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

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Big call that, Adcock and Pollock senior may disagree, along with Procter.....but both Donald and S. Pollock made it into the SA all time XI and that is impressive when you consider the fast bowling opposition. I`m not sure how that continues with Steyn; and I have no idea wtf SA all time XI will look like if Rabada continues on his current trajectory. .

Procter
Steyn
Donald / Rabada
Rice

 

[Bolo]

Pattinson has an awesome first class record, Ngam averaged 32 and never took a 5-for.

He didn't really have a 1st class career pre injury. Got fast-tracked into the test team early and then injured.

Look at the difference in how Ngam and Pattinson are being referred to. Ngam gets mentioned as one of 6 bowlers from his own team and era, in the second tier, when the first tier even includes a batting allrounder. Pattinson gets mentioned as possibly the greatest could have been ever. If it really romanticing Ngam, whose test average is 50% less than Pattinson, in comparison?

 

[harsh.ag]

Appropriate timing from cricinfo. Someone must be following this thread:

Life lessons from Donald and Pollock

 

[Days of Grace]

No.10

Waqar Younis (Pakistan) 875

Quality Points: 770
Career Points: 105

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5Em0LEbhPQ

Career: 1989-2003
Wickets: 373
Gold Performances: 3
7/86 vs. New Zealand at Lahore 1990 (15.31)
7/76 vs. New Zealand at Faisalabad 1990 (15.41)
5/22 vs. New Zealand at Hamilton 1993 (15.81)
Silver Performances: 12
Bronze Performances: 10

Overall Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 23.55 (23.56) 45.42 (43.50) 4.97 (rank 22)
50 Innings Peak Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings (1990-1994): 18.03 34.67 7.98 (rank 3)
Non-Home Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 25.59 48.84 4.58 (rank 34)
Quality Opposition Average/Strike-Rate/Points Per Innings: 23.51 45.65 4.74 (rank 27)

We open the esteemed top 10 with one of the most devastating bowlers ever. Waqar Younis in the first half of the 1990s had the 3rd greatest peak of any bowler in the history of the game. In his first 33 tests he took 190 wickets, becoming feared the world over for his toe-crushing, reverse-swinging yorker. However, injuries started to take their toll in the second half of his career and in his final 54 matches he only took 183 wickets. Waqar's record up to the end of 1994 is so ridiculous that if he never played again after that point he would have ended with an overall rating of 979 points.

Ultimately, it is Waqar's peak and strike-rate that earns him a place in the top 10. His record away from home and against quality opposition is very good without being great. All three of his gold performances came against New Zealand who were struggling in the first half of the 1990s.

 

[Starfighter]

He didn't really have a 1st class career pre injury. Got fast-tracked into the test team early and then injured.

Look at the difference in how Ngam and Pattinson are being referred to. Ngam gets mentioned as one of 6 bowlers from his own team and era, in the second tier, when the first tier even includes a batting allrounder. Pattinson gets mentioned as possibly the greatest could have been ever. If it really romanticing Ngam, whose test average is 50% less than Pattinson, in comparison?

Having watched what I can of both bowling, Pattinson is way better than Ngam, similar pace but Pattinson a much better mover of the ball and generally more skilled. More importantly, Pattinson has actually managed to improve his first class figures despite breaking his back at least three (4-5?) times since test debut, and has a five-for in India, while Ngam played mostly against a pathetic Sri Lankan side at home and never took more than a three-for, hence why test averages are a red herring with a small sample size.

 

[Starfighter]

Waqar up next?

Gotta get something right occasionally.

 

[ankitj]

However, injuries started to take their toll in the second half of his career and in his final 54 matches he only took 183 wickets.

His strike rate was still an impressive 51.1 in that period. He just didn't bowl enough overs in that period to keep taking big hauls; took only 3 fivers in last 54 games. Some say Wasim had a role to play in it who denied Waqar the chances to achieve more glory.

 

[Bolo]

Having watched what I can of both bowling, Pattinson is way better than Ngam, similar pace but Pattinson a much better mover of the ball and generally more skilled. More importantly, Pattinson has actually managed to improve his first class figures despite breaking his back at least three (4-5?) times since test debut, and has a five-for in India, while Ngam played mostly against a pathetic Sri Lankan side at home and never took more than a three-for, hence why test averages are a red herring with a small sample size.

