Dale Steyn vs Allan Donald vs Shaun Pollock

[stephen]

Wasim has never been rated as the number 1 by the icc rankings. Now that is not the only yardstick for greatness but most greats such as Ambrose, Steyn, McGrath etc spent great big chunks of time there and that tells something

Not really his fault when his competition during the time was Marshall, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. 4 bowlers who could legitimately make up 4 of the top 10 best ever.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Marshall and Ambrose didn't really overlap careers at their respective peaks though, Marshall was arguably already starting to decline a little bit by the time Ambrose was really establishing himself

 

[Kirkut]

Not really his fault when his competition during the time was Marshall, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. 4 bowlers who could legitimately make up 4 of the top 10 best ever.

Wasim Akram's best year was 1994, he took 25 wickets in 3 tests against NZ in NZ, that too without reverse swing. From 1995 till 2003 he was an ok test bowler with occasional magical spells in 1999 against India. He was a quintessential ODI bowler to me.

 

[srbhkshk]

Not really his fault when his competition during the time was Marshall, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. 4 bowlers who could legitimately make up 4 of the top 10 best ever.

It's by no means his fault, but those are the very guys he is being compared with - so never snatching the #1 from them does count ultimately.

 

[stephen]

Marshall and Ambrose didn't really overlap careers at their respective peaks though, Marshall was arguably already starting to decline a little bit by the time Ambrose was really establishing himself

Yeah, Marshall stated to decline when Ambrose started to establish himself. It was like they tag teamed being the best bowler in the world.

And I'd put Ambrose ahead of Wasim any day of the week but Wasim would add more to an ATG side with his left arm variety and extra batting.

 

[subshakerz]

Not really his fault when his competition during the time was Marshall, Ambrose, Donald and McGrath. 4 bowlers who could legitimately make up 4 of the top 10 best ever.

From here:

A stunning match-winner

Over a 19-year international career, Wasim Akram took wickets all over the world, in Tests and ODIs, with a consistency that was mind-boggling

www.espncricinfo.com

Based on the below I would say Wasim was the best pacer, if not bowler, of the 90s, along with Ambrose.

"Akram's best years were about to come. In his first Test of 1990, against Australia in Melbourne, Akram took 11 for 160, and that haul triggered a sensational run that lasted through most of the next eight years. In 48 Tests from 1990 to the end of 1997, Akram averaged five wickets per match, and his average dropped to an outstanding 20.05, before his form finally tapered off in his last four years.

During that eight-year period from 1990 to 1997, Akram had the best figures in Test cricket, barring none. There were several legendary bowlers who were at the height of their craft during an era which we now look back on as a golden one for bowlers, especially the fast ones - Curtly Ambrose, Allan Donald, Waqar Younis and Glenn McGrath were all around, but Akram's stats stood out even among them. His average of 20.05 was better than anyone else's during this period (with a cut-off of 150 wickets); in terms of strike rate, only Waqar was ahead."

 

[Coronis]

If we’re looking at the 90’s overall, its Ambrose, followed by Donald/Wasim/Waqar and McGrath. Pollock was probably better than them all bar Ambrose but only played from 95 onwards so ehh.

 

[Jayro]

Ambrose has prolly been underrated comparatively because he went with a weaker outfit than most other greats, was he with a team like Australia like Mcgrath was he probably had ended up with many motm motseries awards, and we would also remember him sending terror and breaking dreams of alot of teams in crucial tournaments.

 

[stephen]

Ambrose has prolly been underrated comparatively because he went with a weaker outfit than most other greats, was he with a team like Australia like Mcgrath was he probably had ended up with many motm motseries awards, and we would also remember him sending terror and breaking dreams of alot of teams in crucial tournaments.

I don't underrate Ambrose. I watched him bowl. Still terrifies me.

 

[Jayro]

I don't underrate Ambrose. I watched him bowl. Still terrifies me.

Not telling you mate, I was just wondering how much better he could have looked with a better team thrashing oppositions when most of the time in the latter half of the nineties he ended up on the receiving end.

 

[Noumenon]

If McGrath were created in Frankenstein's lab, he'd be an Ambrose.

