Ranking the candidates for best fast/pace bowler ever: The Rankings thread

[jimmy101]

I think by that time Greg Chappell had retired from overseas Tests, and only played at home.

 

[quincywagstaff]

Chappell reduced his touring in the final few years because of wanting to spend more time with his family; he missed the 1981 Ashes, 1982 Pakistan tour and 1983 WC.

That’s fine that GC wanted to tour less but he shouldn’t have decided to stay as captain and the selectors shouldn’t have allowed the situation to continue.

 

[bagapath]

He seems to agree

Trust Richard Hadlee to be bang on with the numbers. He casually mentions that Lillee might finish a match with 5/120 and that happens to be as close as it can be to Lillee's career stats of about 5 wickets per match at an average of just under 24.

 

[Logan]

Given what Rabada's achieved so far at a young age, if he can keep going like that then at some point he's going to start becoming a serious candidate for discussions like this.

I am not sure fans would rate Rabada ahead of older legends like Marshall regardless of how well he performs.

Take Steyn vs Marshall for example.

1. Steyn bowled in a much worse era for batsmen. The mean bowling average has increased from 32.1 in the 1980s to 34.5 in the 2000s.

2. Steyn bowled in a better era for batsmen. The mean batting average has increased from 35.8 in the 1980s to 38.2 in the 2000s.

3. Steyn's strike rate of 42.0 is the best in the history of Test cricket for bowlers over 200 wickets. Marshall's strike rate is 46.7

4. Marshall's bowling average is 20.94. Dale Steyn's bowling average is 22.64.

5. Dale Steyn was light years ahead of his peers. Marshall was the best bowler of his generation but not to the extent that Steyn was.

6. In Asian pitches, Marshall has an average of 23.05 and a strike rate of 48. 7. In Asian pitches, Dale Steyn has an average of 24.11 and a strike rate of 42.9


Dale Steyn's stats are similar to Malcolm Marshall despite bowling in a tougher era. Even then he is not considered as good as Marshall by many fans. So even if Rabada performs exceedingly well and becomes statistically better than Marshall, I do not think he will be considered as the GOAT..

Yup, or that there weren't many ATG batsmen in the 2000-2010 decade if you exclude Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Kallis, Sangakkara & Dravid

Statistically not true.

The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 1980s was 5.
The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 1990s was 5.
The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 2000s was 21.



Source for all statistics : ESPNCRICINFO

 

[Slifer]

I am not sure fans would rate Rabada ahead of older legends like Marshall regardless of how well he performs.

Take Steyn vs Marshall for example.

1. Steyn bowled in a much worse era for batsmen. The mean bowling average has increased from 32.1 in the 1980s to 34.5 in the 2000s.

2. Steyn bowled in a better era for batsmen. The mean batting average has increased from 35.8 in the 1980s to 38.2 in the 2000s.

3. Steyn's strike rate of 42.0 is the best in the history of Test cricket for bowlers over 200 wickets. Marshall's strike rate is 46.7

4. Marshall's bowling average is 20.94. Dale Steyn's bowling average is 22.64.

5. Dale Steyn was light years ahead of his peers. Marshall was the best bowler of his generation but not to the extent that Steyn was.

6. In Asian pitches, Marshall has an average of 23.05 and a strike rate of 48. 7. In Asian pitches, Dale Steyn has an average of 24.11 and a strike rate of 42.9


Dale Steyn's stats are similar to Malcolm Marshall despite bowling in a tougher era. Even then he is not considered as good as Marshall by many fans. So even if Rabada performs exceedingly well and becomes statistically better than Marshall, I do not think he will be considered as the GOAT..




Statistically not true.

The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 1980s was 5.
The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 1990s was 5.
The number of batsmen having an average of 50+ in the 2000s was 21.



Source for all statistics : ESPNCRICINFO

On the face of it, Steyn has similar stats to MM but u have to dig a lil deeper. MM went sub 23 vs everyone and sub 25 home and away vs everyone (except for 3 measly tests in NZ). Steyn just doesn't come close to that level of consistency nor do any of the other candidates tbh.

 

[Logan]

On the face of it, Steyn has similar stats to MM but u have to dig a lil deeper. MM went sub 23 vs everyone and sub 25 home and away vs everyone (except for 3 measly tests in NZ). Steyn just doesn't come close to that level of consistency nor do any of the other candidates tbh.

That is why Marshall is arguably the greatest fast bowler. But Steyn is up there too.

