Dale Steyn

[viriya]

So, Steyn needs 17 wickets in next 4 games to beat Hadlee to fastest to 400 wickets. That will be an incredible achievement.

Fast bowling only of course. Fair enough since becoming the actual fastest is pretty much impossible from 400-800.

 

[viriya]

Sorry for stealing your post Jono, but FMD this is such a cricket forum poster thing to say.

Are you saying it's impossible to ruin one's record, or that if a player does, it should/would be ignored?

 

[ankitj]

Fast bowling only of course. Fair enough since becoming the actual fastest is pretty much impossible from 400-800.

Yeah, meant fast bowlers only. It will be amazing because Hadlee, the current fastest to 400, had far less competition in his own team

 

[Dan]

Are you saying it's impossible to ruin one's record, or that if a player does, it should/would be ignored?

I'm saying that it's a thoroughly ridiculous that people can think that having a bad year/decline before retiring can apparently cheapen everything the person has achieved up until that point.

 

[viriya]

It doesn't cheapen their performances, but usually players go through a decline before retirement so it might be considered unfair to compare him when he is at a peak with someone who has already retired.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It doesn't cheapen their performances, but usually players go through a decline before retirement so it might be considered unfair to compare him when he is at a peak with someone who has already retired.

Didn't see you saying this when comparing Sanga with Sachin

In all seriousness, I do think that when players are at their peak, it makes people overrate them a bit, but Steyn is sort of different. For the last 7-8 years he's been the best fast bowler. By a loooooong way. A bit like McGrath was the only truly great fast bowler in the 2000s.

 

[cnerd123]

Im not saying it will cheapen his acheivements, butnas Viriya pointed out, the OP was a statistical comparison and a fair comparison can only be made once Steyn retires.

And longevity matters; if Steyn loses his pace but keeps on taking wickets then that will make all that much greater of a bowler.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Steyn has 383 wickets in 75 Tests over 10 years. Steyn is 31 years old.
Marshall had 376 wickets in 83 Tests over 13 years. Marshall retired at the age of 33.

Why do we need Steyn to retire in order to make the comparison when he's already achieved what Marshall did? Do we hold Marshall's early retirement against him when comparing him to McGrath who retired at 37, on the basis that he didn't play on as a crappy version of himself for a bit longer? Yes, I'm aware of when Marshall passed away. FTR he took 28 wickets at 30 for Hampshire at the age of 35.

People need to get off the fence and make a decision already. Steyn could go on for the next 3 years at an average of 30 and it would make absolutely no difference to what he's already done. It would only be a bonus if he still deserved a place in the team as a lite version of himself. Any supposed devaluation wouldn't matter.

 

[G.I.Joe]

And PEWS, up your game, FFS. You should have piped in already.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Steyn has 383 wickets in 75 Tests over 10 years. Steyn is 31 years old.
Marshall had 376 wickets in 83 Tests over 13 years. Marshall retired at the age of 33.

Why do we need Steyn to retire in order to make the comparison when he's already achieved what Marshall did? Do we hold Marshall's early retirement against him when comparing him to McGrath who retired at 37, on the basis that he didn't play on as a crappy version of himself for a bit longer? FTR Marshall took 28 wickets at 30 for Hampshire at the age of 35.

People need to get off the fence and make a decision already. Steyn could go on for the next 3 years at an average of 30 and it would make absolutely no difference to what he's already done. It would only be a bonus if he still deserved a place in the team as a lite version of himself. Any supposed devaluation wouldn't matter.

But what if Steyn picks up 200 more wickets at an average of 17 and ends up with a lower average than anyone else? Unlikely I know and the only direction Steyn is going to move in the ladder is up, imo MMakes sense to wait.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Assume he retires after the current series. Make a decision. It cannot be a cop-out at this point that he hasn't played enough. Alter your decision accordingly at a later stage if needed. People are allowed to change their minds. Honestly, this thread needs to evolve beyond the tedious "wait a few more years". It's past that now. He's played enough to warrant a serious comparison.

 

[OverratedSanity]

What do you mean by a decision? If you mean decide whether he's an ATG or not, well then of course he is.

If you mean decide whether he's better than Marshall and McGrath, then no, he isn't. If he tears it up and gets another 150 wickets cheaply, then yeah, he probably will be.

Hence, wait.

 

[hendrix]

Would just note that strike rate and number of innings to 400 wickets aren't the only metrics of bowling success. Bowling average also takes into account strike rate and isn't influenced so much by match situation.

Marshall and Hadlee still have more complete records than him, IMO. They're under threat but at the moment I don't think he's better.

 

[G.I.Joe]

What do you mean by a decision? If you mean decide whether he's an ATG or not, well then of course he is.

If you mean decide whether he's better than Marshall and McGrath, then no, he isn't. If he tears it up and gets another 150 wickets cheaply, then yeah, he probably will be.

Hence, wait.

That's exactly what I meant by make a decision. You have the facts before you, you reached a conclusion.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Steyn > Marshall for me. Mcgrath wins out over both for longevity.

Steyn striking slightly faster for the Windies might have won them more matches. Perhaps not enough to match the exploits of the greatest team ever (i.e, McGrath's Australia), but it might have helped in closing the gap.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That's exactly what I meant by make a decision. You have the facts before you, you reached a conclusion.

But it's not a conclusion because he could end up better than McGrath and Marshall when he finishes his career

 

[G.I.Joe]

But it's not a conclusion because he could end up better than McGrath and Marshall when he finishes his career

Ignore McGrath. There's no reason why a Steyn vs Marshall (did anyone even read the OP??) debate needs to wait.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Marshall was a vastly superior bowler to Steyn. He was also much, much cooler. I don't think this second aspect can be or should be ignored.

 

[viriya]

Didn't see you saying this when comparing Sanga with Sachin

I did mention that in the thread. And I never said Sanga was clearly better than Sachin, just that it was a fair comparison.

 

[Red]

Marshall was a vastly superior bowler to Steyn. He was also much, much cooler. I don't think this second aspect can be or should be ignored.

Neither of these are substantiated opinions and I vehemently disagree with both of them.