Who is the best pace bowler of all time?

[funnygirl]

No sean ,i wasn't sarcastic. I was serious .Whenever the discussion of the best bowler arise ,the first thing comes is ''look at the stats'' .and i agreed .Stats tell the whole story . At the end of the day we want results .One can't deny that .

 

[The Sean]

Fair enough. I've said before what I think about using stats as the sole criteria so I won't go into it again, but I do have another question:

By which statistical criteria is McGrath the greatest pace bowler of all time?

 

[funnygirl]

He played more matches than Malcolm Marshall and it is difficult to keep that average and SR with more matches .So in that way .When u play more it is difficult to keep the consistency ,isn't it .He kept that consisitency for a long period of time than any other fast bowler .

 

[The Sean]

Well that would at least in part have a lot to do with today's players cramming a lot more cricket into the same number of years as their predecessors, don't you think? Do you judge batsmen by the same criteria?

I think you and silentstriker will get on very well indeed. As long as you don't mention the "McGrath is boring" part.

 

[pasag]

Stats are evil.

 

[The Sean]

Stats are fan-bloody-tastic.

As long as they're not all you look at.

 

[funnygirl]

Me and silent striker ....

My favourite pacer is Wasim Akram ,now silent striker will eat me alive .

 

[The Sean]

Just stick with "McGrath is the best ever" and he'll be so impressed he might not even notice anything else you say...

I'm with you on the Akram-worship though.

 

[funnygirl]

I can bet for my life that silent striker won't be a fan of Lara .Because

Lara said ''Wasim is the greatest fast bowler i ever faced'' .

Back to the topic ,i am the biggest hater of stats .but then can we win an argument without touching it ?.No .i don't think so.It always pop up .So better surrender to all those ''boring,but my stats are better '' players.
.

 

[The Sean]

I can bet for my life that silent striker won't be a fan of Lara .Because

Lara said ''Wasim is the greatest fast bowler i ever faced'' .

Back to the topic ,i am the biggest hater of stats .but then can we win an argument without touching it ?.No .i don't think so.It always pop up .So better surrender to all those ''boring,but my stats are better '' players.
.

Well the stats-only vs the stats-plus-other-factors thing has been done on here many times even in my relatively short CW lifespan, but suffice it to say I haven't surrendered and neither have plenty of others.

 

[Richard]

I've said it before, and it's all I've to say here - stats tell you most things if you look deep enough and don't just swallow the simple few ones you get given by CricInfo and TV producers.

Except the things that cannot be expressed using them, of course. Sadly, these number a fair bit.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

My top 5 pace bowlers of alltime:

1.Imran Khan
2.Richard Hadlee
3.Malcom Marshall
4.Wasim Akram
5.Glenn McGrath

 

[Richard]

Really? You've never mentioned that before.

 

[Matt79]

^

 

[nightprowler10]

I agree. McGrath was a terrific bowler but you always got the feeling that he relied a lot on the batsman making a mistake to get his wickets. Nothing wrong with that mind you for it works perfectly and is the smartest way to do things without giving much away. But one always felt, watching him, that he would have a tough time getting someone like Gavaskar.

It was Sobers who once said that there is no reason to play a defensive shot to a ball that is not going to hit the stumps. If you cant hit it for runs leave it alone. Gavaskar lived that credo and unlike Sobers thought even fewer of them should be hot for runs too.

Batsmen of the modern era have, by and large, not too great footwork. You dont see decisive early decision in mobement of the feet and full movement back and across when moving back. This is elementary for followingthe above advise of Sobers. It is also, one must add, equally effective in playing better strokes but for defense and for judging which ball to play it is absolutely vital One day cricket has affected batting in many ways of which footwork is a fundamental one.

I have always been reminded of Hadlee when watching MacGrath but never felt the Aussie was as dangerous if the batsman was really smart. Hadlee made it very difficult to ignore (leave alone) most of his balls. He was proactive at the bowling crease as are all those aspiring for the very top spot amongst the games greatest bowlers - Imran, Lillee, Marshall, Barnes.

I remember saying that about McGrath about a year and a half back I was ridiculed for it. In short, completely agreed.

 

[Richard]

I remember saying it non-stop throughout my first year on CW.

Yes, and being ridiculed non-stop. Didn't sway me one bit though.

 

[Swervy]

I remember saying it non-stop throughout my first year on CW.

Yes, and being ridiculed non-stop. Didn't sway me one bit though.

you said he was lucky!

 

[Richard]

No, that was a general term used (inaccurately, really) to describe what I said about him.

I said he offered no wicket-taking threat on non-seaming, non-uneven pitches (which were almost exclusively what he played on in the time in question) between August 2001 and November 2004, and that the wickets he did get during that time were down to poor strokes not good bowling.

Amazingly enough, I still feel that way, despite the barrage I faced from the likes of Marc, tec, yourself, Fuller, and quite a few others. This, however, was not indicative of the greater part of his career and before (so I'm assured by Mr Taylor) and after (as I know by watching myself) he proved well capable of bowling wicket-taking deliveries on any surface.

 

[SJS]

Didn't sway me one bit though.

What does ?
Kidding

 

[Richard]

Don't get it.