Dale Steyn -Greatest of All Time

[Adorable Asshole]

U r conveniently forgetting he actually averaged lower in the 00’s than the 90’s.

Only proves that Steyn played in a more batting friendly era.

 

[Coronis]

Well theres my last attempt at a serious discussion here for a while.

 

[_00_deathscar]

What is even going on here?

I rate Steyn as the best I’ve seen, but that’s also because I enjoy watching him bowl instead of the dullard that is McGrath.

But if I seriously had to rate him putting that bias aside, I’d go:
Hadlee
Marshall
McGrath
Steyn
Ambrose

I’m actually staunchly of the opinion that Steyn was better than Ambrose now.

 

[BazBall21]

Not considering Barnes as I think he was a spinner

1) Marshall
2) McGrath
3) Hadlee
4) Ambrose
5) Lillee
6) Steyn
7) Imran
8) Trueman
9) Akram
10) Lindwall
11) Donald
12) Holding
13) Younis
14) Garner
15) Davidson
16) Roberts
17) Pollock
18) Bedser
19) Hall
20) Walsh

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

It is interesting that Steyn and Cummins both were/are mediocre white ball bowlers despite being test stars.

Marshall, Walsh..
Imran?

 

[ZK$]

Not averaging over 30 in England he isn't. That stat itself should disqualify him from the top 5.

Steyn can’t be in the top 5 because of his average in a nation where he played only 5 tests?

 

[subshakerz]

Steyn can’t be in the top 5 because of his average in a nation where he played only 5 tests?

Yes. Because succeeding in England is that important for a top tier fast bowler. So it's a significant blemish.

Otherwise you have posters prop up Steyn based on his 5.5 tests in India, but then don't want to count England. The former can't be considered a success if the latter isnt a (relative) underperformance. You can't have it both ways.

 

[StephenZA]

Yes. Because succeeding in England is that important for a top tier fast bowler. So it's a significant blemish.

Otherwise you have posters prop up Steyn based on his 5.5 tests in India, but then don't want to count England. The former can't be considered a success if the latter isnt a (relative) underperformance. You can't have it both ways.

Did you even watch any of those 5 matches … are you even aware how flat those pitches were the amount of runs scored on both sides? Steyn had some fantastic spells during both those tours helping SA win.

 

[ZK$]

Yes. Because succeeding in England is that important for a top tier fast bowler. So it's a significant blemish.

Otherwise you have posters prop up Steyn based on his 5.5 tests in India, but then don't want to count England as a failure. You can't have it both ways.

You think Steyn’s 23 wickets @ 31 in 5 matches in England was a failure? What is your definition of failure? He literally helped his team win a series in England lol.

 

[subshakerz]

Did you even watch any of those 5 matches … are you even aware how flat those pitches were the amount of runs scored on both sides? Steyn had some fantastic spells during both those tours helping SA win.

Yes watched both series and you are right. Steyn's spell in Edgbaston 2008 set up that game and in Oval 2012 he bowled SA to victory last day on a very flat pitch. So I give him credit. But in the first test in 2008 he was very flat and the second test in 2012 he was destroyed by KP also.

Point is we are talking about the five best fast bowlers of all time so even a relatively minor underperformance in a key country sticks out.

 

[subshakerz]

You think Steyn’s 23 wickets @ 31 in 5 matches in England was a failure? What is your definition of failure? He literally helped his team win a series in England lol.

I changed it from failure to underperformance since he still delivered key spells.

 

[ZK$]

I changed it from failure to underperformance since he still delivered key spells.

What is your definition of underperformance though?

If your criteria is just average, other bowlers in the top 5/6 have nations where they underperformed or opponents who they underperformed against too.

 

[subshakerz]

What is your definition of underperformance though?

If your criteria is just average, other bowlers in the top 5/6 have nations where they underperformed or opponents who they underperformed against too.

Being unusually expensive and averaging over 30. It may seem pedantic but we are talking elite of the elite.

The others don't have that noticeable a blemish in a major country with a sample size of at least a couple of series.

 

[Bolo.]

I was a big Steyn fan during his playing days but never got the impression I am watching one of the five best pacers ever.

For whatever reason, his reputation among posters has enhanced since retirement when it's more about stats and WPM. The fact remains that Steyn was far easier to score runs off, so if he wasn't taking wickets, he was a big liability.

At various points in his career, he was destroyed by Sehwag, Warner, KP, Clarke and others.

When I watched Ambrose or McGrath, a batsman taking them down would be an event. With Steyn, it was a regular occurrence. He lacked consistency.

You are posting in a thread started in Steyn's career that asks if he is the GOAT. 5 people said yes. Most put him in the top 5. On a site where a huge proportion of posters will not fully credit a player until their career is over. Cognitive dissonance much?

Your consistent 'player xyz is better because of how they were perceived' arguments would be debateable if they were actually accurate perceptions. But you consistently make up 'general perceptions' to fit whatever your opinion of players is.