 

[Flem274*]

Wasim Akram's best year was 1994, he took 25 wickets in 3 tests against NZ in NZ, that too without reverse swing. From 1995 till 2003 he was an ok test bowler with occasional magical spells in 1999 against India. He was a quintessential ODI bowler to me.

that 1994 side was trash. no way would we let people get away with promoting a modern bowler using those performances. 1994 nz were modern windies level batsmen if ancient crowe and ancient jones weren't present, maybe worse.

 

[Bolo.]

From here:

A stunning match-winner

Over a 19-year international career, Wasim Akram took wickets all over the world, in Tests and ODIs, with a consistency that was mind-boggling

www.espncricinfo.com

Based on the below I would say Wasim was the best pacer, if not bowler, of the 90s, along with Ambrose.

"Akram's best years were about to come. In his first Test of 1990, against Australia in Melbourne, Akram took 11 for 160, and that haul triggered a sensational run that lasted through most of the next eight years. In 48 Tests from 1990 to the end of 1997, Akram averaged five wickets per match, and his average dropped to an outstanding 20.05, before his form finally tapered off in his last four years.

During that eight-year period from 1990 to 1997, Akram had the best figures in Test cricket, barring none. There were several legendary bowlers who were at the height of their craft during an era which we now look back on as a golden one for bowlers, especially the fast ones - Curtly Ambrose, Allan Donald, Waqar Younis and Glenn McGrath were all around, but Akram's stats stood out even among them. His average of 20.05 was better than anyone else's during this period (with a cut-off of 150 wickets); in terms of strike rate, only Waqar was ahead."

Look at the 90s greats. Pick a period of x number of years that suits their peak and you can make a case for most of them being the best over a certain period.

Wasim may have been the best test bowler from 90-97 (idk, not checking). But that doesnt make him the best bowler of the whole 90s as you are saying... he is behind a few others when counting the whole of the decade. Not that I think the best of the decade means much, but at least it at least avoids cherrypicking.

And he wasnt the best for any meaningful period. 90-94, most of the period you are considering, he was a long way from the best bowler in his own team (not much of an indictement tbf, considering Waqar had arguably the best period ever for a quick, but he wasnt the only one).

And then there were better bowlers from 95-97 as well. Mcgraths most effective period, for example, way better in every statistically measurable way than Wasim

 

[subshakerz]

Look at the 90s greats. Pick a period of x number of years that suits their peak and you can make a case for most of them being the best over a certain period.

Wasim may have been the best test bowler from 90-97 (idk, not checking). But that doesnt make him the best bowler of the whole 90s as you are saying... he is behind a few others when counting the whole of the decade. Not that I think the best of the decade means much, but at least it at least avoids cherrypicking.

And he wasnt the best for any meaningful period. 90-94, most of the period you are considering, he was a long way from the best bowler in his own team (not much of an indictement tbf, considering Waqar had arguably the best period ever for a quick, but he wasnt the only one).

And then there were better bowlers from 95-97 as well. Mcgraths most effective period, for example, way better in every statistically measurable way than Wasim

Waqar was never rated better than Wasim, even at his peak.

 

[ankitj]

Waqar was never rated better than Wasim, even at his peak.

ICC ratings disagree

 

[Bolo.]

ICC ratings disagree

Waqar's just about 6wpm at a SR of 35 from 90-94 do a pretty spectacular job of disagreeing too.

 

[Coronis]

ICC ratings disagree

Lets be real ICC ratings are far from the be all and end all. For example, Doug Walters achieved a higher rating than players such as Gavaskar, Lara, Headley and Sutcliffe.

 

[ankitj]

Lets be real ICC ratings are far from the be all and end all. For example, Doug Walters achieved a higher rating than players such as Gavaskar, Lara, Headley and Sutcliffe.

Wasim vs. Waqar bowling:



Walters vs. Gavaskar batting:



Matches my intuition.

 

[Gob]

Waqar was never rated better than Wasim, even at his peak.

Plenty did

 

[Arachnodouche]

Is Waqar's birthdate legitimate? If so, it's amazing how his peak came and went well before he'd turned 25. The '96 WC was the last he resembled the glory years but he was already in decline even then (and not 25 yet!).