Was Dennis Lillee really that great?

[Lurker]

Although this comment sure cracked me up' date='[b'] Imran was a better bowler than Lillee. And lets not try to paint Lillee like some fairy from the sky. The guy had a run-in with practically every cricketer of the era.

Better bowler? How? The man was the biggest prima donna cricket has seen. Think of 80s Shoaib Akhtar, only better in terms of performance on the field and worse off the field. Never played Pakistan's domestic cricket and was renowned to make a gala entry into stadiums on helicopter to play a game. And then would pick players at random. All this nonsense of Pakistan's player power stemmed from this one man. But yeah do help me understand how his bowling was better?

[f.b.m]

Statsguru is god. And I like talking shite about players that I've never seen. Thus I become knowledgeable..

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[bunny]

Stats wise I'd agree that Lillee is overrated. There are a few other stats that I can bring in which would seem to indicate that Lillee was not as productive as some of the other great bowlers. However, my guess is that Lillee was known for producing unplayable deliveries, ferocious spells, etc which "adds" to the greatness. [ame=

Dennis Lillee: 8-29 against World 11[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOh-BNyAM_Q]YouTube- Dennis Lillee vs Vivian Richards[/ame] However, from what I've seen, read and analyzed, Lillee is clearly below Marshall. In fact most bowlers are.

[Lurker]

Not half as good as Lillee? Why? Didn't he achieve better results playing in the exact same era as Lillee? Also it's a fact that he had to bowl half his matches on dead tracks of the sub continent.

Which is one reason why you should make assertions after seeing players. Imran's performance in India(another subcontinent country btw) is hardly anything to write about. I beleive he made 3 trips and ended up with 1 good series (79-80). Even in that series he was outbowled by Kapil Dev who was picked by Pakistan skipper Asif Iqbal as the man who made the difference between the two teams.

If you are talking about ball tampering, then what about Akram, why exactly the same doesn't apply to him?

Who do you think Akram learnt ball tampering from??? You should maybe watch some of his videos.

When did I say Imran is not rated? All I said is that as a bowler he doesn't even get half the credit that Lillee gets.

And I am asking you which fan does not rate Imran Khan the bowler?? He is probably the finest Pakistani bowler for many. It is absolutely ridiculous to think he is not rated. Why dont you put a poll on say PP and see what the results are?

It's one thing when you talk about batsman. Viv Richards, despite averaging lower than Border, Gavaskar, Chappel and Miandad, is rated higher than all of them because of his unmatched ability to destroy bowling attacks. In batting, it's not only how many runs you score, but also about the way in which you score them. I don't think there's such a thing in bowling. I mean no one gives a damn how a bowler takes his wickets, all that matters is whether he is getting wickets or not.

Probably sums your knowledge , or lack there of, very well. In other words Bowler X taking 3 top wickets and bowler Y taking last 4 wickets are the same, eh?? This thread is frankly so nonsensical I am not even sure where to start on why Lillee is a great bowler. xxx

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Hadlee - 86 Tests' date= 431 wickets, 22.29 (ave), SR - 50.8 Lillee - 70 Tests, 355 wickets, 23.92 (ave), SR - 52

Hadlee played 16 more Test matches than Lillee, took 76 more wickets and yet managed an average and strike rate much superior than Lillee. This time there is no excuse of ball tampering or biased umpiring. If at all Lillee had the advantage over hadlee of having great support from the other end. Handlee achieved it all with virtually no support from the other end. Yet, Lillee is rated by the Australians and British like some kind of a super man. Maybe he was, but then why doesn't guys like Hadlee get the same appreciation as a bowler. I know he does, but never as much as Lillee (as a pure bowler).

[vvvslaxman]

Fast and furious' date=' completely agreed. WISDEN noted during that era that the bowling combo of Lillee and Thomson was easily the most fearsome in Test cricket history. But does speed necessarily make a bowler the best among his contemporaries? Akhtar's speed never made him even half the bowler that Akram was.[/quote'] based on that argument every bowler is over-rated. Those guys have seen him played with him, We are just internet warriors. We all have opinons though. For instance Lot of guys say Akram is the best left arm fast bowler ever to play. I am a huge fan. But i rate Alan Davidson ahead of him. That doesn't mean Akram is over-rated. You should have lived in that era to realize what an important man Lillee was to his country. I had an opportunity to read Lillee books "Art of Fast bowling". It was a beautiful book. He is a library of fast bowling.

[vvvslaxman]

Hadlee played 16 more Test matches than Lillee, took 76 more wickets and yet managed an average and strike rate much superior than Lillee. This time there is no excuse of ball tampering or biased umpiring. If at all Lillee had the advantage over hadlee of having great support from the other end. Handlee achieved it all with virtually no support from the other end. Yet, Lillee is rated by the Australians and British like some kind of a super man. Maybe he was, but then why doesn't guys like Hadlee get the same appreciation as a bowler. I know he does, but never as much as Lillee (as a pure bowler).

That is because apart from Hadlee everyone else sucked in his team :hysterical: Seriously you could hardly call that as a difference.

