-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Who's the better bowler, Mk II?
- Thread starter Matt79
- Start date
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Your signature makes that post much funnier...
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
This is actually a more interesting question, because there was a time, albeit a short one, when Waqar was quite conceivably a better bowler than anyone except Malcolm Marshall.
Sadly for him, there was also a decidedly lengthy period of fair mediocrity, where searingly good games were sandwiched between 3 or 4 anodyne ones.
Imran was good for far, far, far longer, if never as sensationally marvellous as Waqar was for his first 4 years.
Sadly for him, there was also a decidedly lengthy period of fair mediocrity, where searingly good games were sandwiched between 3 or 4 anodyne ones.
Imran was good for far, far, far longer, if never as sensationally marvellous as Waqar was for his first 4 years.
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
At Waqar's peak, he was the best pacer of all time, bar none. But that peak, unfortunately, didn't last long enough for me to vote for him ahead of Imram.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Who?
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
Check out the poll options.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
Im going to abstain on this one.
Waqar for a brief time was possibly the best quick I have seen. Someting that never crossed my mind watching Wasim.
Obviously he declined from a great to a mere good bowler after his sensational start.
To average under 20, with a strike rate of a wicket every 6 overs, a fifer every 2nd game and 5 and 1/2 wickets a Test is crazy good. However, around 30 Tests on it declined and his legacy has been a little tainted.
For a period though it was like he was from another planet.
Without watching Imran indepth at his peak it is hard for me to compare fairly with a pplayer like Waqar that I rate so highly.
Waqar for a brief time was possibly the best quick I have seen. Someting that never crossed my mind watching Wasim.
Obviously he declined from a great to a mere good bowler after his sensational start.
To average under 20, with a strike rate of a wicket every 6 overs, a fifer every 2nd game and 5 and 1/2 wickets a Test is crazy good. However, around 30 Tests on it declined and his legacy has been a little tainted.
For a period though it was like he was from another planet.
Without watching Imran indepth at his peak it is hard for me to compare fairly with a pplayer like Waqar that I rate so highly.
Matt79
Global Moderator
Hey - who messed with my poll options??? Now we'll never know whether people rate Imram Khan - the little known left-arm swing merchant from Faisalbad...
BhupinderSingh
Banned
Imran Khan.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Waqar for me, simply because the stuff that I've seen of him, is basically better than any other quick bowling ever.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I don't know that it has. So long as people remain aware of this astonishing start to his career, rather than being shallow enough to purely look at the average they're given by a CricInfo player-page, I don't think his legacy will be tainted at all.
Most educated observers of the game - and this isn't even by any stretch limited to this forum - are well aware of it. I only wish I was following closely then - I have some memory of the summer of 1992, but not that much (I was just under 7 years old). As it is, it's only possible to appreciate, rather than revel in, the Waqar deeds.
Personally, I don't like to judge his early career by his later one. For a time, there's no two ways about it, he was as devastating as anyone could really hope to be. And longer than most - everyone fairly good has had the odd 2 or 3 Tests, or the odd series even, where they go like that, but not 30-odd games from the very start of a career.
The fact that he became a fairly middling bowler thereafter says just that - he was a middling bowler thereafter. It doesn't detract at all from his early sensations.