Ranking the candidates for best fast bowler ever - ~20 contenders

[Adders]

Easily

lol........You are so wrong here it is not even funny mate.

I rate Dizzy....very highly. But FMD it's like people just refuse to acknowledge what Anderson has done the last 6 or 7 years.

Edit:

And you know you are ****ed when even stephen, possibly the most one eyed supporter on the site, gets it.

 

[Slifer]

Anderson is a very good fast bowler and I think most cricket fans can see this . Where I draw the line is when people who should know better (like alec Stewart ) rate him as the best and up there with the Mcgraths and Ambroses of the game. That's bs

 

[Adders]

Anderson is a very good fast bowler and I think most cricket fans can see this . Where I draw the line is when people who should know better (like alec Stewart ) rate him as the best and up there with the Mcgraths and Ambroses of the game. That's bs

I haven't heard that from Stewart but if true then I 100% agree....BS.

I'm seriously starting to think he is fast becoming the most underrated cricketer on CW. A large segment of this forum will not or just can't bring themselves to acknowledge what he has been doing in the second half of his career. Jimmy is not ATG good....I don't think that for a second. But he is right up there in the second tier and not better than Gillespie??? GTFO.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I haven't heard that from Stewart but if true then I 100% agree....BS.

I'm seriously starting to think he is fast becoming the most underrated cricketer on CW. A large segment of this forum will not or just can't bring themselves to acknowledge what he has been doing in the second half of his career. Jimmy is not ATG good....I don't think that for a second. But he is right up there in the second tier and not better than Gillespie??? GTFO.

Yeah Stewart said it

“He’s a great of the game. His longevity is remarkable. If he plays for another four years he will get another 130-150 wickets. He looks after his body well and has a great appetite for the game. We are talking about a world great. He is up there with McGrath, [Curtly] Ambrose and Courtney Walsh.”

Lauding his fitness, he said, ” “Once he goes past McGrath, he is 100% the best fast bowler ever and he deserves that,” Stewart said. “Every delivery as a fast bowler you put nine times your body weight through your hip, knee and ankle.”

https://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/anderson-can-become-the-best-fast-bowler-ever-feels-alec-stewart

I think he's underrated on CW as a reaction to people like Setwart, and Dobell (who called Steyn overrated when asked about Steyn v Anderson) and his teammates who have many times called him the best in the world even when Steyn wasn't injured. It happens all the time when people feel a player is being slightly overrated by the public they feel the need to go too far the other way and underrate him wildly because it makes them feel like they've brought some balance to things or something. It's really dumb. He's not McGrath or Steyn or Ambrose, but he's not Gillespie either.

 

[Burgey]

Dizzy was a better bowler than James Anderson. Easily imo

**** yes. By miles.

- Burgey

 

[Burgey]

lol........You are so wrong here it is not even funny mate.

I rate Dizzy....very highly. But FMD it's like people just refuse to acknowledge what Anderson has done the last 6 or 7 years.

Edit:

And you know you are ****ed when even stephen, possibly the most one eyed supporter on the site, gets it.

Nah. Gillespie easily > Anderson.

 

[Adders]

Well I hope people keep underating him.....cos all the time they do he just keeps on quietly taking taking wickets at sub 24. Just got me ****ed that he's been doing this for the last 5 years and some ****s don't even realise it.

 

[Bolo]

Anderson's last 400 wickets have come at an average of 24 in 90 odd tests. Gillespie entire career wasn't even a decade long and he picked up 250 odd wickets @26. Anderson's an easy winner, even disregarding the more important point of Gillespie never performing the role of the lead strike bowler to any real degree of success.

If you put Anderson into AUS in Gillespie's time I'm not sure he would have ever made the team, or he would be dropped very quickly. Gillespie would have had a very successful career in Anderson's place.

Anderson's career is an order of magnitude better than Gillespie's. Who the more skilled bowler is is reasonably debatable, whatever your answer.

 

[mr_mister]

VOTING HAS CEASED

Counting now.

