Roshanrocks Posted June 22, 2011 Author Posted June 22, 2011 It all depends on whom you want to turn out to be the greatest - once decided' date=' that's half the battle won. From there it's only a question of indulging in sophistry and number crunching, and there are people much more qualified than me on ICF who can give you a step by step guide.[/quote'] Fantastic!!! SO lets begin... WHo do you consider the best ever pace bowler and why?
vamos_rafa Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 SO he was better than Glen and Alan becoz he looked better? :hmmm: Well, he certainly was the meanest of all the bowlers. I am not talking of looks here but if there is one bowler whom you would not like to face then its Curtly. He had both the accuracy of McGrath, the pace of Donald and that towering height because of which the ball bounced of a good length.
Roshanrocks Posted June 22, 2011 Author Posted June 22, 2011 Well' date=' he certainly was the meanest of all the bowlers. I am not talking of looks here but if there is one bowler whom you would not like to face then its Curtly. He had both the accuracy of McGrath, the pace of Donald and that towering height because of which the ball bounced of a good length.[/quote'] That sounds scary Then what about Ambrose?
vamos_rafa Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 That sounds scary Then what about Ambrose? Dude it seems you have lotsa free time today :-P
Roshanrocks Posted June 22, 2011 Author Posted June 22, 2011 Dude it seems you have lotsa free time today :-P yea... but only today :sniffle:
Roshanrocks Posted June 22, 2011 Author Posted June 22, 2011 ^ OK then Bossbhai... tell me your views on who do you feel the best pace bowler ever is and how you would give your views to prove it :hmmm: This thread has come to its second page and still nothing....
Vijay.Sharma Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Which one of these 2 bowlers do you think is the greatest Right arm pace bowler ever to grace the crciket field. Come on guys...put on your thinking caps and start this jugalbandi Bring out the stats... Bring out the er... um... cricketing sensibilities... Lets discuss... If u have any other bowler who u think is comparable to these two then throw them into the ring too... Bring on the discussion.... Bring on the smileys and insults.... Lets start the dance The answer is neither Allan Donald nor Glenn McGrath. It is emphatically Malcolm Marshall. Macko, per me, is the greatest fast bowler to have played Test cricket. my rankings / groupings 1. Macko is top cat, 2. Hadlee, Wasim 3. McGrath, Donald, Imran, Ambrose, Lillee 4. Waqar, Roberts, Lindwall, Holding, Garner, Walsh, Kapil, Botham, Willis, Pollock. Trueman, Hall 5. Miller, Davidson, Tyson, Larwood, Snow, Thomson, McDermott, Srinath, Akthar, Lee, Gough, Fazal, Zak, Asif, Ntini, Bond One bowler I haven't mentioned is still playing and although people have still not recognized him as an ATG, I am happy to have him above the number 4 bunch but not exactly in number 3 as yet (although I wouldn't question his inclusion with number 3 bunch) is Steyn. There is always the tendency to look at bowlers who have gone by as being greater than current ones. In Steyn's case I think he is the first in the 2010s to join the elite club (although ppl will not put him there until he retires after which his legend starts to grow)
Vijay.Sharma Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 :hmmm: But supposing someone got 189 wickets at average of 16.43 would he be better than Ambrose?Depends on what kinda wickets he bowled on, whom he bowled to, what were the playing conditions generally during his era, etc. If your reference is to Barnes and based on this stat declare him the best ever then it's the same thing like Don.
daryl1985 Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 4 world cup finals - 3 wins + 1 MOS (WC 2007) as a bowler with 26 wickets. Highest aggregate wkt taker in all wc combined(71???) Consistently troubled all batsmen in all formats. If i am not wrong Aus never lost any Test series when he played the entire series. He played in all 3 tests in 2000/20001 series defeat in India.
