Test bowlers with 900+ rating points - Bumrah attains highest ever test rating (904) among Indian bowlers

[Chakdephatte]

Test cricket has a long history but there are only 25 bowlers who breached 900 points mark. It's much less likely than a batsman hitting the same mark. 

 

Bumrah currently at 890 is 37th best of all time. ICC is going to update the rankings today and he will be over 900 in all likelihood. 

 

Here's the list with two bowlers who last played more than 100 years ago at top-- 

https://www.relianceiccrankings.com/alltime/test/bowling/

 

[Majestic]

Who told you ICC is going to update its ranking today and this is last updated after 2nd test right?

[Trichromatic]

Ashwin 904

Bumrah 904

Jadeja 899

Kapil 877

[Trichromatic]

Harbhajan never managed even 800.

[Trichromatic]

3 hours ago, Majestic said:

Who told you ICC is going to update its ranking today and this is last updated after 2nd test right?

 

It's updated and Bumrah has attained highest ever rating for Indian bowlers - 904.

 

 

[VT87]

Sachin wasn’t able to cross 900 rating despite the best batsman ever produced by India 

[Lord]

20 minutes ago, VT87 said:

Sachin wasn’t able to cross 900 rating despite the best batsman ever produced by India 

 

Says more about rankings than Sachin

[putrevus]

Sachin never attaining 900 rating says two things, he never faced top class bowling in a series plus he never was able to dominate any series.

[Ultimate_Game]

2 hours ago, VT87 said:

Sachin wasn’t able to cross 900 rating despite the best batsman ever produced by India 

 

Tendulkar's forte was consistency, not insane peaks or pathetic lows.

 

Likes of Mohd Yusuf and Kohli may have had a higher rating than Tendulkar but we all know who the better batsman was, and whom we would prefer to have in the team.

 

Same with bowling. There might be 30 or so bowlers in the history of the game who may have had a higher peak rating but you wouldn't pick them ahead of Bumrah in the team.

 

Peak score/rating is a useless stat which simply tells you how high a peak a player was able to achieve. It doesn't factor in longevity, and consistency. It's similar to saying Andy Ganteaume has a better batting average than Bradman, i.e. a totally meaningless stat by itself.

[vvvslaxman]

Ashwin was the only in top 20 in the history of ICC ranking until this. He can push further.

[Vilander]

2 hours ago, VT87 said:

Sachin wasn’t able to cross 900 rating despite the best batsman ever produced by India 

Yup, Sachin was a steady eddy but his steady was super star level. But some of lesser bats often hit higher peaks. If you followed his career you will know the frustration of how the ranking did not consider his logeivity and intense ability to be at that high a level. Not hitting 3 hundreds on trot again a high ranking side was more due to indias playing schedule. 

[sensible-indian]

1 hour ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Tendulkar's forte was consistency, not insane peaks or pathetic lows.

 

Likes of Mohd Yusuf and Kohli may have had a higher rating than Tendulkar but we all know who the better batsman was, and whom we would prefer to have in the team.

 

Same with bowling. There might be 30 or so bowlers in the history of the game who may have had a higher peak rating but you wouldn't pick them ahead of Bumrah in the team.

 

Peak score/rating is a useless stat which simply tells you how high a peak a player was able to achieve. It doesn't factor in longevity, and consistency. It's similar to saying Andy Ganteaume has a better batting average than Bradman, i.e. a totally meaningless stat by itself.

 

Completely agree.

 

Will add a sidenote (NOT related to rankings)

 

Peaking hard in the RIGHT series or for the RIGHT duration is more valuable than consistent scoring.

 

For example, Cook peaked HARD during 2 of the toughest tours - Aus & India.

Result - series win

 

Root is the better bat than Cook but the latter ended up giving English fans their fondest memories.

 

Lara peaked HARD during Aus tour of WI 1998

 

Result - series draw (or else Aus would have thrashed WI)

 

Pujara peaked HARD during 2018 tour.

 

Result - series win

 

Tendulkar peaked HARD during Sharjah 1998 carrying a lame duck team.

 

Result - series win

 

Yuvi peaked HARD during 2007 and 2011 WC

 

Result - series win (no one gives a damn about Yuvi's average)

 

Peak rating is not a useless stat. But yeah, it can be quite misleading if used wrongly.

 

- Botham's peak as an AR was probably unmatched by anyone (maybe except Sobers).

 

- Mushtaq Ahmed in his peak was a better spinner than ALL spinners except Warne & Murali (his body of work was insane for 4 years). 5 wickets per game with 19-21 average in SA, NZ & Aus and 26 average in Eng. Unreal dominance.

 

It matters tho (maybe not ranking points wise but impact wise).