The difference between Steyn's bowling average and the average of other fast bowlers who played in the same period is 10.38. That is the highest difference for any bowler post World War 2.

Steyn also took 3600 balls less to get to 400 wickets than previous record holder Hadlee.

 

[Slifer]

That is why Marshall is arguably the greatest fast bowler. But Steyn is up there too.

The difference between Steyn's bowling average and the average of other fast bowlers who played in the same period is 10.38. That is the highest difference for any bowler post World War 2.

Steyn also took 3600 balls less to get to 400 wickets than previous record holder Hadlee.

Oh no doubt steyn is up there as are the others like McGrath and co. But on top of his consistency, MM has a better sr than most. Better wpm than most pacemen which is magnified more considering his competition. His average is the lowest of anyone with over 200 wkts. Etc. Theoretically, a bowler could come along who I think is better but so far I'm yet to see that person.

 

[Dendarii]

Dale Steyn's stats are similar to Malcolm Marshall despite bowling in a tougher era. Even then he is not considered as good as Marshall by many fans. So even if Rabada performs exceedingly well and becomes statistically better than Marshall, I do not think he will be considered as the GOAT.

Except that I never suggested Rabada would be the GOAT. All I said was that if Rabada continues to put in the performances that he has been then discussions about the best fast bowlers could start including him.

 

[stephen]

I have been doing a little statsguru work.

In the 00s, Australia, India and South Africa had batting averages above 34 vs all major nations. All the other major nations had batting averages under 32. Australia's batting average during that decade was a whopping 40.

In the 80s, 3 teams had batting averages over 32 - Pakistan, India and the West Indies. When you exclude the matches that the West Indies were the opposition, Pakistan, India, Australia and the West Indies all averaged over 33.

So it turns out that facing the West Indies in the 80s was a large part of why batting was bad in the 80s. Batting was still easier in the 00s than the 80s but when you exclude the West Indian bowling, it wasn't that much better.

We had a worldwide glut of ATG fast bowling in the 90s. That was a tough era for batsmen.

 

[stephen]

In the 80s, removing the West Indies from batters averages results in the following:

Min 2000 runs:
G Chappell 2595 @ 63.29
Miandad 4954 @ 58.28
Border 5947 @ 57.73
Amarnath 2257 @ 55.04
Lloyd 2881 @ 52.38
Abbass 2403 @ 51.12
Imran 2021 @ 50.52

7 further batsmen with average > 45.
8 batsmen averaging between 40 and 45.

By comparison, the 00s had (Min 3500 runs due to the increased number of tests):

2 batsmen averaging >55
13 batsmen averaging between 50 and 55
5 batsmen averaging between 45 and 50
7 batsmen averaging between 40 and 45.

There were roughly twice as many batsmen who averaged over 50 but the number who averaged over 40 is only slightly ahead in the 00s.

 

[Logan]

Except that I never suggested Rabada would be the GOAT. All I said was that if Rabada continues to put in the performances that he has been then discussions about the best fast bowlers could start including him.

My point exactly. I was suggesting that even if someone does exceedingly well in tougher conditions today(like Steyn or maybe Rabada in future), there seems to be hesitation in calling them as the best.

 

[Logan]

In my opinion, there is nothing more beautiful than watching a genuine fast bowler in full flow. But I am in the minority. Most people would prefer to watch batsmen hit fours and sixes. T20 style of batting and relaxed rules has made batting easier and bowling much tougher.

The decade of the batsmen | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo

 

[morgieb]

In my opinion, there is nothing more beautiful than watching a genuine fast bowler in full flow. But I am in the minority. Most people would prefer to watch batsmen hit fours and sixes. T20 style of batting and relaxed rules has made batting easier and bowling much tougher.

The decade of the batsmen | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo

I don't think you're in the minority here, run fests bore the hell out of me. Agree the casuals are all about muh big sixes though.

 

[Victor Ian]

Don't get this wrong. I'm not trying to put Steyn down. He's clearly amongst the greatest bowlers ever.
1) how much better he was than his peers means little. He bowled in an era without a glut of great bowlers. We are fortunate that he existed to remind us the value of great fast bowling. Statistically Adam was far better than his peers and he never bowled a recorded ball.
2) that he got to 400 wickets in less balls than Hadlee means little. Hadlee had a different role. He had to bowl large chunks of an innings because there was not as sufficient backup. Different styles - different roles.

 

[Logan]

1) It does mean a lot that Steyn was way ahead of his peers. It is a proven fact that batting had become easier and bowling had become tougher. Even good bowlers like James Anderson and Mitchell Johnson found it tough to bowl in those conditions. On the other hand, it made no difference to Dale Steyn.

