• 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.

Waqar Younis

Hit4Six

U19 Debutant
when you all think about the best bowlers of the 90s where would you rate Waqar? and in all time fast bowelrs where would you rate him?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
All-time - just below the "very top" bracket. If he'd been that little bit more accurate, however, he'd be up there with Malcolm Marshall as possibly the best seamer of the comparable age (1930-onwards).
'90s - one of a legion of great bowlers (along with Donald, Pollock, his parter Wasim, Ambrose, Walsh, Vaas, McGrath, Fleming, Streak, Srinath, Allott, Nash and, Cairns [the last three who would all IMO have been better than they turned-out but for injury]) most of whom were capable of extracting something from any surface. One of the big parts of the greatest decade for bowling in the game's history IMO.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard said:
All-time - just below the "very top" bracket. If he'd been that little bit more accurate, however, he'd be up there with Malcolm Marshall as possibly the best seamer of the comparable age (1930-onwards).
'90s - one of a legion of great bowlers (along with Donald, Pollock, his parter Wasim, Ambrose, Walsh, Vaas, McGrath, Fleming, Streak, Srinath, Allott, Nash and, Cairns [the last three who would all IMO have been better than they turned-out but for injury]) most of whom were capable of extracting something from any surface. One of the big parts of the greatest decade for bowling in the game's history IMO.
i am sure you say these things to stir up some sort of CW controversy.

Those I have highlighted will not in 50 years time be looked back on as great bowlers on the international scene..merely decent enough bowlers, who on their day could do some damage
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
If so it's because of them tailing-off, to different extents, in the later stages of their careers.
Streak, especially, was a devestating bowler before a nasty injury in early 1999 - averaging 24-5 in Test-cricket.
I'm sorry, but I genuinely believe all the bowlers I named played a large part in making the '90s the greatest decade for bowling.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard said:
If so it's because of them tailing-off, to different extents, in the later stages of their careers.
Streak, especially, was a devestating bowler before a nasty injury in early 1999 - averaging 24-5 in Test-cricket.
I'm sorry, but I genuinely believe all the bowlers I named played a large part in making the '90s the greatest decade for bowling.
Streak wasnt a devestating bowler before 99 he was a decent fast bowler...he had his injury in about 1996 I think(that was the real turning point in his career), before which he was genuinely fast and did tak wickets at a fair rate of knots....but this period only lasted for a fairly brief spell..certainly not long enough to be called an all time great fast bowler.

I'm sorry but if you list Fleming,Nash,Allott and Vaas in the top dozen or so bowlers of that decade, I think maybe the 90's wasnt that strong in the fast bowling department.

have a look at the 80's...Holding, Croft,Garner,Marshall,Bishop,Ambrose,Walsh(I still have my doubts about Walsh as being a true master of fast bowling, I personally think all I have mentioned here before Walsh were actually better bowlers than Walsh..but thats just my opinion), Hadlee,Lillee,Imran,Wasim were all good enough to be considered great bowlers..and then you even have bowlers like Geoff lawson,Dilley (on his day very good and fast),Alderman and others I cant think of ( :D ) who were very good bowlers, certainly better than Nash anyway

Go back to the 70's...the list is as long then as well.

So...really do you think that the fast bowlers of the 90's were, in depth, that good..admittedly the top ones were very very good (For me those are,Ambrose,McGrath,Wasim,Donald and Pollock..3 of those actually established themselves in first class cricket in the 80's)
 

Bouncer

State Regular
Certainly the best in 1990's, people who dont agree just give me any other bolwer who turned as many gameas around as he did in 1990's.? Ambrose, Donald even Wasim didnt win same # of games as Waqar.....

What saperated him from rest, his eager ness to perform and get other person out #3, # 9 it didnt matter, he would just knock'em over....he had probably the most mental strength as fast bolwer in 90's he was winning games and winning games consistenly, this is the key word(which was not the case with wasim donald and ambrose) from the end of his first season at international season.....

akrem started his career in 1984 but effectively 1989 was the season from when he consistenly started winning games.
Ambrose started in 1988, but till 1991-92 he did not started wining game consistenly..........
DOnald in 1992 took ten wickets against India but his next ten wicket haul came in late 1995 against ZIm......so i have no doubt that in 1990's Waqar was the Champion fast bowler, The best of'em all.
 
Last edited:

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
Bouncer said:
so i have no doubt that in 1990's Waqar was the Champion fats bowler, The best of'em all.
I wouldn't go that far. I think Ambrose was the most consitent performer if you take the whole decade of 90s, with McGrath in the same league, although he came into the picture only at the middle of the decade. Akram, Waqar and Donald are the next in line who were equally dangerous as the above two but were not as consistent as them for the whole decade. Walsh comes after that who just kept chipping in with Ambrose invoking the most fear in that attack.

The real Waqar Younis didn't last too long to claim the spot of the greatest bowler of the decade. But for the period between 1990-1994, he was probably the most feared bowler in the world.
 