Being unusually expensive and averaging over 30. It may seem pedantic but we are talking elite of the elite.

The others don't have that noticeable a blemish in a major country with a sample size of at least a couple of series.

He doesn't have a sample size of a couple of series. It's 5 tests. Marshall, Mcgrath and Hadlee were all worse in a country in 3 or 4 tests. I would be slightly surprised if there is a single bowler who played in a comparable number of countries who doesn't have a 'worst country' similar (at best) to Steyn in England, and almost all of them were clearly much worse in one or more places. I don't even think it's Steyn's worst country. Such a weird drum to beat.

 

[subshakerz]

You are posting in a thread started in Steyn's career that asks if he is the GOAT. 5 people said yes. Most put him in the top 5. On a site where a huge proportion of posters will not fully credit a player until their career is over. Cognitive dissonance much?

Your consistent 'player xyz is better because of how they were perceived' arguments would be debateable if they were actually accurate perceptions. But you consistently make up 'general perceptions' to fit whatever your opinion of players is.

So you don't agree with me that Steyn's reputation has risen since he retired?

He doesn't have a sample size of a couple of series. It's 5 tests. Marshall, Mcgrath and Hadlee were all worse in a country in 3 or 4 tests. I would be slightly surprised if there is a single bowler who played in a comparable number of countries who doesn't have a 'worst country' similar (at best) to Steyn in England, and almost all of them were clearly much worse in one or more places. I don't even think it's Steyn's worst country. Such a weird drum to beat.

Steyn's 5 tests were over a couple of series in his prime. Hadlee and Marshall underperformed in single series, but with mitigating circumstances since Hadlee was very early career and Marshall was injured. McGrath slightly underperformed in SL but the series was washed out mostly.

We can agree to disagree. I think if a pacer claims to be in the top five ever then having a good to great record in Australia, England and at least one SC country is a must. A 30 plus average in a key country is a blemish.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Well theres my last attempt at a serious discussion here for a while.

on a serious note,

Mcgrath averaged less in 00s than in the 90s because he debuted in the 90s. If he debuted in the 00s then his average would have been higher than his actual verage in the 90s.

So you don't agree with me that Steyn's reputation has risen since he retired?


Steyn's 5 tests were over a couple of series in his prime. Hadlee and Marshall underperformed in single series, but with mitigating circumstances since Hadlee was very early career and Marshall was injured. McGrath slightly underperformed in SL but the series was washed out mostly.

We can agree to disagree. I think if a pacer claims to be in the top five ever then having a good to great record in Australia, England and at least one SC country is a must. A 30 plus average in a key country is a blemish.

Mcgrath performed worse in Pakistan than in Sri Lanka.

 

[Slifer]

You are posting in a thread started in Steyn's career that asks if he is the GOAT. 5 people said yes. Most put him in the top 5. On a site where a huge proportion of posters will not fully credit a player until their career is over. Cognitive dissonance much?

Your consistent 'player xyz is better because of how they were perceived' arguments would be debateable if they were actually accurate perceptions. But you consistently make up 'general perceptions' to fit whatever your opinion of players is.

He doesn't have a sample size of a couple of series. It's 5 tests. Marshall, Mcgrath and Hadlee were all worse in a country in 3 or 4 tests. I would be slightly surprised if there is a single bowler who played in a comparable number of countries who doesn't have a 'worst country' similar (at best) to Steyn in England, and almost all of them were clearly much worse in one or more places. I don't even think it's Steyn's worst country. Such a weird drum to beat.

Marshall averaged 32 in one 3 test series vs NZ that's it. That apart, he averages sub 25 home and away vs all. Sub 23 vs all in general. Steyn not only averages 32 in England but 32 overall vs England over 12 tests. That's a forgivable blemish overall but compared to the elites of elites, it's a set back.

 

[subshakerz]

Mcgrath performed worse in Pakistan than in Sri Lanka.

Yeah Pakistan was a blemish for McGrath but for me he made up for it in India.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Marshall averaged 32 in one 3 test series vs NZ that's it. That apart, he averages sub 25 home and away vs all. Sub 23 vs all in general. Steyn not only averages 32 in England but 32 overall vs England over 12 tests. That's a forgivable blemish overall but compared to the elites of elites, it's a set back.

Mcgrath averaged 31 in Pakistan. Also 29 in SL

 

[subshakerz]

Marshall averaged 32 in one 3 test series vs NZ that's it. That apart, he averages sub 25 home and away vs all. Sub 23 vs all in general. Steyn not only averages 32 in England but 32 overall vs England over 12 tests. That's a forgivable blemish overall but compared to the elites of elites, it's a set back.

All of Marshall, Hadlee, Imran and McGrath averaged sub 30 overall against all opponents. (Ambrose averaged 38 against India despite never playing in India, seems like a bogey team). All of them averaged sub 25 in and against England.

So from that angle, Steyn's England record stands out a bit.