• 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.

New Zealand fast bowlers who are 'definitely' better than Kapil Dev

About New Zealand fast bowlers who are 'definitely' better than Kapil Dev

  • Fuller Pilch was right

    Votes: 10 35.7%
  • Fuller Pilch was wrong

    Votes: 18 64.3%

  • Total voters
    28

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I may take Southee ahead of Kapil but it's close and the rest don't come close.
 

Johan

International Debutant
i love how 2 earnest mfers wrote 5000 word essays and pilch just goes "kiwis were better in england lol"

that's gotta be a combined 60 minutes of post writing rekt in one 5 second line. just beautiful.
Oh I am just copy pasting an old post I made on the same forum before , but hey if you think that debunking Kapil's failiure in England is related to arguing he was better then kiwis there , then maybe you need some real education rather then being a cheerleader on a forum.
 

the big bambino

Cricketer Of The Year
I personally can't see how bowlers who didn't touch 100 test wickets are better than him.
That's fine. But if that's the criteria then Kapil is always going to win it because of opportunity, not necessarily greatness. I mean I'm ok with it if someone chooses that as their reason. I think it's ok to look at other reasons to make up for the other's lack of opportunities. Cowie only played against Aus and Eng (both full strength allowing for injuries etc) and showed consistent form from ages 27 to 37 with a war intervening. Bond was a scary bowler. He could do what Kapil did at 10-15k quicker. Jamieson, on reflection, not yet.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's weird how kiwis are the most one eyed fan base on here. Imagine thinking a guy who played a handful of matches on pitches not discernible from the outfield qualifies for anything other than a solemn nod. Flem has it out for the high SR = talent batting meme but keeps falling for its bowling equivalent. Bond is a nobody ffs. Cowie I have more time for, he legit could've been great, but it's unfair to pick guys on potential alone in this sort of thing.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Bond was also hampered not only by injury but also the cricketing politics that surrounded the ICL. We lost years of his career in the most frustrating way.
 

Johan

International Debutant
Bond is def superior to dev , remained consistently amazing for almost a decade
YearMatOMRW5w10wBestAvgS/RE/R
2001
4​
123.1​
20​
439​
14​
0​
0​
4/47​
31.36​
52.79​
3.56​
2002
4​
119.2​
31​
412​
24​
2​
0​
5/78​
17.17​
29.83​
3.45​
2003
2​
59.0​
13​
194​
5​
0​
0​
3/97​
38.80​
70.80​
3.29​
2005
2​
47.0​
14​
120​
13​
1​
1​
6/51​
9.23​
21.69​
2.55​
2006
4​
131.4​
24​
471​
18​
1​
0​
5/69​
26.17​
43.89​
3.58​
2007
1​
33.0​
2​
133​
5​
0​
0​
4/73​
26.60​
39.60​
4.03​
2009
1​
48.5​
9​
153​
8​
1​
0​
5/107​
19.13​
36.63​
3.13​
18​
562.0​
113​
1922​
87​
5​
1​
6/51​
22.09​
38.76​
3.42​
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Bond is def superior to dev , remained consistently amazing for almost a decade
YearMatOMRW5w10wBestAvgS/RE/R
2001
4​
123.1​
20​
439​
14​
0​
0​
4/47​
31.36​
52.79​
3.56​
2002
4​
119.2​
31​
412​
24​
2​
0​
5/78​
17.17​
29.83​
3.45​
2003
2​
59.0​
13​
194​
5​
0​
0​
3/97​
38.80​
70.80​
3.29​
2005
2​
47.0​
14​
120​
13​
1​
1​
6/51​
9.23​
21.69​
2.55​
2006
4​
131.4​
24​
471​
18​
1​
0​
5/69​
26.17​
43.89​
3.58​
2007
1​
33.0​
2​
133​
5​
0​
0​
4/73​
26.60​
39.60​
4.03​
2009
1​
48.5​
9​
153​
8​
1​
0​
5/107​
19.13​
36.63​
3.13​
18​
562.0​
113​
1922​
87​
5​
1​
6/51​
22.09​
38.76​
3.42​
Shane Bond beats Kapil Dev because of his amazing longevity. Seen it all
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Bond is def superior to dev , remained consistently amazing for almost a decade
YearMatOMRW5w10wBestAvgS/RE/R
2001
4​
123.1​
20​
439​
14​
0​
0​
4/47​
31.36​
52.79​
3.56​
2002
4​
119.2​
31​
412​
24​
2​
0​
5/78​
17.17​
29.83​
3.45​
2003
2​
59.0​
13​
194​
5​
0​
0​
3/97​
38.80​
70.80​
3.29​
2005
2​
47.0​
14​
120​
13​
1​
1​
6/51​
9.23​
21.69​
2.55​
2006
4​
131.4​
24​
471​
18​
1​
0​
5/69​
26.17​
43.89​
3.58​
2007
1​
33.0​
2​
133​
5​
0​
0​
4/73​
26.60​
39.60​
4.03​
2009
1​
48.5​
9​
153​
8​
1​
0​
5/107​
19.13​
36.63​
3.13​
18​
562.0​
113​
1922​
87​
5​
1​
6/51​
22.09​
38.76​
3.42​
Actually he needs 13 more wickets to be better than Dev.
 

srbhkshk

International Captain
That's fine. But if that's the criteria then Kapil is always going to win it because of opportunity, not necessarily greatness. I mean I'm ok with it if someone chooses that as their reason. I think it's ok to look at other reasons to make up for the other's lack of opportunities. Cowie only played against Aus and Eng (both full strength allowing for injuries etc) and showed consistent form from ages 27 to 37 with a war intervening. Bond was a scary bowler. He could do what Kapil did at 10-15k quicker. Jamieson, on reflection, not yet.
Genuine question, would you say Cowie is also better than Anderson?

I don't really care about the Bond thing, Kapil could do whatever Kapil did 10 kph quicker if he was okay getting injured for 9 out of 10 matches he had to play,
 

Top