Younis and Akram speed

[Vk1]

I wonder how the middle order batsmen of 90s played against these Pak bowlers.. its almost impossible to face skiddy reverse swing with tampered balls 

[putrevus]

On 7/6/2026 at 2:26 AM, Gollum said:

Waqar was the greatest beneficiary of ball tampering. Check the scorecards of the Pak-Eng and Pak-NZ tests in early-mid 90s. 200/2 and then mysterious collpase to 240 all out, with Waqar suddenly becoming unplayable with the old ball.

 

He would have been exposed in today's era, just like all Pak tamperers and chuckers. 

 

Wasim was genuinely great and would have been a champ even without the dark arts. 

I disagree, Waqar before his back injury was fearsome fast bowler with SR unlike any other fast bowler.

 

After 1995 reverse swing was known to everyone.Did Pakistan tamper more than other teams then answer might be yes but that alone was not the only reason for either Wasim or Waqar success.

 

Reverse swing is a weapon once it starts it becomes tough for batsman.Even guy like Zak had great success with reverse swing.India was not winning 2011 without reverse swing either.

 

Pakistanis then were waiting for ball to reverse , they did not care if new ball went for runs. That is why a mediocre guy like Sadgoppan Ramesh could score runs against them in 1999.I hated it every moment but you got give  it them.

 

Waqar himself admitted in this t20 era , they would have been hit too.

 

Imran benefitted more due to reverse swing than these two as it was unknown to other teams.

 

Indian bowlers and team were simply not good enough to even exploit reverse swing in 1990s till Zak came around.

 

Would Murali have taken 800 wickets if Doosra was banned. You cannot dismiss Pakistanis after the fact.

 

This nonsense some are saying he was trundler or like he was useless bowler is ridiculous and reeks of jealousy. 

 

Edited July 7 by putrevus

[singhvivek141]

5 hours ago, putrevus said:

I disagree, Waqar before his back injury was fearsome fast bowler with SR unlike any other fast bowler.

 

After 1995 reverse swing was known to everyone.Did Pakistan tamper more than other teams then answer might be yes but that alone was not the only reason for either Wasim or Waqar success.

 

Reverse swing is a weapon once it starts it becomes tough for batsman.Even guy like Zak had great success with reverse swing.India was not winning 2011 without reverse swing either.

 

Pakistanis then were waiting for ball to reverse , they did not care if new ball went for runs. That is why a mediocre guy like Sadgoppan Ramesh could score runs against them in 1999.I hated it every moment but you got give  it them.

 

Waqar himself admitted in this t20 era , they would have been hit too.

 

Imran benefitted more due to reverse swing than these two as it was unknown to other teams.

 

Indian bowlers and team were simply not good enough to even exploit reverse swing in 1990s till Zak came around.

 

Would Murali have taken 800 wickets if Doosra was banned. You cannot dismiss Pakistanis after the fact.

 

This nonsense some are saying he was trundler or like he was useless bowler is ridiculous and reeks of jealousy. 

 

Simple question, why did Waqar failed consistently vs Australia ? Specially in Australia ?

Why his numbers are so inflated in his home country ? And why did his performance took a nosedive suddenly after 1995. ?

 

It all started with Imran's own admission of ball tempering in 1994, post then the ICC becane making strict laws and even the umpiring was altered with neutral umpires. Else it was literally impossible to get an LBW agaibst Pakistani batters in Pakistan. There are many videos of the same in YouTube and even someone like Gary Sobers has mentioned the incident in his biography.

 

Murli's question is valid, but in this case, its ICC which allowed his doosra, but using bottle caps to change the state of ball is always illegal. Waqar imo was the first player who was caught by doing ball temperinh by ICC. Even now ICC dont allow bottle caps, even though they allowed the 15 degree straightening.

 

Agree with the point that Indians were unaware of reverse swing, until Manoj Prabhakar learnt it from Pookies itself. Reason is Indians were not used to play in English cricket....Imran was a smart chap, he not only did learnt but also taught to other Pak bowlers...and kudos for him.

But he aggravated the reverse by using bottle caps, which is illegal.

