DoG's Top 100 Test Bowlers Countdown Thread 100-1

[stephen]

Racist

Lol.

I honestly don't know why i got the numbers mixed up. I think maybe because I saw Croft/Benjamin as the "4th bowler" of two generations of West Indian quicks. For a long time I always wondered why Croft was so highly rated. I thought it may have been a Botham thing where he was ridiculously awesome for a time and then fell away. I knew he didn't have many tests though.

Anyway, it was a genuine mistake and I'm going to have to dig up some footage now. I'd always rated him below the others, but I'm not sure I should:

Marshall
Ambrose
Garner
Holding
Roberts
Bishop
Walsh
Hall
Croft

Now I don't know whether to bump him up on that list. An average of 23 is significantly better than 30.

 

[trundler]

I'd probably have Roberts above Walsh and Bishop below both, followed by Croft. Holding #3 too.

My perception of him is that he was seriously good, frightening to face with a bit of a quirky action, and a bit of a prick.
Now I obviously never saw him live so I hope those who did correct me and/or add to my perception.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.49

Derek Underwood (England) 729

Quality Points: 633
Career Points: 96

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uWksgsFxcI

Career: 1966-1982
Wickets: 297
Gold Performances: 7
7/50 vs. Australia at The Oval 1968 (16.78)
7/32 vs. New Zealand at Lord's 1969 (16.11)
6/12 vs. New Zealand at Christchurch 1971 (16.90)
6/45 vs. Australia at Leeds 1972 (15.07)
8/51 vs. Pakistan at Lord's 1974 (15.72)
7/113 vs. Australia at Adelaide 1975 (15.68)
6/66 vs. Australia at Manchester 1977 (15.15)
Silver Performances: 5
Bronze Performances: 9

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.28 (25.84) 66.57 (73.61) 3.87
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1967-1973): 18.95 53.32 5.45
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 27.00 71.13 3.76
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 30.74 79.09 3.07

Deadly always struck me as a bit of a feast or famine bowler. Outside of seven gold performances his bowling was not that impactful against quality opposition. He does however boast the lower average over a 50 innings peak seen so far in the top 100. Looking at his flat, skiddy bowling in the video, I'd imagine he'd be more effective in the modern game as a limited overs bower. Thoughts?

 

[stephen]

I'd probably have Roberts above Walsh and Bishop below both, followed by Croft. Holding #3 too.

My perception of him is that he was seriously good, frightening to face with a bit of a quirky action, and a bit of a prick.
Now I obviously never saw him live so I hope those who did correct me and/or add to my perception.

That's pretty much my perception of him as well.

I always assumed his reputation was more built on his aggression and pace rather than his average. But now I learn that he had a great average as well.

It really makes me sad that West Indian fast bowling died with the retirement of Walsh.

 

[trundler]

No.49

Derek Underwood (England) 729

Quality Points: 633
Career Points: 96

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uWksgsFxcI

Career: 1966-1982
Wickets: 297
Gold Performances: 7
7/50 vs. Australia at The Oval 1968 (16.78)
7/32 vs. New Zealand at Lord's 1969 (16.11)
6/12 vs. New Zealand at Christchurch 1971 (16.90)
6/45 vs. Australia at Leeds 1972 (15.07)
8/51 vs. Pakistan at Lord's 1974 (15.72)
7/113 vs. Australia at Adelaide 1975 (15.68)
6/66 vs. Australia at Manchester 1977 (15.15)
Silver Performances: 5
Bronze Performances: 9

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.28 (25.84) 66.57 (73.61) 3.87
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1967-1973): 18.95 53.32 5.45
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 27.00 71.13 3.76
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 30.74 79.09 3.07

Deadly always struck me as a bit of a feast or famine bowler. Outside of seven gold performances his bowling was not that impactful against quality opposition. He does however boast the lower average over a 50 innings peak seen so far in the top 100. Looking at his flat, skiddy bowling in the video, I'd imagine he'd be more effective in the modern game as a limited overs bower. Thoughts?

Medium slow spinners and fast spin bowlers like Barnes need to make a comeback.

 

[Starfighter]

That's pretty much my perception of him as well.

I always assumed his reputation was more built on his aggression and pace rather than his average. But now I learn that he had a great average as well.

It really makes me sad that West Indian fast bowling died with the retirement of Walsh.

