-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
A tribute to Pollock
- Thread starter marc71178
- Start date
Rik
Cricketer Of The Year
Well I've taken into account the fact that the England Team were in dissaray, the fact that Pollock is the only bowler who could keep it tight in the SA team, the pitches which gave no joy and generally just the way he's bowled. Even when he's gone for runs it's usually to good length balls, he is a class act. Add to that his 6-37 was one of the best pieces of bowling I have seen for a long long time, since Courtney Walsh was over here in fact.luckyeddie said:
I just feel after watching both bowlers bowl that Pollock is not only the better bowler, but he bowled magnificently on this tour and McGrath was a member of a stronger and more varied attack against a weaker batting side.
Last edited:
Bazza
International 12th Man
As some will know I have often claimed Pollock is massively underrated. What an asset for South Africa. If any of the 6 major nations below them had an allrounder with 300 test wickets at 20 and the ability to average 35 from number 8, they would be quids in!
Interestingly, Pollock averaged just 27 with the bat as recently as 3 years ago, but since then he has scored 1086 runs at 60! Like Flintoff, the turning point appeared to be his maiden test century.
With the ball, Pollock averages 27 against Australia, 23 against England and 20 or less against everyone else. His breakthrough came in 1998 with 69 wickets at 20. Prior to 1998 Pollock had 44 wickets at 24, but since then his 258 wickets have come at 20 and he's only had one 'poor' year, averaging 26 in 2002, mostly due to his 9 wickets at 38 against Australia.
His overall stats are phenomonal:
74 103 26 2688 111 34.90 51.14 2 13 57 0
2735 857 6255 302 20.71 7-87 15 1 54.3 2.28
198 129 46 1977 75 23.81 83.77 0 7 80 0
1725.1 183 6483 280 23.15 6-35 10 4 36.9 3.75
And he's still only 30, so should play at least another 4-5 years.
As for Flintoff, I think he is a batting allrounder, simply because his batting was his strength when he came into the side and still is. Agreed he's picked as much for one as the other, but I feel his batting is his stronger suit.
Interestingly, Pollock averaged just 27 with the bat as recently as 3 years ago, but since then he has scored 1086 runs at 60! Like Flintoff, the turning point appeared to be his maiden test century.
With the ball, Pollock averages 27 against Australia, 23 against England and 20 or less against everyone else. His breakthrough came in 1998 with 69 wickets at 20. Prior to 1998 Pollock had 44 wickets at 24, but since then his 258 wickets have come at 20 and he's only had one 'poor' year, averaging 26 in 2002, mostly due to his 9 wickets at 38 against Australia.
His overall stats are phenomonal:
74 103 26 2688 111 34.90 51.14 2 13 57 0
2735 857 6255 302 20.71 7-87 15 1 54.3 2.28
198 129 46 1977 75 23.81 83.77 0 7 80 0
1725.1 183 6483 280 23.15 6-35 10 4 36.9 3.75
And he's still only 30, so should play at least another 4-5 years.
As for Flintoff, I think he is a batting allrounder, simply because his batting was his strength when he came into the side and still is. Agreed he's picked as much for one as the other, but I feel his batting is his stronger suit.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I would think that Pollock could be around longer than that. Perhaps until 38 or 39. His bowling action is relatively stress free and he doesn't have a mile to runup. Also, he's been quite fit over his career, hasn't he?Bazza said:
Langeveldt
Soutie
I would agree, and I would like to think so too, but surely the shocking shedule in international cricket means that the stress will take its toll sooner rather than laterMr Mxyzptlk said:
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
How quick is Bickers?
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I only know mph too.Rik said:74-75mph on average, 80mph extreme max speed, the 1st ball of a spell I saw he bowled at 69.8mph
Sorry but I don't do kmph
Pollock was 78-82 when he came to the West Indies in 2001.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Speed's not everything (what am I saying?). The point is, a good bowling side has balance - you must have one out-and-out pacer as a spearhead then the other non-spin bowlers can compliment that with seam and swing.
Pollock is that nagging type of bowler at 80 mph - you might get 1 ball to hit every 4 or 5 overs yet he still takes wickets at an average of 20. If in 5 years time his pace drops to that of Bicknell, my guess is that he would STILL take wickets at around the same average but with a marginally worse strike rate.
Face it, by then, batsmen might get 1 ball to hit every 7 or 8 overs.
Pollock is that nagging type of bowler at 80 mph - you might get 1 ball to hit every 4 or 5 overs yet he still takes wickets at an average of 20. If in 5 years time his pace drops to that of Bicknell, my guess is that he would STILL take wickets at around the same average but with a marginally worse strike rate.
Face it, by then, batsmen might get 1 ball to hit every 7 or 8 overs.
Bazza
International 12th Man
Pollock was mostly 78-79 when I saw him at Lord's. Makes you think, if he can take 300 test wickets at 20 bowling 80 mph, maybe Bickers could have been doing a job for us over the last 10 years? OK he isn't quite in the same league, but I always felt he should have had a go since I really got into cricket around 1997-98.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
For quite a time, the England bowling line-up included the likes of Gough, Jug-ears, Chalky White and Corky - all different types of bowler. Throw in the 'shock' effect of Flintoff (in his early days he was witheringly quick but suffered from 'growing' injuries) and it looked a nicely well-balanced attack.Bazza said:
There were certainly others who seemed to be higher in the pecking-order than Bicknell without justification
gibbsnsmith
State Vice-Captain
hehe...i only know this from cricket 2002..
70mph is almost 120khmph
and i love pollocks action..infdact my medium pace..i use the amost exact pace because i fell it is wonderful for extracting a lil pace when needed and i only take 10 stpes runup..
70mph is almost 120khmph
and i love pollocks action..infdact my medium pace..i use the amost exact pace because i fell it is wonderful for extracting a lil pace when needed and i only take 10 stpes runup..
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's alright; Britain as a whole refuses to enter the modern world. I get the feeling that's more to do with why England has an affinity with the US in the way they do; they're two of the very few countries who refuse to leave the 40's and continue to use an anachronistic, illogical and unpopular measurement system.
I get the feeling that both Pollock and McGrath have slowed down by choice. They've both figured out that even at top pace, they'd not be express so instead of trying, they cut back on their pace and work on their movement instead. To me, Ntini has the same problem as they did right now; He's not really quick enough to be called express and too quick to get a great deal of movement so does he work at bowling faster to increase his potency or slow down to get more movement? I remember the same things being said about Andy Caddick early in his career too.
Both McGrath and Pollock (particularly Pollock) bowled quite quickly in their early days. I would guess that bowling slower for them both was a very conscious decision.
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hear, hear!Top_Cat said:That's alright; Britain as a whole refuses to enter the modern world. I get the feeling that's more to do with why England has an affinity with the US in the way they do; they're two of the very few countries who refuse to leave the 40's and continue to use an anachronistic, illogical and unpopular measurement system.