 

Thats why I say, the avg of Wasim, Waqar, Imran needs to be inflated atleast by 3-8 points. They are not as good as everyone calls them out...and Waqar was slower than Srinath pace wise, as evident under the speed guns of 2003 ODI WC. Clocking mythical high speeds under dodgy speed guns dont count.

[Nikhil_cric]

2 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Simple question, why did Waqar failed consistently vs Australia ? Specially in Australia ?

Why his numbers are so inflated in his home country ? And why did his performance took a nosedive suddenly after 1995. ?

 

It all started with Imran's own admission of ball tempering in 1994, post then the ICC becane making strict laws and even the umpiring was altered with neutral umpires. Else it was literally impossible to get an LBW agaibst Pakistani batters in Pakistan. There are many videos of the same in YouTube and even someone like Gary Sobers has mentioned the incident in his biography.

 

Murli's question is valid, but in this case, its ICC which allowed his doosra, but using bottle caps to change the state of ball is always illegal. Waqar imo was the first player who was caught by doing ball temperinh by ICC. Even now ICC dont allow bottle caps, even though they allowed the 15 degree straightening.

 

Agree with the point that Indians were unaware of reverse swing, until Manoj Prabhakar learnt it from Pookies itself. Reason is Indians were not used to play in English cricket....Imran was a smart chap, he not only did learnt but also taught to other Pak bowlers...and kudos for him.

But he aggravated the reverse by using bottle caps, which is illegal.

 

Thats why I say, the avg of Wasim, Waqar, Imran needs to be inflated atleast by 3-8 points. They are not as good as everyone calls them out...and Waqar was slower than Srinath pace wise, as evident under the speed guns of 2003 ODI WC. Clocking mythical high speeds under dodgy speed guns dont count.

I think we shouldn't underrate Waqar's pace.   He had a pretty fast arm. And everyone who played him between 1989-1996 considered him the fastest bowler in the world for sheer airspeed.

 

His only competition was Allan Donald. 

 

These 2 were clearly ahead of the rest in terms of consistent speeds. 

 

Waqar in '91 was considered the fastest bowler in the world almost universally, that has to count for something .

 

Even if guns were dodgy, he still was relatively quicker than all the other bowlers of his time .

 

The man was a very explosive athlete and even someone like Usain Bolt was an admirer growing up. 

 

His bowling legacy is questionable considering the amount of minnow bashing he did in his Test career. 

 

As far as tampering is concerned , Windies and England bowlers also tampered the ball for a fact and still Gough's numbers are not comparable to Waqar's.

 

 

 

[MechEng]

3 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Simple question, why did Waqar failed consistently vs Australia ? Specially in Australia ?

Why his numbers are so inflated in his home country ? And why did his performance took a nosedive suddenly after 1995. ?

 

It all started with Imran's own admission of ball tempering in 1994, post then the ICC becane making strict laws and even the umpiring was altered with neutral umpires. Else it was literally impossible to get an LBW agaibst Pakistani batters in Pakistan. There are many videos of the same in YouTube and even someone like Gary Sobers has mentioned the incident in his biography.

 

Murli's question is valid, but in this case, its ICC which allowed his doosra, but using bottle caps to change the state of ball is always illegal. Waqar imo was the first player who was caught by doing ball temperinh by ICC. Even now ICC dont allow bottle caps, even though they allowed the 15 degree straightening.

 

Agree with the point that Indians were unaware of reverse swing, until Manoj Prabhakar learnt it from Pookies itself. Reason is Indians were not used to play in English cricket....Imran was a smart chap, he not only did learnt but also taught to other Pak bowlers...and kudos for him.

But he aggravated the reverse by using bottle caps, which is illegal.

 

Thats why I say, the avg of Wasim, Waqar, Imran needs to be inflated atleast by 3-8 points. They are not as good as everyone calls them out...and Waqar was slower than Srinath pace wise, as evident under the speed guns of 2003 ODI WC. Clocking mythical high speeds under dodgy speed guns dont count.

 

I dont know about Waqar's stats, but Srinath's speeds have reached legendary levels of exaggeration.

All I remember of him is getting carted around for fours with an occasional unplayable spell on good wickets.

[Rightarmfast]

13 hours ago, putrevus said:

I disagree, Waqar before his back injury was fearsome fast bowler with SR unlike any other fast bowler.

