cnerd123
likes this
thatsthejoke.jpg
-
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.
Ranking the candidates for best fast bowler ever - ~20 contenders
- Thread starter mr_mister
- Start date
cnerd123
likes this
If you cut off voting to a pool of X number of cricketers, there will always be cricketers on the fringes of X who miss out or get overlooked that then other people complain about not having
Personally, if I was Mr Mister, I'd make as comprehensive a list as I could, and ask people to be 20 (or 25 or 30 or whatever) out of that large list. You basically just don't want people writing in Mustafizur Rahman into number 1 and ****ing up the data (ala Ian Harvey in that ODI cricketers list we did...), but you also don't want such a narrow list that exclude some players who deserve to be in the discussion.
harsh.ag
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
False
Agree. Come up with a list of 40 pacers. From which, vote for the Top 20. This may take more work, but it would be more reflective of people's choice.
And provide recognition to some missing names : Statham, McKenzie, Spofforth...
This is more accurate. The way it's being done is much simpler though. None of the guys not on the list would place high up anyway.
The really egregious offence is forcing CW to vote Anderson onto a list of the top bowlers ever
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
This.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I use this rule when it comes to longevity: being mediocre (or whatever) for a long time doesn't somehow magically make you great. Anderson simply doesn't have the all round record (in this case away performances) to be considered near most of the others on that list, despite his longevity.
1. Marshall
2. Hadlee
3. Steyn
4. Ambrose
5. Wasim
6. Mcgrath
7. Larwood
8. Holding
9. Donald
10. Lillee
11. Waqar
12. Trueman
13. Imran
14. Garner
15. Lindwall
16. Davidson
17. Pollock
18. Roberts
19. Barnes
20. Adcock
21. Tyson
22. Walsh
23. Philander
24. Bedser
25. Anderson
2. Hadlee
3. Steyn
4. Ambrose
5. Wasim
6. Mcgrath
7. Larwood
8. Holding
9. Donald
10. Lillee
11. Waqar
12. Trueman
13. Imran
14. Garner
15. Lindwall
16. Davidson
17. Pollock
18. Roberts
19. Barnes
20. Adcock
21. Tyson
22. Walsh
23. Philander
24. Bedser
25. Anderson
Of these, the only one that I think deserves a place rather than an honourable mention is Pollock. 9 year career on paper, even if the period meant very few tests, plus his career was ended by something completely external to himself. World number 1 ranked bowler at the time.
I'd prefer to see him on this list above Tyson and larwood, who he played a lot more than both in terms of time and number of tests. Tyson injured himself out too fast to judge, while larwood wasn't a consistent feature in the side due to not being good enough/picking up injuries before eventually being dropped over the outcry over the tactics in the series that made his name.