Edited December 25, 2024 by sensible-indian

[putrevus]

Bumrah’s breaching 900 is just awesome , he has shown Indian fast bowlers can be ATG fast bowlers.

[singhvivek141]

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Bumrah’s breaching 900 is just awesome , he has shown Indian fast bowlers can be ATG fast bowlers.

200 wickets milestone is I am kinda expecting from him soon. Its a decent sample size and if he remains fit can reach 300 as well by the time he reached 34.

 

Shami is at 229 but is already 34...may end up between 250-275 wkts.

[putrevus]

3 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

200 wickets milestone is I am kinda expecting from him soon. Its a decent sample size and if he remains fit can reach 300 as well by the time he reached 34.

 

Shami is at 229 but is already 34...may end up between 250-275 wkts.

300 might be hard for Bumrah, 250 might be possible.

 

Shami I have lost hope, he has not played for India since 2023. I still don’t know why he was not called up from 4th test.

[singhvivek141]

2 minutes ago, putrevus said:

300 might be hard for Bumrah, 250 might be possible.

 

Shami I have lost hope, he has not played for India since 2023. I still don’t know why he was not called up from 4th test.

He again has swelling on his knees and joints courtesy of the number of overs he bowled in SMAT.

I don't think he is ready for Tests yet, he is getting old so body will take more time to recover.

 

Bumrah if remains injury free can reach 300...he may take 20-25 tests to reach 100 wkt mark. Consider we play an average of 8 tests per year..he can touch the magical number.

[vvvslaxman]

3 hours ago, Vilander said:

Yup, Sachin was a steady eddy but his steady was super star level. But some of lesser bats often hit higher peaks. If you followed his career you will know the frustration of how the ranking did not consider his logeivity and intense ability to be at that high a level. Not hitting 3 hundreds on trot again a high ranking side was more due to indias playing schedule. 

 

India hardly played any tests in the 90s. It was a massive drawback for Sachin to have massive breaks between test series. It just did not allow him to maintain the rhythm. Often times got out to some loose shots when bowlers were at his mercy. Brian Lara's game was more organic. After a certain point of his innings everything is risk free. Tendulkar had the habit of playing a  lot more in the air in comparison.  If Sachin were in Laxman 's position at Eden Gardens he sure would not have scored 281. He would have scored 170 odd and gotten out. Laxman hardly played anything in the air.

[New guy]

7 hours ago, putrevus said:

Sachin never attaining 900 rating says two things, he never faced top class bowling in a series plus he never was able to dominate any series.

Complete rot, India didnt play enough tests during Sachin's first peak years and he didnt get a chance to play much 4-5 match series to rake up points, in fact he has only ever played 3 5 match series in his entire career, one as a teenm 2nd one where he only played 6 innings in 5 tests and one when he was recovering from injury in 2002 yet still scored 300+

 

Compare to how many 5 match series Ponting, Kohli etc played in their career at their peak

 

Now it makes sense why you are a cult Kohli fan, when you dont really understand how things work

[New guy]

6 hours ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Tendulkar's forte was consistency, not insane peaks or pathetic lows.

 

Likes of Mohd Yusuf and Kohli may have had a higher rating than Tendulkar but we all know who the better batsman was, and whom we would prefer to have in the team.

 

Same with bowling. There might be 30 or so bowlers in the history of the game who may have had a higher peak rating but you wouldn't pick them ahead of Bumrah in the team.

 

Peak score/rating is a useless stat which simply tells you how high a peak a player was able to achieve. It doesn't factor in longevity, and consistency. It's similar to saying Andy Ganteaume has a better batting average than Bradman, i.e. a totally meaningless stat by itself.

You are missing a huge factor. During Sachin's peak we hardly played any test and the test we played were 2 and 3 match series. Sachin did score a lot of runs per calendar year

 

Look at how many 2 match series we played during Sachin's peak years, we never ever played 5 match series, it was always 2 match and 3 match. Getting to play a 5 match series against same opposition on same kind of pitch/country is a huge boon which lets you rake in points. Sachin never got this chance. Kohli, Ponting etc played a ton of 5 match series which helped them rake in points. Sachin simply didnt. 

 

 

 

If he had been getting more tests and longer series, he would easily have crossed the 900 point barrier (as well as the 500+ runs a series barrier). He has scored 400+ in 2 match series, imagine if the series was just longer

[deathmonger]

4 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

He again has swelling on his knees and joints courtesy of the number of overs he bowled in SMAT.

I don't think he is ready for Tests yet, he is getting old so body will take more time to recover.

 

Bumrah if remains injury free can reach 300...he may take 20-25 tests to reach 100 wkt mark. Consider we play an average of 8 tests per year..he can touch the magical number.

More like 10 a year.