Bond, Shane Bond

[Days of Grace]

Well, he's back, and I'm sure I am one of many posters on here that think the cricket world is a better place because of it.

My two questions are, 1) can he be as good a bowler and effective a wicket-taker as before?; and
2) With a strike-rate of 27, an E/R of 4.18 in this day and age, and an average of 19, do you think he is a candidate to named as the Greatest ODI bowler of all time? He has nearly played 70 matches, so I don't think you can play the "not a big enough sample" card.

 

[Migara]

Greatest ODI bowler of all time - McGrath has that title, with Wasim and Murali as close 2nd and 3rd. Bond has not played enough matches to get in to that "Hall of fame"

 

[Days of Grace]

According to you, that is.

 

[Noble One]

Greatest ODI bowler of all time? No way.

Greatest ODI bowler against Australia? Yes, by some margin. The level of dominance he has displayed over Australia is just incredible.

 

[Pratters]

I don't think he will be as effective as before. He is 34 years old and you don't bowl your fastest at this age. Only if you can improvise like a Lillee or a McGrath can you hope to match your younger days as a fast bowler and that doesn't happen more often than not. His speeds have definitely reduced and he is past his best in all likelihood.

Greatest ODI bowler ever? Nah. Hussey, Saqlain had great stats but you wouldn't compare them to the greatest at that stage as you need a much more substantial body of work to be in the elite greatest bowlers of all time.

Shane Bond has played 69 ODIs and 17 tests. He was a bowler who could have been one of the greatest bowlers but fate had other ideas.

 

[Brett Dale]

Too bad, Bond wont play test cricket.

 

[Days of Grace]

How do you know?

 

[Athlai]

Reckon he'd slide in between O'Brien and Martin two workhorses and Bond doing a 6 over spell every now and then sounds good to me.

 

[Polo23]

If he doesn't get injured between now and our next test match he'll almost certainly be in the playing XI.

As for being as good as before, he's similar pace to what he was in 2007 (around 140 consistently with the ability to crank the odd ball up) and he looks as fit as ever. To be honest, I think age has almost been a good thing for him as a bowler, he knows what works and what doesn't and he knows how to manage his back a lot better than before. So far I haven't seen anything to suggest he won't be just as effective as before.

 

[Uppercut]

Shane Bond one of the best ODI bowlers of all time?

I don't think you can suspend fitness as a factor when judging someone's ability. Being able to bowl without breaking down is crucial for any fast bowler. 128 wickets isn't many.

 

[SeamUp]

Exactly right.

To be great you need to be consistently good for many years without regularly breaking down.

For instance SA had a left-armer in the mid 90's called Brett Schultz who bowled balls of violence at 155 kmph and with skill and swing and the odd yorker but he always got injured.

I'm sure he would have gone down as a great in the record books but he didn't due to injury.

 

[briangarg]

very well said uppercut, i agree....

 

[Manee]

Shane Bond one of the best ODI bowlers of all time?

I don't think you can suspend fitness as a factor when judging someone's ability. Being able to bowl without breaking down is crucial for any fast bowler. 128 wickets isn't many.

Well said.

 

[Days of Grace]

Well, let's see. Joel Garner took 146 wickets, and is considered by many to be in at least the top 3 ODI bowlers of all time.

Logic only suggests that if Bond goes past Garner's wicket tally then he too must be considered.

 

[Migara]

Well, let's see. Joel Garner took 146 wickets, and is considered by many to be in at least the top 3 ODI bowlers of all time.

Logic only suggests that if Bond goes past Garner's wicket tally then he too must be considered.

On that note best ever ODI bowler in Mendis if he retires today.

 

[Richard]

Merge?

Anyway here's hoping Bond can play to 2010/11 and have a storming World Cup. Otherwise, for mine, there's no point in him coming back to play ODIs at all.

And clearly I hope he doesn't come back and play Tests as he'd worked-out before he elected for the ICL that they were damaging his body.

 

[Richard]

Well, let's see. Joel Garner took 146 wickets, and is considered by many to be in at least the top 3 ODI bowlers of all time.

Logic only suggests that if Bond goes past Garner's wicket tally then he too must be considered.

The regularity of ODIs in the respective days is a key case though. In the 2000s Bond has missed hundreds of ODIs in amongst the games he's played; Garner would have played many more, as he didn't break down like Bond does, if they'd been available.

Anyway the ODI cricket Garner and Bond played was completely different and there's as much point trying to compile lists involving both as there is in trying to drive a car from Stockport to Thunder Bay IMO.

 

[Days of Grace]

On that note best ever ODI bowler in Mendis if he retires today.

Oh, please.

Mendis has played, what? 20 matches?

Bond has played almost 70 matches. That is a huge difference.

Although your analysis is probalby so damn black and white that it's either 100 games or bust.

 

[Migara]

Oh, please.

Mendis has played, what? 20 matches?

Bond has played almost 70 matches. That is a huge difference.

Although your analysis is probalby so damn black and white that it's either 100 games or bust.

What is the bigger difference? 20/70 or 70/250 ?

 

[Manee]

If you divide them, the latter one is, by 0.07. but I'm sure you were making a different point.