Shaun Pollock

[Rasimione]

One of Saffers best players ever, consistent with his bowling, realible with his batting, but somehow when the best allrounders are mentioned he never gets a shout. Could it be that he was a bowling version of Kallis? www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/player/46774.html

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah; a truly great player who was and is massively under-rated by the general cricket-following public. I've always felt he could be one whose legacy grows as the years pass; I think he'll be rated higher by the next generation of fans than he is by his own.

More than a bowling Kallis I see him as a modern Hadlee, and most here will know how highly I think of Hadlee.

 

[Spikey]

it's the red hair

 

[Howe_zat]

Under-rated by the majority

Over-rated by CW's overreaction complex

 

[fredfertang]

it's the red hair

this

doesn't help having famous forebears either - dilutes the reputation

 

[Spikey]

disagree i think the complaints about how under-rated he is is about spot on

 

[zaremba]

SA were so lucky to gave him and Kallis at the same time. A top quality batting all rounder and a top quality bowling all rounder. It means that just about any team you then pick will be balanced. I can't think of any team that has been so fortunate in the all rounder department.

I do think that they were counterparts of each other, and complemented each other beautifully. Kallis' bowling and Pollock's batting being of a comparable standard and vice versa.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If he looked more like Fonzie rather than Richie Cunningham...

Nah, top chap, actually. Think as he gets more telly comm gigs his rep will go up; has exactly the right combo of enthusiasm for the game and an analytical eye. That he patently knows his onions will see a posthumous gloss added to his exploits.

Shameful end to his captaincy career too. Carried the can for (IIRC) Boucher's inability to count properly. If memory serves Goughy (the poster, not the ex-fast bowler turned dancer/meeja know-nothing) is of the opinion the SA wanted to draw a line under the Cronje era and bring in a more malleable captain. One assumes they hadn't actually spoken to Smith beforehand. Despite his youth I can't see Fat Gray being anyone's front man.

 

[Quaggas]

^ Always thought it was the change room misreading the DL charts, Boucher blameless

 

[slowfinger]

Always something missing to the guy for me... Never one of the 'Imran's' . But even to come near is a feat and a half.

 

[Sparkley]

I don't know how bad or stupid this will sound but I'd have Pollock on the same level as the Imrans, Bothams, Devs and Hadlees.

 

[Debris]

Shaun Pollock is one of those almost players for me. Almost a great bowler, almost a good batsman, not quite a genuine all-rounder. Fantastic cricketer but just not in the discussion for great all-rounders.

 

[Migara]

He does enter the discussion IMO. Beats every great all rounder hands down with his fielding, with exception of Sobers. With his credentials with bat and ball, it's enough to keep him among the elite.

 

[Jarquis]

The bloke has more than 400 wickets at a tick over 23 and he doesn't qualify as a great bowler?

 

[Debris]

The bloke has more than 400 wickets at a tick over 23 and he doesn't qualify as a great bowler?

I probably meant it in a bit of a different sense than it usually is meant. There has been a lot of discussion who the ATG bowlers are. Names like Marshall, McGrath, Imran, Hadlee etc get thrown around and I don't think that he is quite in that company.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Shaun Pollock is a terrific cricketer, but one of the almost there types as far as ATG status is concerned. I'd agree with Debris' summation of the man, although I'd perhaps call Polly a great bowler of his era.

The problem is that Pollock's is one particular case where the bowling statistics indicate more than the man actually was. There is no doubt that he was a mighty fine bowler, but most people who would have seen his tests post 2001 would concede that he perhaps didn't have enough firepower to be considered a genuinely threatening bowler. A comment I had made a while back:

He had two careers, in my estimation. From 1995 to 2001/02, he was nippy, could really move the ball late and could kill any opposition on any surface. As good a match-winning seam bowler, as any you'd come across.

Once he lost his pace and that skiddy bouncer, he was more content playing second fiddle to men like Ntini and Nel. Still extremely economical and a very useful bat lower down the order.

All in all, a high quality cricketer and certainly one that the Saffers can be very proud of.

 

[Howe_zat]

Nice to see you again Outswinger.

 

[akilana]

Shaun Pollock is a terrific cricketer, but one of the almost there types as far as ATG status is concerned. I'd agree with Debris' summation of the man, although I'd perhaps call Polly a great bowler of his era.

The problem is that Pollock's is one particular case where the bowling statistics indicate more than the man actually was. There is no doubt that he was a mighty fine bowler, but most people who would have seen his tests post 2001 would concede that he perhaps didn't have enough firepower to be considered a genuinely threatening bowler. A comment I had made a while back:



All in all, a high quality cricketer and certainly one that the Saffers can be very proud of.

That's because he was a brilliant bowler before his decline, which started in 2004/2005 and not 2001/2002. There's a decade of good bowling.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Nice to see you again Outswinger.

I'm quite pleased too, mate..Back amongst my own!

That's because he was a brilliant bowler before his decline, which started in 2004/2005 and not 2001/2002. There's a decade of good bowling.

In part, I agree. He was a victim of his own high standards in the 90s. But, I saw most of South African tests in the 2001 to 2004 period, and the lack of his bowling venom was just glaringly apparent.

His customary accuracy and discipline was there, but somehow I never got the feeling that he could run through sides as before. You often got the feeling thay the batsmen would defend him carefully but not seem discomfited in the way Ntini or Nel troubled them from the other end. The fact that his record still looks very good is I suppose, testimony to his superb work ethics. Stats are usually my last frame of reference for tests that I watch live.

 

[andruid]

He could bat better than Daniel Vettori That's for sure.