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 I see in another thread that a bower is great if he has broken noses , jaws and heads of batsmen... where can we get stats for this? Now moving to a counter point... If batsmen now are considered to be weaker because they they wear protection ike helmets, thigh pads, crotch pads, chest pads and other pads... and batsmen during those times were more brave because they did not wear protections.... then... would you say bowlers during modern times are better than their previous counter parts because they now have to bowl to "fully armoured" batsmen with short ball restrictions, shorter boundaries, powerful bats? Seriously now I think of it... the modern day bowlers have more handicaps and therefore their achievements should be put on a higher pedestals that their seniors who had a seemingly delicious opportunity to bowl at helpless un-protected batsmen in bigger grounds. So..... We seem to be back to square 1. Who is better? Alan Donald or Glen McGrath ? WOuld Dale STeyn be in the same bracket or below them?
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 Go find bowlerrs who played along with Sir Gubby Allen and form a chain with Donald and McGrath and then pretty much announce whatever you want to regardless of a million holes in the chain ( and ohh you cant use stats guru servers stay away from them ) Bossbhai... a new theory has been developed (by me) that present day bowlers have more handicaps as compared to past bowlers as they have to bowl to armored batsmen with severe restrictions with bouncers and smaller grounds. So on that account... wouldnt all bowlers post-protection era be eliminated from this ummm... ranking process? Poor bowlers of our times also have to bowl at nonsense T20 tournaments with more restrictions and also have to put up with more injuries... injuries u havent heard of before (evolution???) like genital warts.. What do you think saaar? :hmmm:
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 The answer is neither Allan Donald nor Glenn McGrath. It is emphatically Malcolm Marshall. Macko, per me, is the greatest fast bowler to have played Test cricket. my rankings / groupings 1. Macko is top cat, 2. Hadlee, Wasim 3. McGrath, Donald, Imran, Ambrose, Lillee 4. Waqar, Roberts, Lindwall, Holding, Garner, Walsh, Kapil, Botham, Willis, Pollock. Trueman, Hall 5. Miller, Davidson, Tyson, Larwood, Snow, Thomson, McDermott, Srinath, Akthar, Lee, Gough, Fazal, Zak, Asif, Ntini, Bond One bowler I haven't mentioned is still playing and although people have still not recognized him as an ATG, I am happy to have him above the number 4 bunch but not exactly in number 3 as yet (although I wouldn't question his inclusion with number 3 bunch) is Steyn. There is always the tendency to look at bowlers who have gone by as being greater than current ones. In Steyn's case I think he is the first in the 2010s to join the elite club (although ppl will not put him there until he retires after which his legend starts to grow) Did Malcolm Marshall ever bowl on flat dead pitches? How would he compare to McGrath and Donald on those? Did he bowl against world class - all time great batsmen? How many? And who would you consider to be world class all time great batsmen who played during that era? ((you have an advantage of referring to ur virtuoso theory)) As far as I know Marshall never bowled to the best batsmen ever like Bradman, Richards, Sobers, Lara, Ponting, Tendulkar, then how could be be considerd to greatest if he were never tested by ATG talent? He did bowl to gavaskar, that much i know....
rkt.india Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 This is a three-way race...Malcolm Marshall, Curtly Ambrose, and Glenn Mcgrath....rank them at whatever number you want first to third...no one can call you wrong...and please do not ask for stats or logic.... These bowlers are beyond logic and stats....beyond comparable to others....
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 Depends on what kinda wickets he bowled on' date=' whom he bowled to, what were the playing conditions generally during his era, etc. If your reference is to Barnes and based on this stat declare him the best ever then it's the same thing like Don.[/quote'] All the all time greatest ever batsmen appeared after Barnes finished his cricketing career so he wouldnt have much to show for his claim to being the world's best ever bowler.... People now, would hardly even know whom he bowled to... All the greatest cricketing articles seems to have appeared after Bradman started playing :--D
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 4 world cup finals - 3 wins + 1 MOS (WC 2007) as a bowler with 26 wickets. Highest aggregate wkt taker in all wc combined(71???) Consistently troubled all batsmen in all formats. If i am not wrong Aus never lost any Test series when he played the entire series. So appearing in world cup finals and overall performances in world cups makes McGrath the best ever bowler? Considering that people rate that team in which McGrath played as the best ever team, how would playing int the best ever team enhance McGrath's credentials as the best ever bowler? As far as my limited knowledge goes, many of the Windies bowers of the 80's could make the same claim :hmmm:
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now