Best ever ODI bowler

[vcs]

Neither South Africa or Pakistan can be considered terrible players of spin though. They were the best sides Australia would have faced in Warne's era, and his numbers against them stack up pretty well. Using India as the benchmark for ODI spinners in Warne and Saqlain's era is massively flawed IMO - yes, they might be better players of spin, and Warne in particular has a shocking record against them, but if India are the sole benchmark for how we rate ODI spinners then Ashley Giles and Michael Clarke would be the two best ODI spinners of the past 10 years.

As smalishah said, this has never been my stand. Quite the opposite, actually.

No question Warne has done very well against SA and Pakistan, who were fine sides at the time of the '99 WC. Also bowled a fantastic match-turning spell against WI in the '96 semifinal. Was heartbreaking for me, personally though because I was cheering hard for WI.

As an aside, I was watching some highlights of the '99 WC on TV today and in particular the Aus-NZ match. Chris Cairns played some amazing shots down the ground against both pace and spinners. Didn't watch that match at the time.

 

[smash84]

Not for the era in which Warne and Saqlain played. Australia, South Africa and Pakistan were by far the best ODI sides in the era, and Sri Lanka and arguably the West Indies were better ODI outfits than India.

That is also because Pakistan, SA, WI, and Aussies, all had superb pace attacks in the 90s and India have never been the best players of pace. But they have always been some of the best players of spin throughout their history and the trend continues to this day.

I think it would be unfair to deny the Indians that they have generally been the best players of spin during the last few decades.

 

[ankitj]

Not for the era in which Warne and Saqlain played. Australia, South Africa and Pakistan were by far the best ODI sides in the era, and Sri Lanka and arguably the West Indies were better ODI outfits than India.

IMHO, you are arguing against what no one has said. Warne has some great performances to his name and I think is a worthy name on the poll options list.

That said, he does lose out a bit for not having great record against very good players of spin (who may or may not have been part of best ODI teams overall)

 

[smash84]

Incidentally what Imran had to say about Wasim and Waqar in his interview with cricinfo

"What were the raw ingredients that you saw in Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis?"

"Wasim was the most talented bowler I have seen apart from Holding. A natural. But he needed the art of taking wickets, fitness and advice, which I gave him. Waqar was a very strong bowler, not as gifted as Wasim, but much stronger physically. Mentally, Waqar was very tough. Wasim would give up a little bit when things got down; Waqar would keep coming back. But Wasim was much more talented"

 

[stephen]

McGrath is the greatest ODI bowler of all time.

He was in by far the most batsman friendly era of ODI cricket, and yet his stats stand up to the best.

He is by far, unquestionably the most successful bowler in world cups and won Man of the Series in 2007.

All of this talk about talent means nothing next to the ability to both keep the runs low and take wickets (not taking anything away from any of the other bowlers here, just saying that aesthetics shouldn't be the primary method of judging a player).

 

[ringo16]

Has to be Kyle Mills. Regularly topped the ODI rankings while most of those guys were still playing.

Seriously, find it funny that nobody's mentioned Vettori. What are you guys taking into account for ODI bowlers exactly?

 

[zaremba]

Hard to go against Garner. To watch clips of him bowl you'd think he was the perfect ODI bowler, pretty much everyone who saw him said he was the perfect ODI bowler, and his stats are precisely those of a perfect ODI bowler.

This.

Frighteningly good bowler all-round and a ridiculously good in ODIs.

Honourable mention to Wasim Akram, who couldn't have been more different as a fast bowler. Those 2 could quite easily bowl the first 10 overs between them, and the last 10: game won.

 

[smash84]

Has to be Kyle Mills. Regularly topped the ODI rankings while most of those guys were still playing.

Seriously, find it funny that nobody's mentioned Vettori. What are you guys taking into account for ODI bowlers exactly?

No of wickets, Econ Rate, SR, match winning performances, 4 fers, 5 fers. What are you looking at????

 

[ringo16]

Mostly short-sightedness and the inability to wear contacts.