 

After 1995 reverse swing was known to everyone.Did Pakistan tamper more than other teams then answer might be yes but that alone was not the only reason for either Wasim or Waqar success.

 

Reverse swing is a weapon once it starts it becomes tough for batsman.Even guy like Zak had great success with reverse swing.India was not winning 2011 without reverse swing either.

 

Pakistanis then were waiting for ball to reverse , they did not care if new ball went for runs. That is why a mediocre guy like Sadgoppan Ramesh could score runs against them in 1999.I hated it every moment but you got give  it them.

 

Waqar himself admitted in this t20 era , they would have been hit too.

 

Imran benefitted more due to reverse swing than these two as it was unknown to other teams.

 

Indian bowlers and team were simply not good enough to even exploit reverse swing in 1990s till Zak came around.

 

Would Murali have taken 800 wickets if Doosra was banned. You cannot dismiss Pakistanis after the fact.

 

This nonsense some are saying he was trundler or like he was useless bowler is ridiculous and reeks of jealousy. 

 

Firstly, noone here has said that Waqar was either a trundler or a useless bowler. NOONE. 

Secondly, about his strike rate. Definitely it was exceptional. But please also see the coutries or the oppositions those strike rate was built upon. 

 

Totally agree on the part where you say reverse swing wasn't the only reason Wasim and Waqar were exceptional. Ball tampering, home umpires added to that success. 

 

If a mediocre guy like Ramesh could handle Waqar against a new ball, then please tell me logically why would that make Waqar great? Are you implying that Waqar actually depended majorly on tampered ball and reverse swing? I agree with you. That is about right! But these are your words, my dear. 

 

Nobody on this forum questions Waqar's pace. Nobody on this forum questions whether he was a good bowler. 

The problem arises when people start making stories that he was an all-time 150k's+ bowler. He was not. From what I can tell, he must have been a 142- 148'ish bowler, with capacity to break 150k's every match in the first 3 yrs of his career. But I think at his top, he would be a 153-154k's bowler. 

There are no concrete records to prove otherwise. 

We had very few 148-150k bowlers in the late 80's and till mid 90's. 

 

Even Allan Donald wasn't a 155k's bowler. And Donald was faster than Waqar. 

 

HOW CAN I TELL IF 155+ BOWLERS WERE NOT THERE IN THAT PERIOD?

 

Because when Shoaib Akhtar came into the scene, people were visibly shaken. And during the first 3-4 yrs of his career, Shoaib wasn't breaking the 155k's+ barrier!

 

While Waqar was fast and an exceptional bowler, without tampering and his pace trio, his effect would have been largely negated. Shami, has been right up there. And it doesn't matter much what others think, but he has been a more devastating bowler with more skills than Waqar. Just that he is bowling in an era where the pitches and rules dont support bowlers.

[singhvivek141]

5 hours ago, MechEng said:

 

I dont know about Waqar's stats, but Srinath's speeds have reached legendary levels of exaggeration.

All I remember of him is getting carted around for fours with an occasional unplayable spell on good wickets.

 

Srinath's speeds feels like an exaggeration coz Indians bowling fast isnt digestible. All the known Indian pace bowlers like Kapil, Prabhakar, Venkatesh, Madan Lal, Roger Binny all were medium pacers or in ICFs language trundler (Kapil was around 135ish in his younger days but slowed down post 1986 considerably, which impacted his stats).

 

Srinath was the first who was fast and made his name. Its not like India never had fast bowlers, there were others like Salgaonkar, N. Rajesh Yadav, Yograj Singh, Kailash Gattani, Ubaid Kamal, Harvinder Singh, David Johnson, Salil Ankola etc who too were brisk but they couldn't get the opportunity or consistent backing. 

 

Its with the rise of the quartet of Bumrah, Shami, Umesh & Ishant for a significant period broke the myth that Indian bodies arent suited to bowl fast. All four of them bowled consistently in 136-148 speed bracket irrespective of conditions.

[singhvivek141]

7 hours ago, Nikhil_cric said:

I think we shouldn't underrate Waqar's pace.   He had a pretty fast arm. And everyone who played him between 1989-1996 considered him the fastest bowler in the world for sheer airspeed.

