Waqar Younis

[tooextracool]

Over the next 9 years he played another 54 tests but his figures were ordinary by comparison.

It just shows what can happen ina longer career particularly to fast bowlers. If Waqar had retired at the end of 1994 on in 1995, he would have been acclaimed as one of the greatest fast bowlers the game has ever seen (which he was) but his latter figures were achieved by a bowler not in his prime and now we judge him by his entire career records
.

err ive already mentioned that in this thread.....coughripoffcough.

 

[Zinzan]

Great bowler

Crap commentator

 

[Fiery]

Great bowler

Crap commentator

You're not wrong. Always agreeing for the sake of agreeing and bitching about his own teams tactics and sounds like English is his 3rd language. He says annoying things like cover instead of covers, e.g, "he hit's it through the cover". Sorry so say it but there is a severe lack of decent commentators from Asia in the game.

 

[SJS]

Sorry so say it but there is a severe lack of decent commentators from Asia in the game.

Yes. Thats true.
Unfortunately, just because the revenue , the bulk of it, is coming out of the sponsers from this region, starsports and ESPN seem to think they need to foist commentators from the subcontinent on us.

I wish the monopoly of Indian commentators on these channels would end and we could hear the best not just indigenous

PS. Just to reinstate, I am an Indian.

 

[membersstand]

the guy...the guy...the guy...The only guy

Record for most guys in a single post ?

 

[Choora]

I argued about Akram and not Waqar.

From what I saw of Waqar, in his period 1996-2002/3, he was a pretty mediocre bowler with nothing special.

Yeah but again you were unfortuante to have missed seeing Waqar Younis when he used to be the best bowler in the world. When you started watching him , he was in his decline , its just like if someone start watching Sachin today (for the first time) he would probably end up saying that the guy is a good batsman but not exactly great.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Astonishing that Alan Davidson is 5th in that list. My opinion of him as a bowler just went up another notch. A record like his playing in a time largely domniated by batsmen is truly magnificent.

 

[SJS]

Astonishing that Alan Davidson is 5th in that list. My opinion of him as a bowler just went up another notch. A record like his playing in a time largely domniated by batsmen is truly magnificent.

Fantastic bowler, Davidson. Great control and big inswinger and away cutter. He kept the batsman watchful all the time. No freebies from Alan Davidson.

Very useful lower order batsman and superb fielder.

 

[nightprowler10]

I remember one match against NZ. Pak made only 160 and Waqar and Wasim bowled so well and got NZ all out for 160 as well (Waqar toolk the last wicket)....it was a tie!

Waqar was superb.

I remember that game. Pakistan won the series 3-1-1 if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Richard]

Hadlee?

After he turned thirty, he played 51 more tests, he took 276 wickets at 19.46 - Awesome.

9-52.

There's plenty of others. Lillie, Thomson....

Thomson, you're having a laugh!
Thomson was nothing special, except perhaps in that '74\75 series (and believe me for the pedigree of some of those batsmen the standard of it was shocking), he was just a slightly-above-average Test-bowler.

 

[Richard]

Fantastic bowler, Davidson. Great control and big inswinger and away cutter. He kept the batsman watchful all the time. No freebies from Alan Davidson.

Very useful lower order batsman and superb fielder.

Alan Davidson has to be the most underrated cricketer of all-time.
Cetainly amongst the best bowlers of all, and could bat - yet hardly anyone knows his name outside the real-circles.

 

[Richard]

I wasn't bashing him! He's probably my all-time fav bowler! I'm old enough to have seen him at his very peak, man he was amazing.

I just meant if he was only 33 it's a terrible shame he's not still charging in. At 33 a quick's best years are probably behind him, but Mr McGrath has shown how effective quicks at the "veteran" stage can be!

McGrath and Waqar are totally different bowlers.
I think Gough has demonstrated how difficult it is for a bowler of the Waqar type to be successful into the mid-30s (Gough, remember, modelled himself on Waqar).
For a McGrath type bowler, with a very economical action and good height with large margin-for-error in length, dropping from the late 80s to the early 80s doesn't really matter.
For a Waqar\Gough type bowler it's incredibly hard to sustain your effectiveness upon that, given the large reliance on extra margin-for-error created by the pace, and the extraordinary "sling" that takes-up so much effort.
If Shoaib Akhtar's still going in 2 years time, for instance, I'll be amazed. Yet Andy Caddick could easily have 3 good years left in him.

 

[Richard]

I seriously dont know how anyone can say Waqar was not erratic when it came to line and length.
One can make a good case for Akram- IMO, he was consistent over that aspect but a great at that aspect- McGrath, Ambrose, Hadlee, marshall etc. definately had more consistency over line and length than Akram.
but Waqar ?
C'mon........if it wasnt for his ability to conjure up magic balls ever so often, he wouldnt be where he ended up......he was pretty poor when it came to line and length bowling consistently.

No, he just wasn't exceptional.
He was still far better than most bowlers of the current age are. If you compare him to Anderson, Harmison and Jones - no contest.
Yes, though, he wasn't quite as accurate as most of the great bowlers were - but he had something perhaps no other bowler has had in the post-1930 era - the regularity of devestating deliveries.