 

[smash84]

Mostly short-sightedness and the inability to wear contacts.

no wonder you rate Vettori so highly.

 

[vcs]

Mostly short-sightedness and the inability to wear contacts.

 

[Prince EWS]

no wonder you rate Vettori so highly.

Whoosh.

 

[Julian87]

MacGill tbh.

 

[Flem274*]

I agree with Ringo that Millzeh is highly underrated and often stereotyped as something he is not (especially by his home country's media), but he isn't even a certainty in an all time NZ ODI side, so he's not really a shout at greatest ODI bowler of all time.

 

[Blaze 18]

It has got to be Wasim Akram. The man could do virtually anything with a cricket ball in his hand. I wonder how much more he would have been able to achieve had he not been diabetic.

 

[miscer]

I dont understand how akram is better?

Wicket per innings: Akram: 1.43 Mcgrath: 1.54
Average: Akram: 23.52 Mcgrath: 22.02
Strike Rate: Akram: 36.2 Mcgrath: 34
innings/4 and 5 wicket hauls: Akram: 15.26 Mcgrath: 15.5
Economy: Akram: 3.89 Mcgrath: 3.88
Best bowling: Akram: 5/15 Mcgrath 7/15

So tell me, what in the world are you people using to say that Akram is better than Mcgrath?

barring shane bond, Mcgrath is the greatest pace bowler I have ever seen. Shane Bond though, omg he is too good. Saw his bowling vs Australia in the 2003 World Cup, I was giddy with excitement at watching who I thought would be the best bowler of all time.

This is Shane Bond
Wickets per innings: 1.84
Average: 20.88
Strike Rate: 29.2
innings/4 and 5 wicket hauls: 7.72 (HOLY SHT)
Economy: 4.28 (tad high)
Best Bowling: 6/19 lol he beats akrams best bowling in just 80 innings. 1/4th of what akram bowled.

Akram is overrated. Bond is underrated.

 

[Maximus0723]

Akram had ****tiest fielding team. Many drop catches. Imagine Akram's ability in Aussie team. Man, he wouldn't have to bowl stump to stump so many times any more.

Akram is believed to be bribed in instances to under perform.

 

[turnstyle]

I dont understand how akram is better?

Wicket per innings: Akram: 1.43 Mcgrath: 1.54
Average: Akram: 23.52 Mcgrath: 22.02
Strike Rate: Akram: 36.2 Mcgrath: 34
innings/4 and 5 wicket hauls: Akram: 15.26 Mcgrath: 15.5
Economy: Akram: 3.89 Mcgrath: 3.88
Best bowling: Akram: 5/15 Mcgrath 7/15

So tell me, what in the world are you people using to say that Akram is better than Mcgrath?

barring shane bond, Mcgrath is the greatest pace bowler I have ever seen. Shane Bond though, omg he is too good. Saw his bowling vs Australia in the 2003 World Cup, I was giddy with excitement at watching who I thought would be the best bowler of all time.

This is Shane Bond
Wickets per innings: 1.84
Average: 20.88
Strike Rate: 29.2
innings/4 and 5 wicket hauls: 7.72 (HOLY SHT)
Economy: 4.28 (tad high)
Best Bowling: 6/19 lol he beats akrams best bowling in just 80 innings. 1/4th of what akram bowled.

Akram is overrated. Bond is underrated.

McGrath clearly didn't play enough games in Sharjah and tbf Bond wore those ****ty aero pads. No ATG would ever be seen on those!

 

[Flem274*]

Akram had ****tiest fielding team. Many drop catches. Imagine Akram's ability in Aussie team. Man, he wouldn't have to bowl stump to stump so many times any more.

Akram is believed to be bribed in instances to under perform.

If Akram's performance was impacted by bribes then he can go and get ****ed tbh.

 

[joels344]

I voted for Joel Garder. Andy Roberts is worth mentioning as well. His bowling average, strike rate and economy rate were great.