 

His only competition was Allan Donald. 

 

These 2 were clearly ahead of the rest in terms of consistent speeds. 

 

Waqar in '91 was considered the fastest bowler in the world almost universally, that has to count for something .

 

Even if guns were dodgy, he still was relatively quicker than all the other bowlers of his time .

 

The man was a very explosive athlete and even someone like Usain Bolt was an admirer growing up. 

 

His bowling legacy is questionable considering the amount of minnow bashing he did in his Test career. 

 

As far as tampering is concerned , Windies and England bowlers also tampered the ball for a fact and still Gough's numbers are not comparable to Waqar's.

 

 

Waqar has a bit of round arm action, in general the bowlers with round arm does look quicker as the batters spot the ball little late.

Waqar also used to bowl a lot of fuller length deliveries, due to prodigious reverse he used to get courtesy of bottle caps, the batters will struggle to follow the trajectory of the ball which gives an illusion that he is bowling fast.

 

Most of the batters of pre helmet technology used to fear bowlers who target their heads and ribs. In 1990s that change to prodigious swing, but later we identified with better tech that those speeds were an exaggeration. For ex...Jeff Thomson was called as 160+ bowler, while in reality his recorded pace was 147.9, Imran clocked around 138-139 in the same test...

 

 

 

 

Anyway, I am not saying that Waqar was a trundler...he clocked 142.6 in 2003 WC as his quickest...so I can say that he may have clocked peak pace of 148-150 kph when he was young (officially he was only 32 in 2003 WC). But I dont think he was in general a 145-150k bowler...maybe a 138-143k with top speed around 149-150. Similar to Shami. 

 

The true 150k bowlers were Shoaib, Lee, Tait, MJ (for a brief), Wood. They looked fast, specially Shaun Tait looked menacing fast to me (yes, even faster than Shoaib).

[Rightarmfast]

It is a myth that Imran Khan was express. He was fast medium. His pace would have been 137-143ish regularly with capability of clocking around 147/148. Except for West Indians, there were a lot of trundlers during Imran's era. Australia and England did not have genuine fast bowlers in the 80's, post Thompson era. Sri Lanka had trundlers. NZ did not have any genuine quickie. That added to the pace myth of few bowlers. 

[Rightarmfast]

17 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

 

Waqar has a bit of round arm action, in general the bowlers with round arm does look quicker as the batters spot the ball little late.

Waqar also used to bowl a lot of fuller length deliveries, due to prodigious reverse he used to get courtesy of bottle caps, the batters will struggle to follow the trajectory of the ball which gives an illusion that he is bowling fast.

 

Most of the batters of pre helmet technology used to fear bowlers who target their heads and ribs. In 1990s that change to prodigious swing, but later we identified with better tech that those speeds were an exaggeration. For ex...Jeff Thomson was called as 160+ bowler, while in reality his recorded pace was 147.9, Imran clocked around 138-139 in the same test...

 

 

 

 

Anyway, I am not saying that Waqar was a trundler...he clocked 142.6 in 2003 WC as his quickest...so I can say that he may have clocked peak pace of 148-150 kph when he was young (officially he was only 32 in 2003 WC). But I dont think he was in general a 145-150k bowler...maybe a 138-143k with top speed around 149-150. Similar to Shami. 

 

The true 150k bowlers were Shoaib, Lee, Tait, MJ (for a brief), Wood. They looked fast, specially Shaun Tait looked menacing fast to me (yes, even faster than Shoaib).

Certain arm action do give an impression the bowlers are faster. Even Ajit Agarkar looked very quick, even when he would bowl in 130's. Gough had a slingy action and looked quick ( at his quickest, he was around 146k's). 

[singhvivek141]

2 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

It is a myth that Imran Khan was express. He was fast medium. His pace would have been 137-143ish regularly with capability of clocking around 147/148. Except for West Indians, there were a lot of trundlers during Imran's era. Australia and England did not have genuine fast bowlers in the 80's, post Thompson era. Sri Lanka had trundlers. NZ did not have any genuine quickie. That added to the pace myth of few bowlers. 

