Who's is greatest ODI bowler?

[Trichromatic]

Wasim

Murali

McGrath

Waqar

Brett Lee

Saqlain

Donald

 

[kohli]

McGrath 

wasim 

murli 

lee 

strac 

saqlain 

donald 
waqar 

[Majestic]

Wasim

McGrath

Murali

Starc

Saqlain

 

That's top 5 for me. Rest are in lower tiers.

[zen]

Appears as if many forumers do not know about guys like Garner

[Adamant]

Mcgrath

Wasim

Murali

Starc

Garner. 

[Vk1]

Starc should become the GOAT in few years. Having those stats in the modern game is incredible and unbelievable. And to add to that he has done well in WC as well.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Vk1

[Tattieboy]

Joel Garner 

[Ankit_sharma03]

If starc wud have had the old 50 over ball his number wud have been crazy good and heard england use to have duke balls in ODI in 90s 

[Gollum]

Garner

Starc

Wasim

[Cricketics]

On 10/11/2020 at 7:49 AM, zen said:

Appears as if many forumers do not know about guys like Garner

 

You can't expect millenials to comment on cricketers from yesteryears like that form 70s and 80s since they never watched them live and highlights is not any indication for them. You can look highlights and enjoy how good their bowling was but can't determine things how good they were overall in bowling in different spells etc. Such kind of ball to ball footage is not available and even if it was, no one has time to watch all of it ball to ball. Hence, better to not comment on yesteryears cricketers for them. We can talk about their pace appreciate the run up of Michael Holding and how quick he was and things like that but thats about it. Most of us here are Millenials or some who never watched these guys. 

 

I am not going to write about 80s bowlers since i never watched them live, if I would write that means I am just doing for the heck of it, when reality is, I have just seen their footages in cricket classics etc. Thats not enough. I think no millenial has that proper knowledge or got to see all of those bowlers enough.

 

But its always great to hear comments from people who were old enough to watch Kapil Dev's team win championships or old enough to watch the 70s of windies. If you did, I would love to read your comments about them. 

 

 

[zen]

11 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

 

You can't expect millenials to comment on cricketers from yesteryears like that form 70s and 80s since they never watched them live and highlights is not any indication for them. You can look highlights and enjoy how good their bowling was but can't determine things how good they were overall in bowling in different spells etc. Such kind of ball to ball footage is not available and even if it was, no one has time to watch all of it ball to ball. Hence, better to not comment on yesteryears cricketers for them. We can talk about their pace appreciate the run up of Michael Holding and how quick he was and things like that but thats about it. Most of us here are Millenials or some who never watched these guys. 

 

I am not going to write about 80s bowlers since i never watched them live, if I would write that means I am just doing for the heck of it, when reality is, I have just seen their footages in cricket classics etc. Thats not enough. I think no millenial has that proper knowledge or got to see all of those bowlers enough.

 

But its always great to hear comments from people who were old enough to watch Kapil Dev's team win championships or old enough to watch the 70s of windies. If you did, I would love to read your comments about them. 

 

 

 

I only have vague memories of cricket in late 80s. I followed most of my cricket in the 90s and early 2000s. But that does not mean that I have not spent time on learning about these cricketers through a variety of sources.

 

If people are only rating those they saw, then in future we may not see McGrath/Wasim/Warne or Tendulkar/Lara/Ponting, as our choices are going to be limited (and probably pointless). If our list only includes players we watched it is better to put a note.

 

 

On the plus side,  I see that a quite a few folks have picked Garner - esp. known for yorkers.

 

 

 

 

 

Also performed in key matches like the WC final in 1979: 

 

 

[Cricketics]

24 minutes ago, zen said:

 

 

I only have vague memories of cricket in late 80s. I followed most of my cricket in the 90s and early 2000s. But that does not mean that I have not spent time on learning about these cricketers through a variety of sources.

 

I

 

 

 

Also performed in key matches like the WC final in 1979: 

Yes, I spent my childhood and most days in middle school/High school uploading videos of the greats of 80s and watched them and saw a lot of it. I just feel I did not watch them live and never got to watch them play by by ball likeI did the 90s players. 
 

Just based on that indigigation, I won’t put Boris Baker as one of the best returners of the game, better than Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic. Its just not true indigation of mastery or idea way tp categorize if they were the masters. These are my personal viewpoints.

 

Imagine Steyn’s spell to Tendulkar at Durban, had it happenend in 70s without much or proper ball by ball coverage available to people of 90s, we would have never got to experience how great a spell that was by Steyn and also top grit and temperament shown by Tendulkar to negotiate Steyn.

