Top 3 fast bowlers in tests ATM?

[aussie]

He may score consistently. But not at an average of 69. BTW an all time Asian XI top 7 looks different in my book. I'd have Sehwag and Gavaskar for opening. Batting line up may be superioe, but even in your list Sangakkara is clearly the bext best bastman behind SRT and perhaps Dravid. Sanga is a better batsman than Sehwag, Gavaskar, Miandad or Majid Khan. If you can settle for 70 runs from him in every match instead of 50, then you might drop a player like Miandad for a keeper like Engineer, who was prolific with the bat as well. In that case the lost 20 runs from selecting a better keeper will be covered by Sanga playing as a non-keeper.

Well i can cetainly see him averaging 50+ batting @ 5/6 in such a team with the gloves on. If Andy Flower could do so, so can Sanga i'd say.

Wouldn't have Sehwag opening at all. Too vulnerable againts quality fast-bowling. If that Asian XI had to face a Rest of the world ATXI:

Hutton
B Richards
Bradman
V Richards
G Chappell/Lara/G Pollock
Sobers
Knott
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee

If he had to face those 3 quicks. I can see him being owned too regularly. Majid or H Mohammad are safer bets againts such quality new-ball bowling.

- I'd definately put Tendy & Sunny ahead of Sanga. But its definately close between Sanga/Dravid/Miandad for sure.

- Theirfore againts a strong opposition like that ROW XI wit that bowling attack. I would want the longest batting line-up as possible. Thus Sanga would keep the gloves instead of dropping a batsman to bring in Engineer.

 

[aussie]

Except you now completely contradict your original assertation that keeping did not affect his batting (which you "proved" by the "fact" that his batting improved so much during 2004-08 when he was keeping full time - something that has been completely blown out of the water by the 55 run difference in average)

Keeping did not affecting his batting. The only change i'd make from that post which i couldn't re-dit since post cant edit after a certain point on this site. Is batting @ # 3 while having to keep when his batting peak took off in 2004 - was the reason for the gap averages between keeping & non-keeping between 2004-2008. But his batting ability didn't disappear as soon as he put on the gloves.

That was the mistake SRI made for balance sake to their team. This is why i say if he had to bat during that 2004-2008 period @ # 4/5/6 like what A Flower did for ZIM. The runs would have continued.

Pus read again i never said between 2004-2008 he was keeping fulltime.

 

[Migara]

Well i can cetainly see him averaging 50+ batting @ 5/6 in such a team with the gloves on. If Andy Flower could do so, so can Sanga i'd say.

Wouldn't have Sehwag opening at all. Too vulnerable againts quality fast-bowling. If that Asian XI had to face a Rest of the world ATXI:

Hutton
B Richards
Bradman
V Richards
G Chappell/Lara/G Pollock
Sobers
Knott
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
Lillee

If he had to face those 3 quicks. I can see him being owned too regularly. Majid or H Mohammad are safer bets againts such quality new-ball bowling.

- I'd definately put Tendy & Sunny ahead of Sanga. But its definately close between Sanga/Dravid/Miandad for sure.

- Theirfore againts a strong opposition like that ROW XI wit that bowling attack. I would want the longest batting line-up as possible. Thus Sanga would keep the gloves instead of dropping a batsman to bring in Engineer.

We both agree that he'll average 50 with the gloves. But the point is that he'll do it close to 70 without it at #3. That 15-20 extra runs will be good enough to cover the batting of a wicket keeper whose replacing a batsman like Miandad. Engineer averages 31 with the bat and was very good against quick stuff, and definitely a better keeper than Sangakkara. That 15 - 2- run extra that I get from Sana will cover Engineer's inability with the bat, but I'll be sure that the important catch will be held by him. Do you expect Sangakkara to average 70 with the bat when functioning as a keeper? that'll give a good idea on your thinking process.

 

[Tom 1972]

The responses speak volumes about the dearth of top class bowlers in Test/world cricket at the moment.

We were blessed in the late nineties, early-mid 2000s with top-liners like (in no particular order) Murali, Warne, McGrath, Harbhajan (spelling), Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, Akram, Ntini, Donald, Vaas, Pollock. Apologies to others I've forgotten.

Plus Shane Bond could have been anything if he stayed on the park. Gillespie was almost unplayable for a time.

Nowadays, I'd only say that there very few consistent matchwinning bowlers - Steyn, but who else? I think people might reflect on the late nineties, early-mid 2000s being the last "golden age" of cricket for the Test bowlers. Since the Windies of the 1980s anyway.

Just too much counts against the bowlers nowadays - bat technology, smaller grounds, generally flat wickets, so much cricket played. Perhaps the new benchmark for a truly great Test bowling average is anything under 30, with under 33 being very good.

Let's face it, if you are rolled in the first innings for <330 inside 4 sessions, you are probably in a fair bit of trouble.

 

[andyc]

The responses speak volumes about the dearth of top class bowlers in Test/world cricket at the moment.