 

One more thing, I have seen that if a bowler has athletic runup..he will be perceived as fast. You see Vinay Kumar without speed guns and in the poor 144/240p quality he will look like a 140 kph pacer 

 

Imran, Waqar both used to run fast. In comparison Srinaths runup was slower and Srinath used to generate pace courtesy of his action and shoulder. 

[Rightarmfast]

2 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

 

One more thing, I have seen that if a bowler has athletic runup..he will be perceived as fast. You see Vinay Kumar without speed guns and in the poor 144/240p quality he will look like a 140 kph pacer 

 

Imran, Waqar both used to run fast. In comparison Srinaths runup was slower and Srinath used to generate pace courtesy of his action and shoulder. 

Haa... waise agar Shoaib Akhtar apna run up 30% cut karta aur sprint ke speed ko half kar deta, to koi batsmen usse darta nahi at the same bowl speed he had. Uski run up hi fear factor thi.. and bowling speed ko perceive karne me enhance karti thi...

[Nikhil_cric]

2 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

 

Waqar has a bit of round arm action, in general the bowlers with round arm does look quicker as the batters spot the ball little late.

Waqar also used to bowl a lot of fuller length deliveries, due to prodigious reverse he used to get courtesy of bottle caps, the batters will struggle to follow the trajectory of the ball which gives an illusion that he is bowling fast.

 

Most of the batters of pre helmet technology used to fear bowlers who target their heads and ribs. In 1990s that change to prodigious swing, but later we identified with better tech that those speeds were an exaggeration. For ex...Jeff Thomson was called as 160+ bowler, while in reality his recorded pace was 147.9, Imran clocked around 138-139 in the same test...

 

 

 

 

Anyway, I am not saying that Waqar was a trundler...he clocked 142.6 in 2003 WC as his quickest...so I can say that he may have clocked peak pace of 148-150 kph when he was young (officially he was only 32 in 2003 WC). But I dont think he was in general a 145-150k bowler...maybe a 138-143k with top speed around 149-150. Similar to Shami. 

 

The true 150k bowlers were Shoaib, Lee, Tait, MJ (for a brief), Wood. They looked fast, specially Shaun Tait looked menacing fast to me (yes, even faster than Shoaib).

I'm talking about the speeds that he clocked as well.  Yeah he did pitch the ball up a lot which modern bowlers won't do because of the lack of reverse but even then he was probably the faster of that era. 

 

I think Waqar at his fastest was quicker than Shami.  He clocked 95.2 mph after his first stress fracture and he at least visually looked a bit quicker in '91 before. 

 

The bowlers you named as express pacers were something else. 

 

But, a couple of points.   Johnson came back from 4-5 back stress fractures, I think, which was not possible in Waqar's era.

 

Tait, Mark Wood and even Akhtar to an extent  never had that kind of a workload bowling hundreds of overs in county + international cricket. 

 

Lee was the real freak who maintained serious pace despite a fairly heavy workload across formats for many years. 

 

 

Edited July 8 by Nikhil_cric

[putrevus]

13 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Simple question, why did Waqar failed consistently vs Australia ? Specially in Australia ?

Why his numbers are so inflated in his home country ? And why did his performance took a nosedive suddenly after 1995. ?

 

It all started with Imran's own admission of ball tempering in 1994, post then the ICC becane making strict laws and even the umpiring was altered with neutral umpires. Else it was literally impossible to get an LBW agaibst Pakistani batters in Pakistan. There are many videos of the same in YouTube and even someone like Gary Sobers has mentioned the incident in his biography.

 

Murli's question is valid, but in this case, its ICC which allowed his doosra, but using bottle caps to change the state of ball is always illegal. Waqar imo was the first player who was caught by doing ball temperinh by ICC. Even now ICC dont allow bottle caps, even though they allowed the 15 degree straightening.

 

Agree with the point that Indians were unaware of reverse swing, until Manoj Prabhakar learnt it from Pookies itself. Reason is Indians were not used to play in English cricket....Imran was a smart chap, he not only did learnt but also taught to other Pak bowlers...and kudos for him.

But he aggravated the reverse by using bottle caps, which is illegal.

