Bond vs. Asif - who was a bigger loss for cricket?

The mid to late 2000s was a pretty fallow period for world class fast-bowling. McGrath was retiring, Shoaib was sputtering, Brett Lee was inconsistent. The only really high class consistent pacer I recall was Steyn.

The two pacers who defied this trend were Bond and Mohd Asif. Both had short careers but ended up with figures that promised more.

Bond was just a thoroughbred fast bowler, lovely action, lively pace, terrific swing and a deadly yorker. But injuries dogged him and robbed him of plenty of tests in his best years.

Asif was a fox and looked for a time to be McGrath's natural heir. On a pitch with a touch of seam or swing, he could be unplayable, and was extremely intelligent. Both DeVillier and KP have said he was the best they faced. But we all know what happened to him.

Who was a bigger loss to cricket?

most here will say Bond.

Asif has done his legacy no favours with all his dramas

I'd say Asif simply because he is a much rarer breed of bowler in modern cricket. A master of the subtleties of swing and seam, without the kind of pace a guy like Anderson has, or the bounce of McGrath. The closest parallel in the last couple of decades who has been successful is probably Bhuvi, and he's great but not as good as Asif was. Asif was a throwback to an older era.

There are a few bowlers who are in the mould of Bond -Steyn, Pattinson, even a guy like Southee- but almost no one like Asif. So id say he's more sorely missed.

I still remember that Karachi spell from Asif against us, best seam bowling spectacle ever, and I've watched enough of Mcgrath and Ambrose to attest this fact. But my feelings for Asif are same as that for Azharuddin, Azhar was a genius and probably would have been my most favourite batsman of all time had he not brought disrepute to the game.

***** said:

I'd say Asif simply because he is a much rarer breed of bowler in modern cricket. A master of the subtleties of swing and seam, without the kind of pace a guy like Anderson has, or the bounce of McGrath. The closest parallel in the last couple of decades who has been successful is probably Bhuvi, and he's great but not as good as Asif was. Asif was a throwback to an older era.

There are a few bowlers who are in the mould of Bond -Steyn, Pattinson, even a guy like Southee- but almost no one like Asif. So id say he's more sorely missed.

Click to expand...

Asif was a lot more like Broad, I don't see any similarity to Bhuvi tbh.

Bond obviously. Loved that guy.

Bond - all Asif's troubles were self-inflicted

I was a big fan of both. That NZ-Pak series in 09 when Akmal made his debut was a really enjoyable one, purely because of Bond vs Asif contest. Both dominated that series, and add in a young promising Aamir at the time, it was a great series for fast bowling.

If Bond was less injury prone, and Asif not a controversy magnet, both would have given Steyn legitimate competition for best in the world.

Personally, I enjoyed watching Asif more. The lazy run up, wristy action, the cunning smile that showed he knew exactly what he was doing. Just brilliant.

Bond was a more exciting bowler, an express bowler that could get genuine swing. He also wasn't a ****ing cheat.

So Bond.

***** said:

I'd say Asif simply because he is a much rarer breed of bowler in modern cricket. A master of the subtleties of swing and seam, without the kind of pace a guy like Anderson has, or the bounce of McGrath. The closest parallel in the last couple of decades who has been successful is probably Bhuvi, and he's great but not as good as Asif was. Asif was a throwback to an older era.

There are a few bowlers who are in the mould of Bond -Steyn, Pattinson, even a guy like Southee- but almost no one like Asif. So id say he's more sorely missed.

Click to expand...

Philander.

subshakerz said:

Bond was just a thoroughbred fast bowler, lovely action, lively pace, terrific swing and a deadly yorker. But injuries dogged him and robbed him of plenty of tests in his best years.

Click to expand...

Also don't forget the BCCI bullying the ICC to ban him for 2 years for playing in the ICL, even though he'd received a NOC to play by NZC.

hendrix said:

Also don't forget the BCCI bullying the ICC to ban him for 2 years for playing in the ICL, even though he'd received a NOC to play by NZC.

Click to expand...

Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurgh

That was so frustrating

Bond was exhilarating to watch when got in rhythm. Made all the more spectacular by the excruciating mediocrity that was trundling in at the other end.

Asif definitely the bigger missed opportunity for cricket fans though. Bond was never going to have a great test career, his body just couldn't handle what he was putting it through. Even if he hadn't been pointlessly banned in 2008, I doubt he would've played more than a half dozen more tests for New Zealand. In fact I think there's a very good chance he would've retired from tests anyway after the 2008 tour of England (if he'd made it that far). Asif on the other hand could easily have 300+ test wickets by now if it wasn't for his own self-destructive tendencies.

Daemon said:

Asif was a lot more like Broad, I don't see any similarity to Bhuvi tbh.

Click to expand...

Asif was not as quick as Broad, he was in 127-130 range. I guess ***** was comparing them to Sydney Barnes era where bowlers would get a batsman out by testing their skills against the moving ball instead of the modern era approach of bowling short stuff at high pace.

Agree with Bahnz comments on Bond. Asif type of bowler isn't so uncommon in modern cricket. I think Philander is much the same in style while Tremlett at his best wasn't that much quicker in pace. In Australia we have Copeland and Sayers who have magnificent fc records in a country that supposedly doesn't favour their style of bowling.

I can see the similarity a bit between Broad and Asif, as in they have slightly similar actions, but Broad is a lot quicker and a lot less consistent with his ability to move the ball around at will. Broad also does like to bowl short or to book dry.

Philander is a good shout. He's the kind of bowler I'm taking about. The accurate swing and seam master is a rare breed in today's world.

How can Asif be a loss for cricket...

Bond was banned? I thought he retired because his body gave out on him.

As an Australian I can say I genuinely feared facing Bond. He would rip through our side regularly. Asif was really good but I'd have preferred to see more of Bond than Asif.

Shane Bond was a frightening figure. Such elegance and efficiency in that run-up of his...almost no drag on his body...smooth action, and delivering bombs....oh, what a cricketer he was...

Asif to me was Pakistan's bowling equivalent of Mohammad Yousuf- Youhanna. Dibbly-doobly approach to the bowling crease, and as soon as the ball left his hand it started to do its own thing...banana swing. Add to that hairstyle of his--- "As soon as I finish my delivery stride, I turn around, and amble back to my bowling mark, but before I get there, I have to run my fingers through my manly and handsome head of hair...not allowing even a single follicle to be crooked."


Oh mid-2000s, how have I missed you!

Asif was no loss to cricket.