.

 

[Fusion]

Wasim for me. Was a lefty and more versatile than Waqar. Had more in his arsenal and I believe bowled more intelligently. At their peaks, Waqar was more devastating. But since he so overwhelmingly relied on speed alone, he could not match Wasim in the long run.

 

[Fusion]

Not to mention if we take batting into account, then Wasim becomes even more valuable then Waqar.

 

[Langeveldt]

Wasim, because he was a good batsman as well..

 

[Sanz]

Not to mention if we take batting into account, then Wasim becomes even more valuable then Waqar.

Add His friendship with Salim Malik, He becomes invincible.

Wasim Any day. For me , Best bowler of all time.

 

[aussie]

Waqar, he seemed more destructive than Wasim when on top form, his unbelievable yorker to Lara & his spells in the 2001 natwest series shows how destructive he can be.

 

[adharcric]

Wasim, the more complete bowler and valuable option with the bat

 

[Goughy]

Wasim was a very good bowler. In fact I cannot deny he was excellent. However, Waqar is a good head and shoulders above him when they were in their prime.

Waqar in his pomp was like he was from another planet.

When you watched Wasim you thought "Hey, this guy is quality" but you still never thought he could be close to the best ever.

When you watched Waqar you thought "This guy is unbeleivable, Ive never seen anything like this before". For a period his strike rate was under 30 (stand to be corrected) and the most destructive bowler Ive seen.

This may sound harsh but Haynes was elevated to a higher level than he deserved because he partnered a superior player in Greenidge. I suspect the same is true with Wasim.

 

[steds]

Wasim.

 

[Goughy]

Wasim.

Oh, I nearly forgot that he played for the rainy side of the Pennines. Would you have said the same if he had played for Yorkshire?

 

[Right arm fast]

although i cant remember alot of the two playing all the footage ive seen o me suggests that wasim was better although i it would be hard to choose wasim would get my vote

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I'll take both, thanks.