 

Thats why I say, the avg of Wasim, Waqar, Imran needs to be inflated atleast by 3-8 points. They are not as good as everyone calls them out...and Waqar was slower than Srinath pace wise, as evident under the speed guns of 2003 ODI WC. Clocking mythical high speeds under dodgy speed guns dont count.

A simple question back to you. Why are Kapil Dev numbers bad in England and so much better in India. He was a swing bowler.

 

Why is Srinath's avg better so much better in India than in England,  and so much worse in Australia.

 

Why you keep harping on ball tampering. As I said many times yes Pakistanis benefitted from ball tampering. But it does not make Waqar Younis a bad bowler without it. All three Wasim, Waqar and Imran are  ATG bowlers with or without ball tampering.You cannot deny them their greatness.

 

Wasim still is the best left arm bowler in the history of the game.

 

Murali without Doosra might not have reached 800 but he still would have been ATG bowler.

 

 

[putrevus]

6 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Firstly, noone here has said that Waqar was either a trundler or a useless bowler. NOONE. 

Secondly, about his strike rate. Definitely it was exceptional. But please also see the coutries or the oppositions those strike rate was built upon. 

 

Totally agree on the part where you say reverse swing wasn't the only reason Wasim and Waqar were exceptional. Ball tampering, home umpires added to that success. 

 

If a mediocre guy like Ramesh could handle Waqar against a new ball, then please tell me logically why would that make Waqar great? Are you implying that Waqar actually depended majorly on tampered ball and reverse swing? I agree with you. That is about right! But these are your words, my dear. 

 

Nobody on this forum questions Waqar's pace. Nobody on this forum questions whether he was a good bowler. 

The problem arises when people start making stories that he was an all-time 150k's+ bowler. He was not. From what I can tell, he must have been a 142- 148'ish bowler, with capacity to break 150k's every match in the first 3 yrs of his career. But I think at his top, he would be a 153-154k's bowler. 

There are no concrete records to prove otherwise. 

We had very few 148-150k bowlers in the late 80's and till mid 90's. 

 

Even Allan Donald wasn't a 155k's bowler. And Donald was faster than Waqar. 

 

HOW CAN I TELL IF 155+ BOWLERS WERE NOT THERE IN THAT PERIOD?

 

Because when Shoaib Akhtar came into the scene, people were visibly shaken. And during the first 3-4 yrs of his career, Shoaib wasn't breaking the 155k's+ barrier!

 

While Waqar was fast and an exceptional bowler, without tampering and his pace trio, his effect would have been largely negated. Shami, has been right up there. And it doesn't matter much what others think, but he has been a more devastating bowler with more skills than Waqar. Just that he is bowling in an era where the pitches and rules dont support bowlers.

Collis King has score 89 of  1979 finals which even guy like Viv Richards said his innings was better than his 138.

 

Gordon Grennidge in his three finals did not score 50.Does it make Collis King better batsman than Gordon Greenidge.So a ordinary player can have one of two great performances.

 

About Ramesh. So Mediocre batsman is not allowed to score runs against ATG bowler.

 

I never said Waqar was fastest so what is your point in all other mumbo jumbo and he was no 140 speed bowler either.He had as much pace as any other express fast bowler.

 

Waqar was better than Shami with or without tampering.

Edited July 8 by putrevus

[Rightarmfast]

13 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Collis King has score 89 of  1979 finals which even guy like Viv Richards said his innings was better than his 138.

 

Gordon Grennidge in his three finals did not score 50.Does it make Collis King better batsman than Gordon Greenidge.

 

About Ramesh. So Mediocre batsman is not allowed to score runs against ATG bowler.

 

I never said Waqar was fastest so what is your point in all other mumbo jumbo.

 

Waqar is better than Shami with or without tampering.

NO..Now you are shifting your goalpost. Your whole analogy was that Waqar was not a new ball bowler. And hence a mediocre batsman like Ramesh could hit him in initial overs. Which is the truth. Waqar and Wasim feasted on lower order batsmen, with the tampered, old balls.

 

And that is exactly I pointed out to you. An ATG bowler takes top order wickets, mid order and lower order. Doesn't depend upon the ball getting old and tampered to get wickets.

[tapandrun]

The thread has gone in 2 dif direction 1 ) waqar/wasim pace and 2) their quality.

