Do you consider Malcolm Marshall...

[Migara]

Nah, he had Vaas.

 

[Matt79]

did anyone carry his team as much as hadlee in the 80's ?

Murali perhaps? Especially overseas?

Nah, he had Vaas.

Murali I'd say. Also Andy Flower. Allan Border in the mid-80s. Brian Lara and now Shiv Chandrapaul at times for the Windies.

 

[nightprowler10]

Nah, he had Vaas.

Overseas?

 

[Migara]

Overseas?

Average of 32.5 is not that bad IMO. Zoysa and Malinga also average around 32-33 overseas. When IND, PAK and BAN removed from the equation (as they produce spin friendly pitches) Vaas still averages 33, Malinga 33.5 and Zoysa 31.5 to go with Murali's 25.9.

 

[bagapath]

Average of 32.5 is not that bad IMO

when you are discusssing greatness, 32.5 is quite poor IMO

 

[Migara]

when you are discusssing greatness, 32.5 is quite poor IMO

I thought we were discussing about support, not greatness?

 

[bagapath]

cool. i misuderstood it.

 

[JBH001]

Hmm, Vaas has a better overseas average than I had thought. Although, iirc, he does tend to not take too many wickets (on a wickets/test basis). Also, I doubt I can include Zoysa and Malinga as they are both, imo, a little too recent to count and have not taken enough wickets or played enough tests (although I might be a little picky here). Murali's ascent to greatness (if I can call it that) began in 97/98 after the home and away series to India (where, iirc, a couple of fearful tonkings from Sidhu made him revise the length he was bowling) and Zoysa and Malinga only begin to figure from 2006 onwards. Vaas, however, was - as you rightly say - there througout.

Also, if we are talking about support, then we should certainly count Chatfield and Cairns who were great foils for Hadlee. Although none of these, Sri Lankan or Kiwi, were or are in the same league as the WI 'support' quicks that Marshall had around him.

 

[bagapath]

Hmm, Vaas has a better overseas average than I had thought. Although, iirc, he does tend to not take too many wickets (on a wickets/test basis). Also, I doubt I can include Zoysa and Malinga as they are both, imo, a little too recent to count and have not taken enough wickets or played enough tests (although I might be a little picky here). Murali's ascent to greatness (if I can call it that) began in 97/98 after the home and away series to India (where, iirc, a couple of fearful tonkings from Sidhu made him revise the length he was bowling) and Zoysa and Malinga only begin to figure from 2006 onwards. Vaas, however, was - as you rightly say - there througout.

Also, if we are talking about support, then we should certainly count Chatfield and Cairns who were great foils for Hadlee. Although none of these, Sri Lankan or Kiwi, were or are in the same league as the WI 'support' quicks that Marshall had around him.

in the days of marshall, patterson, davis and walsh were the support acts. holding and garner were spearheads in their own right. although, due to the age factor, and ofcourse superior skills, marshall had his nose ahead of them since 82-83.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, Marshall's career - in terms of who he played alongside - is an interesting one. He first played Test cricket genuinely in 1980 in England, but his first 9 Tests (4 in England in 1980; all 4 in Pakistan in 1980/81; then 1 more at home to England in 1981) all came as a fill-in, when one or more of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft were unavailable. He mixed the good with the bad in this time (I'd say he had 3 excellent games, 3 moderate and 3 poor) and overall they produced an average of 26.41.

Croft left the team and in '83, Marshall finally became a first-choice, and on a couple of occasions played alongside Roberts, Holding and Garner in what is surely the best first-choice attack West Indies have ever fielded. However, Garner picked-up a bad injury meaning this lasted just 2 games. By the time he was back, and just 2 series' (both against India) after Marshall became established, Roberts then retired. For the next 3 years it was Marshall, Holding, Garner and someone else. In '84 against Australia and England, it was Baptiste. In '84/85, Walsh debuted. Then Winston Davis returned in '85, then in '86 it was Patrick Patterson debuting. In this "first leg", '83 to '86, Marshall picked-up 181 wickets in 33 matches at 19.64

The "second leg" of Marshall's career begun in '86/87, when Holding and Garner quickly waned and were gone. In the 36 matches comprising it, he picked-up 161 wickets in 36 matches at 20.10. His support acts here were the likes of Tony Gray, Patterson, Walsh, Bishop, Ambrose and Winston Benjamin. None too shabby by any stretch of the imagination, but somehow not quite to my mind in the Holding and Garner league - with the exception of the injury-plagued Bishop and, eventually (but not straight away, and not until Marshall's career was almost over) Ambrose.

 

[Rant0r]

Yeah, Marshall's career - in terms of who he played alongside - is an interesting one. He first played Test cricket genuinely in 1980 in England, but his first 9 Tests (4 in England in 1980; all 4 in Pakistan in 1980/81; then 1 more at home to England in 1981) all came as a fill-in, when one or more of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft were unavailable. He mixed the good with the bad in this time (I'd say he had 3 excellent games, 3 moderate and 3 poor) and overall they produced an average of 26.41.

