-
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.
Top 10 Greatest Fast Bowlers of All Time in Tests?
- Thread starter gggsaffa12
- Start date
Migara
International Coach
Barnes vs Marshall
Barsnes rates 800+ about 50% of his matches while Marshall has managed it 75% of the time. The unusual thing is Barnes is probably the only bowler to retire on the highest rating during a players peak. This graph will answer a lot of questions about Marshall vs Barnes debate.
EDIT: Grimmett also has retired at his peak rating
Barsnes rates 800+ about 50% of his matches while Marshall has managed it 75% of the time. The unusual thing is Barnes is probably the only bowler to retire on the highest rating during a players peak. This graph will answer a lot of questions about Marshall vs Barnes debate.
EDIT: Grimmett also has retired at his peak rating
Last edited:
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It really won't.
There is a limit to how quckly you can gain ratings points, regardless of how good you are, especially with points not being fully given until you have played x number of games. Took Barnes 15 games to hit your 800 points, and Marshall 20 something. Irrespective of exactly how good Barnes was, he wasn't dropping below 800 in his career if he played as many years (or even significantly more than) Marshall.
Not sure this form of comparison has any merit for Barnes as the era is too different, but if it does, it has the opposite effect to what you are saying.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
So he was basically Proto Sandeep Sharma
(Edit: Reposted because I quoted the wrong thing)
Correct. But when you are overbowled you get tired. The more you bowl the more the batsmen can get their eye in and get set, so unless you are frequently taking wickets it becomes an issue. Less pressure from the other end helps the batsman have a breather, rotate the strike and score runs plus get their eye in from the other end. Another thing to say is Warne didn't have to play Australia the strongest team. It was just a side point didn't expect a reply and debate considering the thread title but don't mind.
Pap Finn Keighl
International Debutant
Peak performances
Hadlee 1978-88
60 tests , 330 wickets at 19.57
Imran 1980-88
48 tests 236 wickets at 17.77
Marshall 1983-91
69 tests 342 wickets at 19.85
Akram 1990-97
48 tests 240 wickets at 20.05
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
In terms of bowling peaks, Imran would be marginally ahead of Marshall who would be marginally ahead of Hadlee.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Marshall's peak really was from the series in India in 1983 to his series in England in 1988. After that, Ambrose took over a main bowler of the side and Marshall stopped being opening bowler. He took around 236 wickets in 40 tests.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is a whole lot of speculation that means nothing, and I could give you a dozen counter points that actually are meaningful. However this has been done to death and everyone (except you it seems) knows exactly how it will go. So how bout we just leave this thread to be about what it is supposed to. Look up a Warne v Murali thread if you want to learn more about it
You are funny.
Migara
International Coach
ICC ranking gives better idea about peaks than raw stats. It takes the strength of the opposition in to account. Anmy one to get 800 points in ICC ranking shows they are very very good. You can easily determine a peak using ICC rating points rather than raw stats. We may need an arbitrary limit.
In your stats, the peak is misleading, because the length of the peak is not equal and the chunk of the career in the peak also not equal. However even with those stats, it's very evident Marshall had 69/87 tests as "peak". No one even comes close other than Hadlee.
Migara
International Coach
This is adjusted to the era as far as I know. So the modern players will have to play more games than players of yesteryear (actually these ratings are retrospective). The second part is an assumption. We can assume many things, and way the Marshall was bowling even his last test, he had it him in for another few more years. On the other hand, a mystery bowler playing more means his mystery can go away very quickly (note this is an assumption too, like yours). So assumptions don't mean much. We can only rate the data we already have.
The data shows Marshall (70%) and Hadlee (57%) to be amazingly consistent, and most probably the few bowlers to stay a top of 800 points for the largest proportion of their careers, together with McGrath (84%), Steyn (73%), Ambrose (74%), Donald (61%) and Pollock (63%). All others like Garner, Roberts, Wasim, Waqar, Holding, Lindwall, Lillee, Imran, Walsh all have just about 50% or lower . (In comparison for Warne this is about 43%, Muralitharan 57%, All other ATG spinners around <40%).
This consistency would be good enough to rate Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, Ambrose, Hadlee, Donald and Pollock are good enough to be rated in top 20. Assuming Barnes is a fast bowler, he also a deadset name in that top 20.
bagapath
International Captain
that's an interesting question
I would rate the top four fast bowlers of every five year cycle for the first twenty five of my fan years this way: purely based on impact, without stats guru
1979-83
Lillee
Imran
Botham
Holding
1984-88
Marshall
Hadlee
Garner
Imran
1989-1993
Ambrose
Akram
Waqar
Marshall
1994-1998
Donald
Ambrose
Akram
McGrath
1999-2003
McGrath
S Pollock
Akhthar
Walsh
Gob
International Coach
Waqar > Everyone from that period
Gob
International Coach
Should do the same
96-00
McGrath
Wasim
Pollock
Donald
01-05
McGrath
Shoaib
Gillespie
Bond
06-10
Steyn
Lee
Ntini
Clark
11-15
Steyn
Harris
Anderson
Johnson
16-20
Cummins
Anderson
Rabada
Broad
Interesting exercise
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Nah. Akram's peak from 90 - 97 coincided with Waqar's from 90- 94, but even at their peaks, Akram was widely considered the better bowler.
Waqar's peak is a tad overrated. Definitely he was a demon, but took a lot of cheap wickets against low quality batting lineups, and was often thrashed in his new ball spells only to clean up the tail with the old ball. He only became a dangerous new ball bowler later in his career. Just look at his series against England in 92 and West Indies in 93, he took much less wickets with the new ball.
This is one reason why I considered Imran's peak in the mid-80s as even better than Waqar's, he was dangerous with both old and new, took wickets against better opposition.
Last edited:
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Agree with most, I think 89 to 93, I would put Ian Bishop ahead of Marshall.