In fairness to you, I've rarely seen anyone put him on par with Holding, Roberts or Garner skills wise, he always seems to be 'fourth guy', the Michael Anthony if you will.

Medium slow spinners and fast spin bowlers like Barnes need to make a comeback.

The latter yes, the former not really (imagine watching Jadeja bowling his quicker ones all the time) unless uncovered pitches come back (from a watching pov).

 

[ankitj]

Ashwin is going to come in quite high.

 

[trundler]

I was more thinking of guys in the grey area between Fazal and Jadeja. Like O'Reilly and Chandra, maybe Kumble. It would certainly be exciting though I'm not sure how much turn is usual for such a bowler. If my medium slow off cutter on a dust bowl is anything to go by, a healthy bit.

 

[Starfighter]

I was more thinking of guys in the grey area between Fazal and Jadeja. Like O'Reilly and Chandra, maybe Kumble. It would certainly be exciting though I'm not sure how much turn is usual for such a bowler. If my medium slow off cutter on a dust bowl is anything to go by, a healthy bit.

That's really open ended. Kumble, Chandra and O'Reilly all had really different techniques and comparing them to Underwood, a finger spinner, is harder again. If you're wondering about the amount of turn, well Underwood is the only spin bowler I've seen where the commentator (Benaud no less) said 'that's he first ball he's turned in the past 35 minutes', on a favourable pitch no less. That bounce though.

I guarantee you that unless your full pace bowling is actually pacy, say getting towards 120 km/h at your age, your 'medium-slow' is unlikely to be bowled any faster than about 85 km/h. That's simply the way it is for those who aren't gifted with noticeably above average cricketing abilities, which by your own admission you aren't. Bowling at pace is fricken' hard.

 

[trundler]

I clocked myself at 55 Mph and no more.

I think I just grouped them all together based on pace. I think at least 3 of them had unconventional grips too. Chandra and O'Reilly at least ought to have some overlap since I've seen both of them compared to pacers, even if sarcastically. I'm not sure how much turn Chandra got but I'm certain Borges saw him so I pose this as a question to him.

 

[harsh.ag]

Oh yeah, Jadeja is going to make the list, right?

 

[ankitj]

"Chandra got ATVG turn" – Borges

 

[ankitj]

Oh yeah, Jadeja is going to make the list, right?

Ashwin, Kumble, Jadeja, Gupte, Srinath haven't appeared IIRC. Can't see last 2 making top 50 though not making top 100 genuinely surprising.

 

[Starfighter]

Oh yeah, Jadeja is going to make the list, right?

There is no justice in this world.

 

[harsh.ag]

Ashwin, Kumble, Jadeja, Gupte, Srinath haven't appeared IIRC. Can't see last 2 making top 50 though not making top 100 genuinely surprising.

Not surprised about Srinath not making it. Yeah, would have expected Gupte to be there someewhere.

 

[Borges]

Chandra relied on heavy top spin along with a classical spinners loop, at close to medium pace. And utter unpredictability.
More often than not, he beat the batsman in the air; no one who bowls at those speeds is going to be a consistent big turner of the ball.

 

[NUFAN]

I might be way off but I expect Underwood to appear in the next 2 or 3 players. Or was his strike rate too high?

This guy knows.

 

[Days of Grace]

No.48

Darren Gough (England) 731

Quality Points: 669
Career Points: 62

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aukp5RgYLs

Career: 1994-2003
Wickets: 229
Gold Performances: 2
6/42 vs. South Africa at Leeds 1998 (17.54)
5/96 vs. Australia at Melbourne 1998 (15.17)
Silver Performances: 3
Bronze Performances: 5

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 26.63 (28.40) 50.95 (51.62) 4.90
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1997-2001): 24.20 47.46 5.35
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.75 51.02 4.73
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 28.82 53.86 4.73

Darren Gough has to be the biggest surprise in the list so far. My image of him was of a very good bowler for his era, but not an alltime top 50 entrant. Looking at his stats, we can see nothing truly outstanding. But his strike-rate across quality opponents and all conditions is very good. As is his points per innings (no.34 within the top 100). Maybe we underrated him (along with his English contemporaries Fraser and Caddick).

 

[stephen]

England through the 90s never seemed to have a problem taking 20 wickets. Their problem was that they weren't able to put enough runs on the board. I'm not sure I rate those three English quicks quite so highly but they were very good.

 

[mr_mister]

Now we just need Cork to crack the top 40