Pollock's Batting

[flanflinger]

SM Pollock            4    8   1   120   43   17.14

My memory of Pollock is that he is obviously a bowler, but also has the potential to score a huge amount of runs. However, IMO, he has lost his batting almost completly. Any idea why? Has the pressure of bowling so many overs got to him? Or is not working as hard on his batting?

After he got hit on the head he went to pieces, not something you would expect from someone with his obvious talent?

[Zainub]

Hmm...may be's just short on luck a little bit (I mean the ball he got today from Fred..totally unplayable...) or simply out for form - sometimes you're just out of form for apparently no good reason, sometimes that happens.

[John]

Well I think Pollock is in the last strech of his career. He has been brilliant. He has been one of the top bowlers of his era. Tell me which England bowler out of this bunch will take 350 wickets ? I think I am right in saying the last English bowler to take 300 wickets was Botham or Willis.
He has batted well enough to be called allrounder.
I think time has caught up with him. He has been asked to be the main bowler with Ntini and I think maybe it asking him too much to play vital innings.
I think the explanation is simply wear and tear.

[Trescothick]

I've never understood why hes been called an all-rounder personally. Maybe i havent seen him enough but although his bowling is first class, his batting certainly isn't brilliant. If we call him an all-rounder then why not Ashley Giles etc. cause in my opinion Giles is a better batter than Pollock who looks awquard. Whats his test average overall?

[Rahul_Dravid_is_No.1]

because he used to be a great batsmen.

even pathan should be an allrounder

[R W S]

Shaun's stats

PHP Code:

           . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mat  Runs  HS   BatAv 100  50   W    BB  BowlAv 5w  Ct St
            overall               91  3120 111   31.51   2  13 371  7/87   21.98 16  65  0 


Other players that have scored over 2000 runs and taken 200 wickets:
Sobers, Dev, Botham, Khan, Cairns, Hadlee, Akram, Warne, Benaud, Vaas.

details here

[Zainub]

Not calling Shaun Pollock an all rounder would be a grave injustice, his batting probably is just suffering, as some one else points out from the fact that in recent times, he has had no one but Ntitni to rely on in sharing the responisibility bowling wise. I do think though, that he is man of good temprement and lots of guts, he'll play a good innings sooner rather than later.

[Milo]

Pollock's just having a bad trot with the bat at the moment. Just like Vaughan did. Fact still remains he has played two very important innings in the series so far, and is still very much an all-rounder. If this thread had replaced Pollock's name with Flintoff's there would have been all sorts of uproar.

[John]

Quite right Milo Flintoff couldn't wear Pollocks jock strap as a crickter. There is no comparison between the two.

[Ernest]

Why Milo, why would there have been an uproar?,what problem have you got with Flintoff, who has the better batting average, and also has bowled as well as anyone this series.

Even on the 4th Test, he was pounding away, worked into the ground, and what happened, when he created a chance, it was dropped, like all though his career.
No there is no comparason between the two Milo, Flintoff is a true all-rounder, Pollock aint! Pollock has always been a bowler 1st, a great bowler in his day, but his batting was only a bonus.