The worst 300+ wicket club bowler?

[EnterTheVoid]

Can I ask you a question. Who do you support when India play Australia?

Why do you care ? And what does that have to do with Bhajji being the worst of this lot ?

[pensionplan]

Can I ask you a question. Who do you support when India play Australia?

I know what you do when Nehra is playing in the India team.

[pensionplan]

I have seen some responses here. They are hilarious. How is this any different than debating who between Bradman vs Tendulkar is better or Lara vs Tendulkar or Ponting vs Tendulkar is better. I have seen some of the same folks who are questioning the poll here ridicule Bradman, Lara, Ponting and may other greats. May be the poll is not going to their liking. Hmm... On a relative basis it is a very fair question to ask who among the 300 club is the worst or the weakest bowler. And as of now we all know who the majority here thinks. Personally I think folks here got it right by suggesting it is Harbhajan or even if he get a few more votes he will stay right up at the top of being considered the weakest of the 300 club.

[King Tendulkar]

Why do you care ? And what does that have to do with Bhajji being the worst of this lot ?

Just curious. Just answer the question, I mean its not a tough question or anything. Who do you support when India play Australia?

[King Tendulkar]

I know what you do when Nehra is playing in the India team.

Yeah right:hysterical::hysterical: Trust me if goofy bowls us to WC victory, i would bow to his feet and kiss them! I would annoit him Sir Nehra and offer him thousand apologies

[EnterTheVoid]

Just curious. Just answer the question, I mean its not a tough question or anything. Who do you support when India play Australia?

Convince me the relevance of your question to the issue discussed by the Opening Post.

[King Tendulkar]

Convince me the relevance of your question to the issue discussed by the Opening Post.

Bloody hell talk about avoiding a simple question. You a politician or some thing. Its not a tricky or private question I am asking. Simply who do you support when India play Australia? No releavance to OP, just wondering. Why wont you answer it:hmmm:

[EnterTheVoid]

Bloody hell talk about avoiding a simple question. You a politician or some thing. Its not a tricky or private question I am asking. Simply who do you support when India play Australia? No releavance to OP, just wondering. Why wont you answer it:hmmm:

I got my reasons. You don't need to know them as its none of your business. :hmmm:

[King Tendulkar]

I got my reasons. You don't need to know them as its none of your business. :hmmm:

What are the reasons for not saying who you support between oz and india? Bloody hell did not realise such a simple question would get so deep!

[vaibhav_delhi]

What are the reasons for not saying who you support between oz and india? Bloody hell did not realise such a simple question would get so deep!

1. Being critical of a particular player doesnt have anything to do with allegiance for a team. 2. Even if he supports australia, its no biggie. Its just a sport.

[King Tendulkar]

1. Being critical of a particular player doesnt have anything to do with allegiance for a team. 2. Even if he supports australia, its no biggie. Its just a sport.

Agree with both points to a certain extent. 1. You cant say for example that pakis are objective in their analysis of Indian players. 2. Agree, no probs if he support aus. That point you made you should be directed at him as if he is an aus supporter why not come out and say it, why is he avoiding answering it like politician? Its all very mysterious to me:nervous:

[vaibhav_delhi]

Agree with both points to a certain extent. 1. You cant say for example that pakis are objective in their analysis of Indian players. 2. Agree, no probs if he support aus. That point you made you should be directed at him as if he is an aus supporter why not come out and say it, why is he avoiding answering it like politician? Its all very mysterious to me:nervous:

agreed

[bunny]

Gibbs and/or Murali.

[The Outsider]

Lots of people seem to have missed the idea behind the poll and discussion. Taking 300 wickets is no mean feat. It puts the cricketers in a certain elite category. However, the changing times have meant that 300 wickets does not hold the same level of difficulty and exclusivity as it did 20 years back. Bowlers like Chandra, Holding, Garner were never able to get to 300 wickets, and they had pretty long careers as well. Besides the obvious reason of more cricket being played, I think the decline in bowling stocks over the past few years has also played a part. Quite a few bowlers today continue to find a spot in the side, despite not being very good test bowlers. Declining bowling stocks around the world have also played a part in a few players racking up the wickets. As someone alluded to earlier in the thread, someone like Kaneria is not far off from a mark considered to be a domain of exclusivity a couple of decades back. For me, it is probably Lee. He had one good season as the spearhead of his attack, otherwise was pretty poor and picked off the success of McGrath, Warne, and Gillespie or was regularly thrashed. I did put Vettori up in the poll, but on hindsight he probably should not be there because for the last 4 seasons or so he has been playing as a genuine all rounder, averaging 40 with the bat. So kind of unfair on him, but on the other hand he does not have too many great bowling performances even from before that time.

[The Outsider]

I have seen some of the same folks who are questioning the poll here ridicule Bradman, Lara, Ponting and may other greats. May be the poll is not going to their liking. Hmm...

One of them has two of his threads on the front page. One titled 'Rohit Sharma is class', the other 'Ponting is mediocre'!

[The Dark Horse]

One of them has two of his threads on the front page. One titled 'Rohit Sharma is class'' date= the other 'Ponting is mediocre'!

:cantstop:

[Sid]

One of them has two of his threads on the front page. One titled 'Rohit Sharma is class'' date= the other 'Ponting is mediocre'!

:giggle:

[yoda]

The point is not about declining bowling quality, rather that none of them belong to any "worst list". They have all done admirably well for their countries and won them numerous matches. That they continued to play cause rest of the available talent wasn't up to the mark in their countries actually raises their value cause if they weren't fit enough to keep playing, their countries would be worse off.

[maniac]

It's Vettori quite easily from the list. Have to say though, if Kaneria picks 39 more wickets he'd be the undisputed "winner"!

If Khatmal is still the keeper he might have to pick up 78 wickets,Poor guy he would have been in the club if not for Akmal. And yes we would have the obvious winner.

[The Outsider]

The point is not about declining bowling quality' date=' rather that none of them belong to any "worst list". They have all done admirably well for their countries and won them numerous matches. That they continued to play cause rest of the available talent wasn't up to the mark in their countries actually raises their value cause if they weren't fit enough to keep playing, their countries would be worse off.[/quote'] For me, there is a clear distinction in class between and a Lee and an Akram. What is wrong in pointing that out? What is wrong in ranking the 24 cricketers who have taken 300+ wickets and picking out the worst amongst the group? All cricket forums are replete with comparison threads. Your point is absurd as saying that just because Bangladesh play test cricket and have a bunch of no doubt dedicated cricketers, they don't belong in any 'worst' list. Well ICC publishes such a list every week, it's called the rankings. Anyhow, if you don't understand or agree with the reasoning behind the thread, don't participate. Simple. There are plenty who are contributing to the thread in the spirit of it's original intention, after understanding that it is not meant to be a mindless bashing thread.