Croft left the team and in '83, Marshall finally became a first-choice, and on a couple of occasions played alongside Roberts, Holding and Garner in what is surely the best first-choice attack West Indies have ever fielded. However, Garner picked-up a bad injury meaning this lasted just 2 games. By the time he was back, and just 2 series' (both against India) after Marshall became established, Roberts then retired. For the next 3 years it was Marshall, Holding, Garner and someone else. In '84 against Australia and England, it was Baptiste. In '84/85, Walsh debuted. Then Winston Davis returned in '85, then in '86 it was Patrick Patterson debuting. In this "first leg", '83 to '86, Marshall picked-up 181 wickets in 33 matches at 19.64

The "second leg" of Marshall's career begun in '86/87, when Holding and Garner quickly waned and were gone. In the 36 matches comprising it, he picked-up 161 wickets in 36 matches at 20.10. His support acts here were the likes of Tony Gray, Patterson, Walsh, Bishop, Ambrose and Winston Benjamin. None too shabby by any stretch of the imagination, but somehow not quite to my mind in the Holding and Garner league - with the exception of the injury-plagued Bishop and, eventually (but not straight away, and not until Marshall's career was almost over) Ambrose.

i challenge anyone to name a better attack

 

[LongHopCassidy]

i challenge anyone to name a better attack

Charizard's Fire Blast against a Venusaur, for mine.

 

[bagapath]

i challenge anyone to name a better attack

well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

mcgrath
gillespie
lee
warne

akram
younis
akhthar
saqlain

 

[Goughy]

akram
younis
akhthar
saqlain

This attack played together in 2 games and didnt win either (1 of which was agianst Zim).

IMO, neither the Pak attack or the Aus attack quite compares

 

[Richard]

well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

mcgrath
gillespie
lee
warne

Not a chance. Lee only became a good bowler after McGrath, Gillespie and Warne were no more in Test cricket.

Well, there was 2000/01, but again the attack played together once in that time, IIRR. Lee debuted in 1999/2000, a season which Gillespie missed entirely due to injury - though he was replaced by Damien Fleming who though he didn't have a long career was IMO every bit as good as Gillespie when he did play - but this was smack in the middle of Warne's 3-year down period where he wasn't all that good. No attack between March 1998 and March 2001 can be considered for mine, as a Warne at the top of his game is absolutely essential.

The best Australian attack fielded in the last 19 years was, without question for me, the one which played most of the calendar-year 2004 - McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Warne. This attack conquered Australia's most difficult frontiers (SL and Ind), and was peerless at home - hardly anyone scored a run against them other than on a rank featherbed at Cairns, and that too just Marvan Atapattu and Mahela Jayawardene, two excellent technicians.

At no other point was there an attack filled with four bowlers, all of whom had proven their excellence beforehand and all of whom were not either out-of-form at the time or constantly missing with injury.

However, does McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Warne of 2004 compare to Roberts, Holding, Garner, Marshall of 1983? Not a chance, IMO. For quality, just, just maybe. For intimidation? No chance.

 

[Richard]

This attack played together in 2 games and didnt win either (1 of which was agianst Zim).

IMO, neither the Pak attack or the Aus attack quite compares

TBF, Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall played just twice as a first-choice, against India in 1983 (IIRR, they won both games - they certainly didn't lose either). I don't give the Pakistan attack any great consideration as it played together at a time when Waqar was past his best and Shoaib, well, you can never truly know what's going to turn-up with him.

However, the sad truth is that the best WI attack of all played together only very, very briefly. Marshall only became a first-choice in 1983 (he'd played the odd game as a replacement between 1980 and 1983 and had lined-up alongside Roberts, Holding and Garner on 1 or 2 occasions) and Roberts retired 2 series after Marshall replaced Croft. Garner played just the first 2 of the 11 games of these 2 series', picking-up a serious injury.

The attack that had a long stint as West Indies' first-choice was Roberts, Holding, Garner, Croft. Even that didn't play together a massive number of times due to various absences. And Croft was arguably a lesser bowler than a man ignored throughout this time - Wayne Daniel.

As well as these two attacks, there was also Marshall, Holding, Garner, Walsh (which played together in Australia in 1984/85) and Marshall, Holding, Garner, Patterson (which wiped England off the Caribbean in 1986 in the last act of West Indian dominance and the start of the most wretched period in England Test history).

Either of these has a fair case, based purely on the brevity of Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall, to be the finest attack West Indies briefly fielded.

At most other times there was a weak-link, be it Winston Davis, Milton Small or Eldine Baptiste. And Holding and Garner were essentially finished after '86 (I think they each played a further 2 games), Patterson never again attained the heights of his debut series, and Ambrose (debuting in '88) took time to become the bowler he would be later.

Had Marshall, Bishop, Ambrose, Walsh ever played together around about 1990 or 1991, that too might have something of a case.

 

[Michaelf7777777]

Two other attacks from the earlier days of test cricket that one could mention as being close to the Windies in the 1980's

Australia 1948

Lindwall
Miller
Johnston
Toshack
Johnson
Loxton

England - Mid 1950's

Trueman
Statham
Tyson
Laker
Bailey

 

[Anil]

well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

mcgrath
gillespie
lee
warne

akram
younis
akhthar
saqlain

neither of them are good enough, lee and gillespie bring down the quality of the aussie attack and akhtar and saqlain does the same for the pakistanis...the quality being referred to is comparative of course...

 

[bagapath]

inthe 88-89 home series against india the west indies fielded, IIRC, marshall, ambrose, walsh, and, the debutante, bishop. i thought ravi shastri's 108 against this attack in barbados was one of the best centuries by an indian for the sheer quality of fast bowling he had to deal with on the fastest wicket in the carribbean

 

[Lillian Thomson]

In 1976 when the West Indies first decided on the four man pace attack they had a debate about it on TMS and Trevor Bailey reckoned that the most potentially lethal was Lillee, Thomson, Walker and Gilmour. In his defence, at the time Holding was still very young, Daniel still quite raw and Holder not really express pace and it wasn't known how long Jeff Thomson would keep up his form of the previous two years or how Gilmour was going to develope.