I don't have an issue rating Pattinson way above Ngam. It's not something we will have an answer to. Ngam never recovered from his injuries. But Ngam is being considered below the top bowlers of his team like Pollock. And below the next tier, where we see Macmillan, a batting allrounder. He's on the same tier as elworthy, who was not considered good enough for a proper test career.

You are complaining about this being a romantic overrating while ranking Pattinson alongside bowlers like Procter (over 50% better average and nearly 50% more WPM). I don't think many people put him in tier three for a particular era for a particular country.

Even if you think Pattinson is 1000% better than Ngam, you are overrating him in comparison through this complaint.

 

[ankitj]

Remaining 9 will probably be in this order:

1. Murali 2. McGrath 3. Hadlee 4. Barnes 5. Warne
6. Marshall 7. Steyn 8. Lillee 9. Imran

 

[Starfighter]

Where the hell did I rank Pattinson alongside Procter? Strawman de luxe. And your grasp of the context of statistics is... interesting to say the least.

 

[trundler]

Imran or Lillee, who's next?

 

[trundler]

Yeah this has been a misunderstanding. Proctor wasn't really considered to be in the discussion by Starfighter and I. He was brought up in relation to Reid and Schultz. Proctor should be compared with someone like O'Reilly perhaps.

 

[Bolo]

Where the hell did I rank Pattinson alongside Procter? Strawman de luxe. And your grasp of the context of statistics is... interesting to say the least.

You are ranking Pattinson as possibly the greatest could have been. Procter is an obvious candidate. You are comparing the two whether you mention him or not.

Change better to worse re. stats. It's clear what I mean

 

[Starfighter]

You are ranking Pattinson as possibly the greatest could have been. Procter is an obvious candidate. You are comparing the two whether you mention him or not

Try again.

 

[trundler]

It wasn't exactly about who was the better could have been. I started the discussion about 'waste men' as defined by slippy. Proctor doesn't really fall into that category since his career ended owing to external circumstances, not injury or the like.

 

[Starfighter]

It wasn't exactly about who was the better could have been. I started the discussion about 'waste men' as defined by slippy. Proctor doesn't really fall into that category since his career ended owing to external circumstances, not injury or the like.

And I was specifically bringing up Pattinson in the context of your bringing up Schultz, as I have compared the two several times here, and then replying to TJB correctly pointing out that Ngam, mentioned by Migara, probably wasn't as good as people make him out to be, with me adding my opinion on an observation on this board. Then Bolo replies with a jab and I call him out on the difference between the two and the it goes. Procter was never part of the discussion. May as well bring up Ron Archer too if we're gonna reach that far back.

 

[trundler]

Migara has a habit of massively overrating some cult bowlers like Hogg and Ngam for some reason.

 

[Days of Grace]

Quality opposition ranking of 16 is higher than what I expected considering his average of 31 and str of 61.6 against Australia.How many of his matches were against quality opposition?

Donald played 30 matches against quality opposition, including:

14 against Australia (1993-2002): 53 wickets at 28.24 (31.08)
5 against India (1996-1997): 30 wickets at 15.05 (15.33)
6 against Pakistan (1995-1998): 27 wickets at 21.79 (22.37)
5 against West Indies (1992-1999): 23 wickets at 21.25 (20.96)

 

[Starfighter]

Migara has a habit of massively overrating some cult bowlers like Hogg and Ngam for some reason.

Migara was mentioning him as being maybe on the level of Craig Matthews, which is fair. That said, he's the only person I've seen who rates Elworthy.

 

[jaideep]

Donald played 30 matches against quality opposition, including:

14 against Australia (1993-2002): 53 wickets at 28.24 (31.08)
5 against India (1996-1997): 30 wickets at 15.05 (15.33)
6 against Pakistan (1995-1998): 27 wickets at 21.79 (22.37)
5 against West Indies (1992-1999): 23 wickets at 21.25 (20.96)

5 matches against India helped his Quality opponent points massively.