pasag
RTDAS
I think it shows how touchy some people are really, when an honest discussion point is seen as 'inflammatory'. People being way too precious.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Is Dale Steyn the worst ever best fast bowler in the world?
- Thread starter pasag
- Start date
biased indian
International Coach
and the answer your straight forward question is simple its S.J.Harmison
Precambrian
Banned
Is that Steyn's fault that he has to contend with the Mitchell Johnsons and the Zaheer Khans of his period?
Or is it that the conditions have become so hugely skewed in favor of batsmen in tests that a bowling average of 30 in tests is as good as 25 some years back?
I think the broad scenario must be discussed before categorising Steyn as poor.
I mean, he would come on the top 5 fast bowlers of any decade with over 100 wickets since 1950 imho. So I don;t think he is the worst best (lol) fast bowler.
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
Who said Steyn was poor? Some people are totally missing the point of this thread.
Harmison was never the best paceman in the world. His peak was during McGrath's reign. Rankings are meaningless in this debate.
Precambrian
Banned
Sorry mate, but you have not yet provided a reasoning for naming Steyn as "Worst" best fast bowler, other than some dodgy logic like his peers being all **** and the like. What exactly is Steyn lacking that you consider him to be not worthy to be at the top of the bunch of all time? Apart from obvious experience??
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
Another 200 test wickets and a proven longevity in the game.
Precambrian
Banned
If rankings are meaningless, what is the meaningful argument then? Perceptions? Because the other indicator, statistics, show Steyn to be as good as any fast bowler in any decade.
pasag
RTDAS
Yeah, these are the exact points I had in mind being raised in the thread discussion, that's why the OP is a series of questions, not a statement of fact. I'd also like to know from some of the older members whether they thought there were worse number #1s in years gone by and how the current #1 relates to them.
pasag
RTDAS
.....
I have not stated Steyn is the worst best fast bowler ever, merley asked the question. Notice all the question marks in the OP???
Precambrian
Banned
Cop out at the worst. Steyn hasn't played that many tests, but his performances so far are ridiculously good to label him as the best going around. People used to rate Donald to be a premier fast bowler when he too had these sort of figures.
And don't you rate Keith Miller as a quality bowler? He ended with 170 wickets.
Or SF Barnes???
Or Lohmann??
Or Colin Blythe??
Or Jim Laker????
Or O Reilly??
Or ADcock?
Or Davidson?
Or Fazal Mahmood?
Or Bishop?
Last edited:
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
Of course he didn't, he's a ****ing spastic.
Precambrian
Banned
Wonderful value addition mate. What more to expect from you?
Why have you gone mute on my counterargument?
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Hmm, who do you think challenged Brett Lee for that title?
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Having a closer look at things Peter Pollock was pretty raw around 1966 when Trueman retired and missed most of that year due to injuries. Wes Hall was still around at that time but was past his peak. Higgs had a brillant season but was as raw Steyn. McKenzie I always thought was average similar to Brett Lee.
Wes Hall was probably the No 1 quick around that era still. If that was the case then there is one era where there was a worse quick and in the early 70s after he and McKenzie retired, Pollock stop playing Test and the young quicks coming through didn't bowl as well as Steyn until the mid 70s. John Snow would have been the best quick in the early 70s.
From 1966 to about 1975 the best seamers in the would were worse then Steyn. The 30s were as poor as well imo. It is easy to say he is worst quick when comparing the best from the mids 70 on. But there are plenty of eras with worse best seamers.
Last edited:
biased indian
International Coach
why are you again and again stating that Styen is not a good enough bowler ?????
he is a very very good bowler for me rite now ..he could go either way but now is performing the best he can as far as i think i don't think he can improve a lot from here.... all he can do and should do is to maintain it for a longer time...
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Well, let's go back:
McGrath from 1993-1994 or so. Ambrose before that. Marshall & Co. before that. Imran and Lillee before that. That takes you back almost 40 years. So yea, there is definitely a dearth. Who was the best fast bowler right before Lillee & Co. came on the scene? Wes Hall? But I think he retried a few years before Lillee came along. Maybe in the interlude there (I'm sure I'm missing a few)?
McGrath from 1993-1994 or so. Ambrose before that. Marshall & Co. before that. Imran and Lillee before that. That takes you back almost 40 years. So yea, there is definitely a dearth. Who was the best fast bowler right before Lillee & Co. came on the scene? Wes Hall? But I think he retried a few years before Lillee came along. Maybe in the interlude there (I'm sure I'm missing a few)?
pup11
International Coach
Sure had Garner, Marshall, Holding, Lille, etc had been playing now, they would have made Steyn look ordinary, but the fact is Steyn is ahead of other fast-bowlers of his time in wicket taking abilities by some distance, that too in early stages of his career.
Steyn doesn't posses too many intimidating deliveries, but he surely knows how to get people out, and with all the protective equipment available to the batsmen nowadays, they really don't worry much about getting hit by the ball, its losing their wicket cheaply that hurts them more.
So imo Steyn is hardly the most "ordinary" best fast-bowler, the evident lack of challenge is what really gives one that impression.
pup11
International Coach
Please put me on the ignore list, if my posts are hurting your head that badly...
Last edited:
Precambrian
Banned
This whole business of him not having 300 wickets being a disqualification is laughable.
Here's the list of the greatest (statistically atleast) bowlers who ended up with between 100 to 200 wickets in their entire career.
Here's the list of the greatest (statistically atleast) bowlers who ended up with between 100 to 200 wickets in their entire career.