ABD’s average in ODIs is 53 and his Strike Rate is 101. Still we regard Viv Richards with an average of 47 and SR of 91 as superior. Why? Because Viv Richards was only batsman of his era who had such numbers. Nowadays, batting in ODIs has become much easier. Even guys like Amla and Root have better stats than Viv. That doesn’t make them better. The reverse scenario applies to Dale Steyn.


2) I am not comparing Steyn with Hadlee. Of course, they had different roles for their teams. I meant Hadlee was the fastest to get to 400 wickets and Steyn broke his record by an astonishing 3600 balls. This means he was getting wickets at a faster rate than not only Hadlee but also legends(and strike bowlers) like McGrath, Ambrose, Akram etc. Hell, he was getting wickets at a faster rate than even the mighty Malcolm Marshall, who is possibly the GOAT fast bowler.




3) I am curious on why people think Curtly Ambrose is better than Allan Donald. Back in the 90s, I thought Donald was faster and more consistent than Ambrose though Ambrose bowled at a higher peak at times.

 

[Victor Ian]

You don't seem to injest the consequence of why I raised these points. They are 'Meh' points no matter how important you think they are.

Steyn is marvellous to have maintained his strike rate over his career but it is helped by him not having to bowl while the ball is doing nothing. Also by the different mindset of batsmen this century. In Marshall's time batsmen were happy to be less aggressive in order to stay (try) at the crease longer. Now they have 'intent'.

Steyn is awesome to get his figures in this period of harder bowling, I agree. Not because he is x% better than his peers.

 

[trundler]

It was pure coincidence that Marshall played in an era with so many ATG fast bowlers. If you put Holding, Roberts, Garner, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim, etc in the current era, I don't think they'd be lesser bowlers.

 

[smash84]

3) I am curious on why people think Curtly Ambrose is better than Allan Donald. Back in the 90s, I thought Donald was faster and more consistent than Ambrose though Ambrose bowled at a higher peak at times.

I don't know what you mean by more consistent but Ambrose was more accurate than Donald. If Ambrose wasn't taking wickets he would be extremely tidy and building up pressure. Plus Ambrose bowled better against the best team of the mid to late 90s (Aus).

 

[Logan]

If you put Holding, Roberts, Garner, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran, Wasim, etc in the current era, I don't think they'd be lesser bowlers.

That is purely hypothetical. They wouldn’t be lesser bowlers. They would have suffered in tougher conditions and had lesser stats.

Steyn is awesome to get his figures in this period of harder bowling, I agree. Not because he is x% better than his peers.

Steyn is AWESOME not because of his stats alone. But also because he was able to perform in an era when no one else can.

Plus Ambrose bowled better against the best team of the mid to late 90s (Aus).

Allan Donald had a sub-23 average and sub-50 strike rate against every Test playing country except Australia. His record in Asian countries was fantastic.

Donald had a mediocre record against Australia. But his record against Australia is better than Ambrose’s record against India and Pakistan. Ambrose’s record against India was pathetic.

Donald’s record against Australia was perhaps the only blemish on his great career. He took 53 wickets in 14 matches at an average of 31 and a SR of 61.

Ambrose’s record against India and Pakistan was quite average. In 9 Tests against India, he took just 13 wickets at an average of 38 and a SR of 99. In 14 Tests against Pakistan, he took 42 wickets at an average of 28 and a SR of 68.

 

[kingkallis]

In my opinion, there is nothing more beautiful than watching a genuine fast bowler in full flow. But I am in the minority. Most people would prefer to watch batsmen hit fours and sixes. T20 style of batting and relaxed rules has made batting easier and bowling much tougher.

The decade of the batsmen | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo

My YouTube history and CW Community strongly disagree.

I absolutely love watching Wasim and Waqar breaking toes, Ambrose and Walsh crushing the Poms time and again. Steyn, Imran, Botham, Lillee, Hadlee, McGrath, Roberts, Garner, Holding, Bond, Pollock, Akhtar, Broad, Jimmy, Srinath, Kapil, Trueman, Lindwall, Hall changing the fates of the games with their stunning spells. I even look for Franklyn Rose, Kenny Benjamin, Stephen Jack, Merv Hughes, Darren Gough, Craig McDermot, Andy Caddick, Brett Lee, Fanie de Villiers, Brett Schultz, Chaminda Vaas, Heath Streak.