Curious case of Waqar's career - avg 18 in first 32 tests and avg 28 in next 55

[Trichromatic]

Waqar had stellar record in first 31 tests

 

Matches 32

Wickets: 187

Avg: 18.85

5fers: 19

10fers: 4

 

Next 55 tests starting from Aus series in 1994

Wickets: 186

Avg: 28.29

5fers: 3

10fers: 1

 

How can avg of a bowler decline 10 points?

[Trichromatic]

Even that 2nd half record is saved by 11 tests v Zimbabwe and BD where he picked up 53 wickets at avg of 19.63 with 2 5-fers.

 

Otherwise 133 wickets in 44 tests against other teams paints very sorry picture.

 

 

[deepdynamo]

Ball tampering wasn't a thing in second part of his career.

[Lord]

Had an injury I think

[Nikhil_cric]

2 back stress fractures , age , greater scrutiny on bowlers for tampering, batsmen got better against pace because of bowling machines, sidearms etc. 

 

 

[jf1gp_1]

returned from a major back injury which kept him out for years. 

[nevada]

He very likely under reported his age by 4-5 years. Enjoyed his peak years right after debut for a few years, and then injuries + age caught up with him. While his decline is disappointing, he still has very respectable numbers. 

For me, the bigger disappointment is Kapil Dev, who had a similar career trajectory. In 1983, he had 244 wickets to his name while Malcolm Marshall had just 81. In 1992, Marshall retired at 370 change while in the same year, Kapil reached 400 thanks to a 20+ wicket haul on Australian pitches and then limped his way to Hadlee's world record for an additional 30 wickets over the next two years. 5 years of brilliance followed by 11 years of mediocrity - sure, he had injury in 1983, but how bad was it that it dented his career stats so bad? 

[diga]

59 minutes ago, deepdynamo said:

Ball tampering wasn't a thing in second part of his career.

Plus the focus on Pak umpires...

[Trichromatic]

1 hour ago, nevada said:

He very likely under reported his age by 4-5 years. Enjoyed his peak years right after debut for a few years, and then injuries + age caught up with him. While his decline is disappointing, he still has very respectable numbers. 

For me, the bigger disappointment is Kapil Dev, who had a similar career trajectory. In 1983, he had 244 wickets to his name while Malcolm Marshall had just 81. In 1992, Marshall retired at 370 change while in the same year, Kapil reached 400 thanks to a 20+ wicket haul on Australian pitches and then limped his way to Hadlee's world record for an additional 30 wickets over the next two years. 5 years of brilliance followed by 11 years of mediocrity - sure, he had injury in 1983, but how bad was it that it dented his career stats so bad? 

 

69 tests 187 wickets at avg of 32 from 1984 onwards was very poor for Kapil Dev.

[MechEng]

Waqar was too reliant on pace. He was not a strategy oriented fast bowler like Akram or Bumrah and was all about explosiveness like Akhtar and Bond. Stress fractures forced him to change his bowling style.

 

Allan Donald is another example that I can think of who became a cannon fodder bowler once he lost his pace.

[MechEng]

Waqar was still world class in ODIs though till his retirement. Look at the spell below.

 

https://youtu.be/5uq4vHK6SUo?si=AypPZAsTabreQzqp 

[Chaos]

Thats what happens if bottle crowns r not used, television broadcast improvements didnt help either.  Yet they still did it n get caught.

[Muloghonto]

Even in his peak phase Waqar was ordinary against the best teams- iirc in the part of his career he took like 200 wickets from 35 matches at 19 average, he still averaged 27-28 vs India, australia, England and south Africa, with his average being helped mostly by beating the hell outta new Zealand and Zimbabwe. 

[velu]

Injury and Ajay Jadeja 

[vvvslaxman]

You have to look at the oppositions.  3 teams that were going through transition. England/  West Indies/ New zealand. New zealand was a garbage team right through the 90s.

 

 

vs NZ 4 tests 38 wickets  10.42 avge

vs SL 3 tests 16 wickets 17.43 avge

vs zimbabwe 3 tests 27 wickets 13.81 avge

 

He averages 12.9 against these three teams.

 

vs Australia 56.00

vs England 25.31

vs WI 19.42

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wanted_desi]

Injuries and shortage of bottle caps.

[Muloghonto]

5 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

You have to look at the oppositions.  3 teams that were going through transition. England/  West Indies/ New zealand. New zealand was a garbage team right through the 90s.

 

 

vs NZ 4 tests 38 wickets  10.42 avge

vs SL 3 tests 16 wickets 17.43 avge

vs zimbabwe 3 tests 27 wickets 13.81 avge

 

He averages 12.9 against these three teams.

 

vs Australia 56.00

vs England 25.31

vs WI 19.42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah whatever be the reason - injury, bottlecaps or whatnot, even at his peak, the difference between waqar and bumrah is this:

Waqar : few wickets against good batting teams at mediore/bad average + Lots of wickets against bad batting teams at crazy average

Bumrah: few wickets against bad batting teams at crazy average +  lots of wickets against good batting teams at amazing average.

 

[Ultimate_Game]

4 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

 

Yeah whatever be the reason - injury, bottlecaps or whatnot, even at his peak, the difference between waqar and bumrah is this:

Waqar : few wickets against good batting teams at mediore/bad average + Lots of wickets against bad batting teams at crazy average

Bumrah: few wickets against bad batting teams at crazy average +  lots of wickets against good batting teams at amazing average.

 

 

Comparing Bumrah with Waqar is an insult to Bumrah as they don't belong together. Bumrah is compared to ATG fast bowlers like Marshall, Holding, Hadlee, etc. while Waqar is a tier or two below. Comparing Bumrah to Wasim Akram makes sense but not with Waqar.

 

Bumrah has shown up against the best and was instrumental in India beating Aus in Aus twice! It should've been three times but lack of support from other bowlers, and more importantly Rohit & Kohli dragging the team down as always.

[First class]

37 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Comparing Bumrah with Waqar is an insult to Bumrah as they don't belong together. Bumrah is compared to ATG fast bowlers like Marshall, Holding, Hadlee, etc. while Waqar is a tier or two below. Comparing Bumrah to Wasim Akram makes sense but not with Waqar.

 

Bumrah has shown up against the best and was instrumental in India beating Aus in Aus twice! It should've been three times but lack of support from other bowlers, and more importantly Rohit & Kohli dragging the team down as always.

Bumbra is very good bowler and truly on its way to a possible AGB, depending on his longevity and the form , but not there yet. He is not at Waqar's level, yet, but might make it to that level. I would pick Waqar ahead of Wasim in my 11. 

 

Extreme pace, accuracy and swing , and the most rhythmic and beautiful action of all time, that was Waqar Younis , 

 

 

Edited January 12 by First class

[First class]

Wasim is popular and Waqar not so popular in India for non-cricketing reason .