Shaun Pollock vs Waqar Younis

[Coronis]

One is ATVG and the other is ATG.

You decide what is better.

Harsh to call Waqar an ATVG (whatever that is anyway) but I get it.

 

[Kirkut]

Harsh to call Waqar an ATVG (whatever that is anyway) but I get it.

Nopes.

 

[BazBall21]

I don't get this at all. He was technically fine. Very limited range of shots, but no obvious weakness that resulted in him getting out. If Waugh managed to be an ATG bat by playing in almost exactly the same way, Pollock can be a decent bowling AR.

The fact that he spent a chunk of his career away career in very easy conditions notwithstanding, you do need to respect a guy who averages late 30s away from home. I'm not sure that a bowling AR has ever managed this. I can only think of 1 balanced AR from the last century who has him beat on this. He is basically midway between Keith Miller and Michael Clarke on away average.

He is not as good as is average suggests simply because he batted low? He was just unlucky to play for teams with a lot of ARs. He got out in single digits a lot. Once he hit double digits, he was very reliably good for runs. If he wasn't running out of partners, he would have scored and averaged a bunch more.

Looked very decent ability wise, but I think his average flatters his output. RPI is south of 25.

 

[Kirkut]

I'm assuming OP is only comparing fast bowling.

If we're including batting and fielding, it's Pollock comfortably.

 

[Coronis]

I'm assuming OP is only comparing fast bowling.

If we're including batting and fielding, it's Pollock comfortably.

Generally when the title question is *test cricketer* its for comparing batsman vs bowler or an AR with a specialist. e.g in this case most people would consider Waqar clearly ahead as bowler, OP’s question is whether his batting etc. makes up the difference.

 

[shortpitched713]

Looked very decent ability wise, but I think his average flatters his output. RPI is south of 25.

All that means is that he was underutilized, not that he wasn't very good.