 

[trundler]

I wonder how people rate 2nd tier bowlers.
My bottom 5 ATGs were:

Pollock
Adcock
Larwood
Tyson
Walsh

Then I'd have
Anderson
Philander
McDermott
Dizzy etc

 

[cnerd123]

I don't think anyone who has watched peak Jimmy and peak Gillespie can argue in good faith that Gillespie is better skill wise. Even ignoring statistics, peak Jimmy is basically the perfect swing bowler while Gillespie, while fantastic, wasn't ever as much of a wicket taking threat. At his best he's constantly building pressure and working over batsmen, at Jimmy best he's ripping through lineups.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Both Jimmy and Dizzy are products of their environments. Jimmy is slower swinging bowler not that niggling cut and bounce that is more effective in Australia.

 

[Engle]

Dizzy, I'm afraid will be forgotten far sooner than Jimmy.

He had the opportunity to pair up with McGrath to form a deadly duo combo, but for some reason failed for reasons unbeknownst.
Jimmy and Stuart did and will be remembered thusly

 

[Red]

Dizzy, I'm afraid will be forgotten far sooner than Jimmy.

He had the opportunity to pair up with McGrath to form a deadly duo combo, but for some reason failed for reasons unbeknownst.
Jimmy and Stuart did and will be remembered thusly

How do you figure McGrath and Dizzy DIDNT form a duo?

 

[Adders]

Both Jimmy and Dizzy are products of their environments. Jimmy is slower swinging bowler not that niggling cut and bounce that is more effective in Australia.

Good Post. An earlier poster tried to claim Dizzy was better than JA because if JA was Aussie during Dizzy's era he would have never played a test or got dropped pretty quickly but conversely if Dizzy was English and played now he would have had a top career.

That's just horeshit hypotheticals taken too far and just doesn't work. A nonsense argument.

 

[Bolo]

Good Post. An earlier poster tried to claim Dizzy was better than JA because if JA was Aussie during Dizzy's era he would have never played a test or got dropped pretty quickly but conversely if Dizzy was English and played now he would have had a top career.

That's just horeshit hypotheticals taken too far and just doesn't work. A nonsense argument.

I think you are referring to my post. I didn't say Gillespie was better because of this. I was responding to a post critiquing Gillespie on a short career/low wickets and not being the leader of the pack, which was a product of the team he played for.

 

[Adders]

I think you are referring to my post. I didn't say Gillespie was better because of this. I was responding to a post critiquing Gillespie on a short career/low wickets and not being the leader of the pack, which was a product of the team he played for.

Ok fair enough......but you did say Jimmy would possibly have never played a test if he was Aussie in that period.

If we are playing hypotheticals what if Jimmy hadn't have had Duncan Fletcher **** up his action for the first part of his career? He could quite possibly be in that ATG bracket if not for his very ordinary first few years.

 

[Bolo]

Ok fair enough......but you did say Jimmy would possibly have never played a test if he was Aussie in that period.

If we are playing hypotheticals what if Jimmy hadn't have had Duncan Fletcher **** up his action for the first part of his career? He could quite possibly be in that ATG bracket if not for his very ordinary first few years.

I'm was adding bowling style to quality, which is a dumb thing to do tbh. He would have ended up a seamer in AUS.

Anderson would probably have looked more like he does now. Ironically though, making him rubbish and injury probe might have actually extended his career. He's sent down a ridiculous number of overs as is. Hard to guess how many overs they would have wanted out of him if he'd been good the whole time. Probably would have retired by now as the leading wicket taker.

 

[Engle]

How do you figure McGrath and Dizzy DIDNT form a duo?

They did form a duo, but not a deadly duo that will be remembered like we do of Lillee/Thomson, Roberts/Holding, Wasim/Waqar.... or going back to days of yore, we still read of McDonald/Gregory, Lindwall/Miller, Hall/Griffith...

 

[Slifer]

They did form a duo, but not a deadly duo that will be remembered like we do of Lillee/Thomson, Roberts/Holding, Wasim/Waqar.... or going back to days of yore, we still read of McDonald/Gregory, Lindwall/Miller, Hall/Griffith...

Dwta. The great bowling pairs from the 90s into 2000s are as follows: Walsh and Ambrose, Waqar and Wasim, Pollock and Donald, and finally McGrath and Gillespie. The McGrath/Gillespie pairing was right up there with any of their near counterparts.