 

 

Sometimee in highlights packages you miss that and only see the best balls etc, without seeing how consistent they bowler to a particular bat.  Thats just what I am pointing af. Nothing otherwise wrong in bringing past players. Like I said, I would love to hear from people who if watched live, how they felt.

 

 

Meanwhile I play cricket with a lot of West Indians from whom I hear a lot and I have have seen a lot of footages of Garner, Marshall, Holding and I rate them all high. I just feel it was a different era of fast bowling. They are all legends. 

 

[zen]

50 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Meanwhile I play cricket with a lot of West Indians from whom I hear a lot and I have have seen a lot of footages of Garner, Marshall, Holding and I rate them all high. I just feel it was a different era of fast bowling. They are all legends. 

 

Marshall, probably the best test pace bowler, was not as effective as Garner in ODIs though. 

[Cricketics]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Marshall, probably the best test pace bowler, was not as effective as Garner in ODIs though. 

Yeah. Plus adding again, the game has changed now too so much that every fast bowler from yesteryear eta might get tonked in todays era.

 

They bowled to batsman based on batsman’s strength in that era.l just like how current bowlers do. think honestly its futile to compare eras. Hence I have lost interest in this pick the best all time x1 etc type of discussions. 

 

 

[zen]

10 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Yeah. Plus adding again, the game has changed now too so much that every fast bowler from yesteryear eta might get tonked in todays era.

 

They bowled to batsman based on batsman’s strength in that era.l just like how current bowlers do. think honestly its futile to compare eras. Hence I have lost interest in this pick the best all time x1 etc type of discussions. 

 

 

Yeah, there would be nuances to specific era but "ATG" by definition means someone who is good enough to be successful in any period. For e.g. a Lara can be as effective facing the spin quartet of 60s-70s Ind as against Warne or Murali, and facing Starc, Bumrah, etc. Similarly, a Viv Richards can be successful tonking bowlers in any period and format. 

[Tattieboy]

10 hours ago, zen said:

 

Yeah, there would be nuances to specific era but "ATG" by definition means someone who is good enough to be successful in any period. For e.g. a Lara can be as effective facing the spin quartet of 60s-70s Ind as against Warne or Murali, and facing Starc, Bumrah, etc. Similarly, a Viv Richards can be successful tonking bowlers in any period and format. 

Excuse me !!!!.... Sir IVA Richards did not tonk !! He majestically hit proper cricket shots with his natural power with what would be classified as a match stick today  lol 

Now I HAVE seen every bowler from 70s to date and Joel Garner was THE best odi bowler bar none !!

Every great from a previous era would be a great today !! With all the improved things like cricket academy's , under age cricket , fitness regimes ,  bigger bats , videos analysis, game management , huge backroom teams etc etc etc , .. Today's fitness regimes certainly are making better fielders but in one area they are behind yesterday's cricketers and I don't know why and that is Slip Catching ..

[putrevus]

Garner would be best, Ambrose, Mcgrath and Akram would be second, you can flip a coin between these three.

[rkt.india]

On 10/13/2020 at 2:21 AM, Cricketics said:

 

You can't expect millenials to comment on cricketers from yesteryears like that form 70s and 80s since they never watched them live and highlights is not any indication for them. You can look highlights and enjoy how good their bowling was but can't determine things how good they were overall in bowling in different spells etc. Such kind of ball to ball footage is not available and even if it was, no one has time to watch all of it ball to ball. Hence, better to not comment on yesteryears cricketers for them. We can talk about their pace appreciate the run up of Michael Holding and how quick he was and things like that but thats about it. Most of us here are Millenials or some who never watched these guys. 

 

I am not going to write about 80s bowlers since i never watched them live, if I would write that means I am just doing for the heck of it, when reality is, I have just seen their footages in cricket classics etc. Thats not enough. I think no millenial has that proper knowledge or got to see all of those bowlers enough.

 

But its always great to hear comments from people who were old enough to watch Kapil Dev's team win championships or old enough to watch the 70s of windies. If you did, I would love to read your comments about them. 

 

 

Garner played in absolutely amateur ODI era, so, very difficult to judge him.

[rkt.india]

McGrath, Brett Lee, Wasim, Starc, Shane Bond, Donald, Ambrose, Bumrah

Edited October 14, 2020 by rkt.india

[rkt.india]

On 10/13/2020 at 4:31 AM, zen said:

 

Yeah, there would be nuances to specific era but "ATG" by definition means someone who is good enough to be successful in any period. For e.g. a Lara can be as effective facing the spin quartet of 60s-70s Ind as against Warne or Murali, and facing Starc, Bumrah, etc. Similarly, a Viv Richards can be successful tonking bowlers in any period and format. 

You cannot say the same in case of bowlers. Lot of variabilities.