Greatest Ever Fast Bowler?

[silentstriker]

Probably influenced by his groupie.

People think I'm joking, but I only use my own stuff or this book for my barbecue recipes:

I'll never look anywhere else unless he comes up with another book.

 

[silentstriker]

Also, the very nature of his accurate bowling meant that he was less affected by changes in pitch conditions than most bowlers. People have the ridiculous misconception that you could just leave balls and be patient with him...but even a cursory look at his stats disproves that notion. His S/R is slightly better than Lillee (considered to be a much more 'aggressive' bowler, which makes no sense) even when bowling in this era. In addition, batsmen like Kallis and Dravid (the quinticenssial patient men of the era) get completely dominated by McGrath.

Not only that, he takes just as many wickets bowled + lbw as Lillee did...so that throws the whole notion of 'bowls outside off stump only' completely out of the park.

 

[shortpitched713]

Takes so much pressure off the other bowlers and puts it on him (Hadlee had to do that to a greater degree tbh, but Hadlee had the benefit of massive greentops prepared just for him in NZ...he's a top five too, but just saying).

Well for me the amount of pressure that Hadlee had playing as a lone hand for NZ more than makes up for the favorable pitches that he faced. In Test cricket I just barely have Hadlee ahead of McGrath for the same reason I have Murali more comfortably ahead of Warne. In the end its been the way that McGrath has been able to bowl so economically and take so many cheap wickets in this most hectic of batsmen's eras in the "bastard" ODI form of cricket that put him over Hadlee.

 

[Ikki]

It would be interesting to see a comparison of how Hadlee and McGrath did when pitches suited them and how they did when it didn't. Just like Warne and Murali, where if you change their home grounds it becomes quite clear how much it helps having your home pitched prepared for you.

 

[gunner]

waqar younis could have been the greatest ever
he got axed after world cup 2003 when he was only 31 years old
even now he can come back cos hes only 35
only 31 years old and having these stats he could have been ahead of shane warne right now and still have a couple more years left in terms of playing

Bowling averages Mat Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4 5 10
Tests 87 16224 8788 373 7/76 13/135 23.56 3.25 43.49 28 22 5
ODIs 262 12698 9919 416 7/36 7/36 23.84 4.68 30.52 14 13 0
First-class 228 39182 21350 956 8/17 22.33 3.26 40.98 63 14
List A 411 19811 15083 674 7/36 7/36 22.37 4.56 29.39 27 17 0
Twenty20 7 156 181 5 3/21 3/21 36.20 6.96 31.20 0 0 0

 

[Slifer]

Marshall for me and for several valid reasons:

1. He took 22 five fors in 81 tests despite having 2 (or sometimes 3 other great bowlers to compete with him for wicets)
2. his amazing strike rate of a touch over 46
3. his amazing average of 20.94 wich i think is the lowest of any bowler wit over 200 wkts.
4. the fact that he thrived both at home and away against all teams (his highest average against ne one team is 22 odd against Australia i think)
5. Unlike many other bowlers on the list Marshall didnt exactly have the common physical features of a fast bowler (he was all of 5 10) but he thrived nevertheless
6. took 4.64 wkts per match which is slightly higher than Mcgrath (the other guy i considered as the best paceman) despite all the competition he had or wkts
7 I could go on and on but basically as mentioned earlier Marsall simply had no faults, and thats y i consider him the best.

 

[open365]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=22EJKoV4dBo

Heh

 

[adharcric]

I'm quite surprised with so many people voting McGrath as the greatest ever. He's certainly belongs in the top 10, but the greatest? I don't know about that.

Did you really have to?

 

[Swervy]

waqar younis could have been the greatest ever
he got axed after world cup 2003 when he was only 31 years old

I think there is some debate as to whether is official D of B is real, rumour has it he is older than he 'officially' is

 

[Swervy]

Marshall for me and for several valid reasons:

1. He took 22 five fors in 81 tests despite having 2 (or sometimes 3 other great bowlers to compete with him for wicets)

and yet that is exactly the arguement that would actually be used against the likes of McGrath or Warne

 

[nightprowler10]

and yet that is exactly the arguement that would actually be used against the likes of McGrath or Warne

That argument can be used against Warne, but certainly not McGrath.

 

[sonia]

very surprising to see waqar not on the list - people have forgotten how good a bowler he was in his prime. he had a strike rate of 39 in tests and of under 30 in ODI's and with over 300 and 400 wickets in each form of the game and average of less than 23. all this was achieved despite playing on some of the most unhelpful and docile wickets of the sub-continent and a fielding side that had some of the worst slip catchers.

for me there has never been a better spectacle of fast bowling than watching waqar in his prime.

he is definitely in my list of the top 3 bowlers ever.

 

[grecian]

Waqar at his best was frightening, it has to be said.

Joel Garner gets my vote tbh, or would.......

 

[gunner]

add waqar to the list

then it would be complete

 

[Matt79]

I figured Ambrose was a little overrated in adharcric's list.

Ambrose is certainly NOT overrated for mine. He's clearly the 2nd best Windies bowler after Marshall IMO, and he at the moment sits in the 3rd seemers slot in my all-time team. 400 wickets at a shade over 20, steepling bounce no batsman was comfortable with, genuine pace, phenomenal accuracy - total package really. Given I'm too young to have seen Lillee bowl, or to have seen Marshall apart from in his twilight as a bowler, Ambrose remains the best quick I've seen, comfortably ahead of McGrath for mine.

 

[Matt79]

People think I'm joking, but I only use my own stuff or this book for my barbecue recipes:

I'll never look anywhere else unless he comes up with another book.

I actually have that book you know...

 

[shortpitched713]

Ambrose is certainly NOT overrated for mine. He's clearly the 2nd best Windies bowler after Marshall IMO, and he at the moment sits in the 3rd seemers slot in my all-time team. 400 wickets at a shade over 20, steepling bounce no batsman was comfortable with, genuine pace, phenomenal accuracy - total package really. Given I'm too young to have seen Lillee bowl, or to have seen Marshall apart from in his twilight as a bowler, Ambrose remains the best quick I've seen, comfortably ahead of McGrath for mine.

I never said hes overrated. Only said hes ranked higher on the list than he should be. McGrath pips him for mine due to his ability to retain an excellent average having played many of his matches in a bowler unfriendly era.

 

[shortpitched713]

It seems I'm taking some flak for not including more options like Garner and Waqar, but seeing as Wasim and Holding have a combined total of two votes I feel once again that I am justified in this decision.

 

[Matt79]

Imran and Donald?




(jj - I think Donald certainly deserves a spot on the short list and including Imran ahead of Garner and Waqar might not be what I'd do, but isn't a ridiculous decision either).

 

[Don]

in all actuality the greatest fast bowler is me. but ok really i lean towards ambrose simply becuz i learnt to bowl watching him and gained a love of fast bowling watching him