We were blessed in the late nineties, early-mid 2000s with top-liners like (in no particular order) Murali, Warne, McGrath, Harbhajan (spelling), Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, Akram, Ntini, Donald, Vaas, Pollock. Apologies to others I've forgotten.

Plus Shane Bond could have been anything if he stayed on the park. Gillespie was almost unplayable for a time.

Nowadays, I'd only say that there very few consistent matchwinning bowlers - Steyn, but who else? I think people might reflect on the late nineties, early-mid 2000s being the last "golden age" of cricket for the Test bowlers. Since the Windies of the 1980s anyway.

Just too much counts against the bowlers nowadays - bat technology, smaller grounds, generally flat wickets, so much cricket played. Perhaps the new benchmark for a truly great Test bowling average is anything under 30, with under 33 being very good.

Let's face it, if you are rolled in the first innings for <330 inside 4 sessions, you are probably in a fair bit of trouble.

Don't think it's that much of an issue, to be honest. There were only a handful of consistent matchwinning batsmen in the 80s, and look at how many there have been over the last 10 years. Cricket just goes through peaks and troughs, and right now we're in a bit of a fast bowling trough, but there's still signs of promise. Steyn's tearing it up, Broad's coming along, Hilfenhaus looked very good in India and Hazelwood looks very exciting, and you only have to read a couple of WW's posts to hear about the next West Indian pace bowler. Whether these players and more actually live it up to their promise is another story obviously, but give it a few years and who knows what will happen.

 

[Xuhaib]

Don't think it's that much of an issue, to be honest. There were only a handful of consistent matchwinning batsmen in the 80s, and look at how many there have been over the last 10 years. Cricket just goes through peaks and troughs, and right now we're in a bit of a fast bowling trough, but there's still signs of promise. Steyn's tearing it up, Broad's coming along, Hilfenhaus looked very good in India and Hazelwood looks very exciting, and you only have to read a couple of WW's posts to hear about the next West Indian pace bowler. Whether these players and more actually live it up to their promise is another story obviously, but give it a few years and who knows what will happen.

Broad and Hilf will always be a rung below top class.Morkal is probably the only young bowler who looks like a future world class atm the top looks very bare with only Steyn,Anderson and Zaheer looking the goods.

 

[TumTum]

Broad and Hilf will always be a rung below top class.Morkal is probably the only young bowler who looks like a future world class atm the top looks very bare with only Steyn,Anderson and Zaheer looking the goods.

Think not.

 

[aussie]

We both agree that he'll average 50 with the gloves. But the point is that he'll do it close to 70 without it at #3. That 15-20 extra runs will be good enough to cover the batting of a wicket keeper whose replacing a batsman like Miandad. Engineer averages 31 with the bat and was very good against quick stuff, and definitely a better keeper than Sangakkara. That 15 - 2- run extra that I get from Sana will cover Engineer's inability with the bat, but I'll be sure that the important catch will be held by him. Do you expect Sangakkara to average 70 with the bat when functioning as a keeper? that'll give a good idea on your thinking process.

Well no i dont believe he could average 70+ over the course of a series in a hypotetical matchup againts a ROW ATXI bowling attack consistenting of Lillee/Marshall/Hadlee/Warne, batting anywhere in the top 6. Absolutely not, i doubt even Bradman could.

Potentially he would be close to 50 (anything between 40-50 for sure), since even averaging over 50 againts such an attack would be a great feat. So theirfore Engineer can't be picked in such a team unfortunately, since those extra runs from Sanga wont be coming.

 

[Migara]

Well no i dont believe he could average 70+ over the course of a series in a hypotetical matchup againts a ROW ATXI bowling attack consistenting of Lillee/Marshall/Hadlee/Warne, batting anywhere in the top 6. Absolutely not, i doubt even Bradman could.

Potentially he would be close to 50 (anything between 40-50 for sure), since even averaging over 50 againts such an attack would be a great feat. So theirfore Engineer can't be picked in such a team unfortunately, since those extra runs from Sanga wont be coming.

Now you are missing the point. Do you expect Sangakkara to average the same as a wicket keeper batsman and a pure batsman? My answer is no. He'll be more useful as a pure batsman, because he has the best record out of above XI in that aspect. With the gloves he'll average good one and half dozen less.

 

[Prince EWS]

Now you are missing the point. Do you expect Sangakkara to average the same as a wicket keeper batsman and a pure batsman?

His point, throughout this whole exercise, is that he does. That's where you fundamentally differ. Can we establish that and move on please?

 

[aussie]

Now you are missing the point. Do you expect Sangakkara to average the same as a wicket keeper batsman and a pure batsman? My answer is no. He'll be more useful as a pure batsman, because he has the best record out of above XI in that aspect. With the gloves he'll average good one and half dozen less.

Do i expect Sanga to average the same as keeper & pure batsman batting @ # 3 againts quality bowling consistently. No.

Do i expect Sanga to average the same as keeper & pure batsman batting @ # 5 againts quality bowling consistently (like Andy Flower did). Yes.