 

every bowler will love to have extra zip/pace and bounce , ask any bowler when they though they when was their prime-- most will point out the time when they were at their fastest.

 

Waqar was v.fast there is no doubt about it, but he was nt shohib/lee/tait and now wood. These 3/4 are diff level in terms of pace. And their longevity with express pace or near express pace. There were no one before them and no one after them in terms of longevity of express/near express pace.

 

At high or v.high pace bowler does not have to have all the skill, bowlers can get wkt with jst pace, pace is a v.rare skill-set.. And once the pace goes down those similar skill-set doe not remain the same or their effectiveness is reduced.

 

 

As for waqar's record ppl can take it however they like it, he has one of best sr. 

 

Its just how cricket was is -- Murali's action was dodgy but his recorrds stands and may be considered best bowler of all times, same for sachin he played in Ind with v.lttle assistance for the bowler and comparatively smaller boundaries to Aus , Ashwin bowled on some of most spin friendly wkts in Ind. warner/gayle used bigger bats infact every 1 used bigger bats than what is permitted right now.

 

 

 

[putrevus]

15 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

NO..Now you are shifting your goalpost. Your whole analogy was that Waqar was not a new ball bowler. And hence a mediocre batsman like Ramesh could hit him in initial overs. Which is the truth. Waqar and Wasim feasted on lower order batsmen, with the tampered, old balls.

 

And that is exactly I pointed out to you. An ATG bowler takes top order wickets, mid order and lower order. Doesn't depend upon the ball getting old and tampered to get wickets.

Let me get this straight since he did not take  Ramesh's wicket in one test he played in that series, Waqar is not ATG bowler??

 

So he took 373 test wickets with old ball only and off only tailenders ?You really have some imagination.

 

FYI express fast bowlers like Waqar are supposed to get tail enders out.Plus he did alright with top batsman too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 8 by putrevus

[singhvivek141]

41 minutes ago, putrevus said:

A simple question back to you. Why are Kapil Dev numbers bad in England and so much better in India. He was a swing bowler.

 

Why is Srinath's avg better so much better in India than in England,  and so much worse in Australia.

 

Why you keep harping on ball tampering. As I said many times yes Pakistanis benefitted from ball tampering. But it does not make Waqar Younis a bad bowler without it. All three Wasim, Waqar and Imran are  ATG bowlers with or without ball tampering.You cannot deny them their greatness.

 

Wasim still is the best left arm bowler in the history of the game.

 

Murali without Doosra might not have reached 800 but he still would have been ATG bowler.

Kapil isn't regarded as an ATG purely as a bowler, he is Indian great. Srinath, Zak, Kumble...neither of them are an ATG. Only ATG from India is Bumrah.

Waqar is claimed as an ATG, while I am calling him at max a Pakistani great. Shaun Pollock isn't an ATG, but he is a very good bowler and a South African great.
Shami is head and shoulders above Waqar and he too isn't an ATG.

Ambrose, Steyn, Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, Hadlee, Bumrah are the real ATG's (maybe I missed some names). Donald and Wasim have a solid case but IMO they're few notches below that list. Bond could have been an ATG if his body would have supported him.

P.S. -> Ball Tempering was real and it's illegal. Murali's case was approved by ICC, not for the bottle caps. That's the reason Waqar's career took a nosedive as soon as Imran accepted the usage of bottle caps and ICC became strict. I can't ignore these coincidences, specially with the fact that Waqar has been caught doing ball tempering.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/waqar-first-to-be-fined-for-ball-tampering-88784

[Rightarmfast]

20 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Let me get this straight since he did not take  Ramesh's wicket in one test he played in that series, Waqar is not ATG bowler??

 

So he took 373 test wickets with old ball only and off only tailenders ?You really have some imagination.

 

FYI express fast bowlers like Waqar are supposed to get tail enders out.Plus he did alright with top batsman too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why are you getting so touchy? :) You made a point, and I just proved it logically. Why are you shifting goalpost? Stay on one point. 

 

And about ATG, naah! I don't consider him ATG. I believe any player who has taken illegal means to achieve success can never be an ATG. 

 

And anyway, his record is heavily dependent on minnow bashing and ball tampering.