Waughney

International Debutant
Waqar was absolutely amazing towards the beginning of his career, if he could've maintained that form right throughout it, imagine how good his career stats would be.
 

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
If Waqar maintained his form of 1990-1994 for a better part of his career and wasn't plagued by injuries that forced him to cut his pace, I think it won't be an exaggeration to say that he would have turned out to be the greatest fast bowler of all time.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Hit4Six said:
when you all think about the best bowlers of the 90s where would you rate Waqar? and in all time fast bowelrs where would you rate him?
He is one of the great bowlers the game has seen.

If there is one thing that seems to make him look a bit 'less' than others it is what appears to be a 'sameness' to his bowling. He appears to be lacking in variation. But thats really misleading. His line was so good that it gave that impression.

Secondly he seems to lack the volatility and the outward aggression in persona which is the hallmark of pace bowlers.

He had everytrhing, speed, accuracy, movement in the air and off the wicket and was very penetrative. If there is any modern bowler who is under rated it is Waqar.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Swervy said:
Those I have highlighted will not in 50 years time be looked back on as great bowlers on the international scene.
Why 50 years, within 5 years of retirement they'll be forgotten.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Swervy said:
Streak wasnt a devestating bowler before 99 he was a decent fast bowler...he had his injury in about 1996 I think(that was the real turning point in his career), before which he was genuinely fast and did tak wickets at a fair rate of knots....but this period only lasted for a fairly brief spell..certainly not long enough to be called an all time great fast bowler.
Maybe he had an injury in 1996 (don't know about that) but believe me, he certainly had a very nasty injury in 1999, that forced him to cut his pace. In WC99 there was a game where Henry Olonga was clocking 89mph and Streak was being made to look pedestrian (80 tops). A South African commentator (might have been Dave Richardson) was saying that last year Streak could have done that. I never actually saw him bowl before WC99, so I just had to take his word.
I'm sorry but if you list Fleming,Nash,Allott and Vaas in the top dozen or so bowlers of that decade, I think maybe the 90's wasnt that strong in the fast bowling department.

have a look at the 80's...Holding, Croft,Garner,Marshall,Bishop,Ambrose,Walsh(I still have my doubts about Walsh as being a true master of fast bowling, I personally think all I have mentioned here before Walsh were actually better bowlers than Walsh..but thats just my opinion), Hadlee,Lillee,Imran,Wasim were all good enough to be considered great bowlers..and then you even have bowlers like Geoff lawson,Dilley (on his day very good and fast),Alderman and others I cant think of ( :D ) who were very good bowlers, certainly better than Nash anyway

Go back to the 70's...the list is as long then as well.

So...really do you think that the fast bowlers of the 90's were, in depth, that good..admittedly the top ones were very very good (For me those are,Ambrose,McGrath,Wasim,Donald and Pollock..3 of those actually established themselves in first class cricket in the 80's)
Quite clearly you've never seen Dion Nash bowl before all his injuries. His career followed a similar pattern to Angus Fraser, and IMO they could both have been bowlers who took 300 Test-wickets at 24-5 if they'd had the injury record of, say, a Walsh.
Who, incidentally, I agree with you about not being perhaps quite as good as some seem to think - he was truly brilliant only in perhaps the last 2-3 years of his Test-career. Nonetheless, a Test-match bowling average of 24 is not to be sniffed at. If he wasn't as good as Marshall, Ambrose and Holding, that's hardly much of a slight.
Personally I think the 70s, 80s and 90s were all exceptional decades for seam-bowling - but the presence in the 90s of Murali, Mushtaq Ahmed and Warne (plus Saqlain and Harbhajan towards the end) means the '90s shades it.
 

ReallyCrazy

Banned
Waqar was certainly the most devastating bowler. He's got the record of having the best strike rate in test cricket....i think its 43 and he played 88 tests.

At one point, he was the fastest bowler in the world and was also the most feared. His in swinging yorkers (toe crushers) were just awesome. He had a great start to his career (I think Sachin was his first wicket) and then tapered off from '96 onwards.

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.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Richard said:
All-time - just below the "very top" bracket. If he'd been that little bit more accurate, however, he'd be up there with Malcolm Marshall
an interesting way of looking at it is that if waqar had not played a test after 95(6 whole years since his debut) when his average was in the 19s he might have ended up being amongst the very best of all time. unfortunately now most people wouldnt even consider him in an all time XI.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Swervy said:
I'm sorry but if you list Fleming,Nash,Allott and Vaas in the top dozen or so bowlers of that decade, I think maybe the 90's wasnt that strong in the fast bowling department.
nothing wrong with fleming, before his last game against india he was averaging below 25, an especially good average for someone who played as many series in the sub continent. under-rated, didnt get too many opportunities, and dropped after 1 poor game in india so i would say unlucky.....
 

Top