[Lurker]

heres a tickler for the Lillee bhakts ... Bowler A : 219 wkts at 26.4 on Pitches not conducive for fast bowling. Bowler B : 231 wkts at 23.7 on Pitches most conducive for fast bowling. who is the better bowler ? :hmmm:

Bowler C: 100 wickets in 21 Tests, 11 series, 32 innings, 7894 deliveries, 4567 dot balls, 17 no balls, 18 leg byes, 27 wides, strike rate 73, maiden 1500, bowled with left arm 4000, bowled with right arm 3894, round the wicket 33%, over the wicket 67%, 765 balls before lunch, 23 times bowled in mandatory overs.

[Lurker]

Hadlee played 16 more Test matches than Lillee, took 76 more wickets and yet managed an average and strike rate much superior than Lillee. This time there is no excuse of ball tampering or biased umpiring. If at all Lillee had the advantage over hadlee of having great support from the other end. Hadlee achieved it all with virtually no support from the other end.

Arre Bhaiya Hadlee modelled himself after Dennis Lillee. You should read from Hadlee's mouth in what respect he holds Lillee and frankly every other bowler of his time did. It is something similar to Sehwag vs Sachin, for lack of a better example. Hadlee would be right up there for me as a bowler, I dont put him on top because he was an 80s McGrath, the metronome, just not my style. But you wouldnt know it if you have only checked out Statsguru.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

Great ! Because Bowler A in my post is none other than your hero Kapil Dev ... I hope you now recognize how far better Kapil was compared to your Bowler C or Bowler B(Lillee) .... :--D

Bah! You really need to remind me of 219 wickets@26.4?? Fans who lived before days of Statsguru would know that figure right off the bat. That all being said, do I consider Kapil Dev as a better bowler than Lillee? No. Do I consider Kapil as the greatest all-rounder in history?? You bet your dollars, and stats :winky:

[vvvslaxman]

Arre Bhaiya Hadlee modelled himself after Dennis Lillee. You should read from Hadlee's mouth in what respect he holds Lillee and frankly every other bowler of his time did. It is something similar to Sehwag vs Sachin, for lack of a better example. Hadlee would be right up there for me as a bowler, I dont put him on top because he was an 80s McGrath, the metronome, just not my style. But you wouldnt know it if you have only checked out Statsguru.

It really irks me when people read cricinfo and come and argue. They just don't read the historywhat kind of impact they brought about. There are lot of unquantifiable factors that some of our fans fail to grasp. They just go to statsguru pull out some random stats and say so and so is not as good as he is made out to be.

[Mr. Wicket]

Better bowler? How? The man was the biggest prima donna cricket has seen. Think of 80s Shoaib Akhtar, only better in terms of performance on the field and worse off the field. Never played Pakistan's domestic cricket and was renowned to make a gala entry into stadiums on helicopter to play a game. And then would pick players at random. All this nonsense of Pakistan's player power stemmed from this one man. But yeah do help me understand how his bowling was better?

Oh, don't ask such questions - then he might actually have to watch some of these players and understand a thing or two about them rather than just clutching at stats, straws and biases.

[yoda]

Not the greatest, but obviously a great.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Which is one reason why you should make assertions after seeing players. Imran's performance in India(another subcontinent country btw) is hardly anything to write about. I beleive he made 3 trips and ended up with 1 good series (79-80). Even in that series he was outbowled by Kapil Dev who was picked by Pakistan skipper Asif Iqbal as the man who made the difference between the two teams.

Imran Khan not having a stellar bowling record in India doesn't change the fact that he had to play half his matches on Pakistani wickets which were just as dead and unproductive for fast bowlers as the Indian tracks were. You are mixing up different things here. Also, Imran Khan averages 28.03 with the ball in India, not bad by any means.

Who do you think Akram learnt ball tampering from??? You should maybe watch some of his videos.

How does it matter whom he learnt it from? Bottom line, Akram was caught tampering with the ball. There cannot be different set of rules for different players.

And I am asking you which fan does not rate Imran Khan the bowler?? He is probably the finest Pakistani bowler for many. It is absolutely ridiculous to think he is not rated. Why dont you put a poll on say PP and see what the results are?

Was that the point I'm making? My point was and still is that Imran Khan isn't rated half the bowler that Lillee was by most cricket experts.

Probably sums your knowledge , or lack there of, very well. In other words Bowler X taking 3 top wickets and bowler Y taking last 4 wickets are the same, eh??

:haha: You need to learn the art of comprehension. In other words, bowler A and bowler B both takes 5 top order wickets. It doesn't matter how they got their wickets i.e whether they deceived the batsman with swing or lethal pace, what matters is whether they took those wickets or not. And finally when they have done it, you analyze their performance by looking at their average and strike rate to figure out how many runs they conceded per wicket and how many balls it took them to get a wicket.

[Mr. Wicket]

Not the greatest' date=' but obviously a great.[/quote'] Nice pithy summation.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Not the greatest' date=' but obviously a great.[/quote'] That's my point. A genuine great, a genius. But there maybe someone better than him.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

That's my point. A genuine great' date=' a genius. But there maybe someone better than him.[/quote'] That is highly subjective. Is Marshall the greatest? May be not. Why do we have to dispute the opinion of guys who played alongside him. Nobody can claim that thorne.