Which pacers would you rank ahead of Murali and Warne as bowlers?

[Coronis]

p

I hear you, but then we should give the same context to other pacers too. IK for example wasn't much of anything when he had his first series in England.

Nobody criticises Imran’s record in England though? And why should they, its perfectly fine.

 

[Brook's side]

Ahead of Murali:
None

Ahead of Warne:
Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee
Barnes

Murali SR in SL: 50.8
Warne SR in SL: 39.6


Murali SR in Aus: 131.0
Warne SR in Aus: 60.8

 

[trundler]

Wow damn, it was that clear cut all along, huh?

 

[Migara]

Murali SR in SL: 50.8
Warne SR in SL: 39.6


Murali SR in Aus: 131.0
Warne SR in Aus: 60.8

That comparison brought down collective IQ of the thread by few points.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

I would rate zero pacers definitely ahead. For me, Any of Marshall/Hadlee/McGrath/Warne/Murali have strong claims to be ranked as the greatest bowler ever.

S.F Barnes as well.

 

[subshakerz]

p


Nobody criticises Imran’s record in England though? And why should they, its perfectly fine.

The earlier poster said Imran didn't have a great record in a country aside from SL and Pakistan, and I think Imran in England would qualify.

Murali in Australia isnt an outright fail since it's just 5 tests but I think if he is being rated against the best bowlers ever then it does matter.

 

[Slifer]

I generally rate Warne, Steyn and Imran over Murali/Ambrose for having more compete home away records with success in SC, or in Warne’s case bowling in less helpful home pitches.

Can I ask how Ambrose's record isn't complete? Away from home, he averages 25 and under vs all comers. Against all teams, he only averages over 30 vs India. By way of comparison, both Warne and Murali sucked in India ( Warne against India in general)and Murali sucked in Aus and Warne in WI.


And before I hear all the excuses like injuries and what's not, every cricketer has been hit with injury and some point or another.

 

[Prince EWS]

Just an interesting exercise to see how each posters values pacers' contributions compared to elite spinners.

Pls don't say you cant compare, that is the whole point of the thread.

Wondering if anyone of you would not even put Murali and Warne in your top ten.

Good thread. McGrath and Marshall definitely, harder after that. Hadlee and Ambrose are the next best two IMO but I dunno if I'd take them ahead of Warne/Murali as bowlers or not.

Quicks are less conditions-dependent in general but one crucial thing about having a gun spinner is that they can bowl more overs. In a Test team around median level it'd help to have your absolute gun bowler bowl 30% of your overs instead of 20%. I'd take Hadlee and Ambrose over Warne/Murali for a single over but maybe not for a whole innings, if that makes sense.

 

[subshakerz]

Can I ask how Ambrose's record isn't complete? Away from home, he averages 25 and under vs all comers. Against all teams, he only averages over 30 vs India. By way of comparison, both Warne and Murali sucked in India ( Warne against India in general)and Murali sucked in Aus and Warne in WI.


And before I hear all the excuses like injuries and what's not, every cricketer has been hit with injury and some point or another.

And how is Warne's record complete given WI and India?

 

[subshakerz]

Good thread. McGrath and Marshall definitely, harder after that. Hadlee and Ambrose are the next best two IMO but I dunno if I'd take them ahead of Warne/Murali as bowlers or not.

Quicks are less conditions-dependent in general but one crucial thing about having a gun spinner is that they can bowl more overs. In a Test team around median level it'd help to have your absolute gun bowler bowl 30% of your overs instead of 20%. I'd take Hadlee and Ambrose over Warne/Murali for a single over but maybe not for a whole innings, if that makes sense.

Yeah that is a logical reasoning to have a spinner ahead. I was thinking of just the pure bowling load that they would have to cover and how it can balance out.

However, why would McGrath be ahead and not Hadlee? Not much to differentiate them.

 

[ZK$]

Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee

I’m undecided on Ambrose. Cummins could eventually join this list.

 

[Slifer]

And how is Warne's record complete given WI and India?

Warne's record isn't. Which is why I brought it up, especially relative to Ambrose.

 

[subshakerz]

Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee

I’m undecided on Ambrose. Cummins could eventually join this list.

At the rate Cummins is going this India series, he may need to be downgraded.

 

[Godard]

Can I ask how Ambrose's record isn't complete? Away from home, he averages 25 and under vs all comers. Against all teams, he only averages over 30 vs India. By way of comparison, both Warne and Murali sucked in India ( Warne against India in general)and Murali sucked in Aus and Warne in WI.


And before I hear all the excuses like injuries and what's not, every cricketer has been hit with injury and some point or another.

Barely tested in Pak, didn’t play in Ind, barely played in SL and NZ, and played very little in SA as well. Warne also has an incomplete record cause of bad record in Ind and WI. But Warne has done everywhere else, and Warne had to bowl on less helpful home pitches than Ambrose. Warne also has a clearly better WPM despite bowling in a more competitive attack. With Murali, I rate him equal to Ambrose, since he also had conducive home pitches.

 

[Godard]

Warne's record isn't. Which is why I brought it up, especially relative to Ambrose.

Warne and Ambrose both have incomplete records, it’s just that Warne bowler on less helpful home pitches, and had a way better WPM despite playing in a more competitive attack

 

[Slifer]

Barely tested in Pak, didn’t play in Ind, barely played in SL and NZ, and played very little in SA as well. Warne also has an incomplete record cause of bad record in Ind and WI. But Warne has done everywhere else, and Warne had to bowl on less helpful home pitches than Ambrose. Warne also has a clearly better WPM despite bowling in a more competitive attack. With Murali, I rate him equal to Ambrose, since he also had conducive home pitches.

Warne bowled on unhelpful wickets where? He played extensively in Asia where wickets generally favor spin (especially SL and India). He also played extensively vs England who were inept vs spin. And Warne was not part of a more competitive attack. Ambrose competed in his early career with at least 2 other greats. Then it dwindled down to one. Either way fine, his wpm was lower but he had a much better average, strike rate and economy. And Ambrose was decisively better outside his home country. So this point about home wickets not favoring Warne is still moot. Ambrose's worst average in any country is 25 in Pakistan. For Warne its 43 in India and 40 in the WI. I can't imagine Ambrose averaging 40 in the WI vs Carl Hooper and Ridley Jacobs....lol lol

As for home wickets, in the Caribbean only Sabina and Kensington favor pace. Ambrose has an outstanding record on the flattest wicket in the world aka the ARG in Antigua.

 

[OverratedSanity]

What this thread has told me is that CW greatly underrates ATG spinners and the benefits they provide with regards to the massive workload of overs they can handle and the high volume of wickets. The combination of necessary donkey work and wicket taking ability isn't something a lot of ATG pacers can provide.

 

[Godard]

Warne bowled on unhelpful wickets where? He played extensively in Asia where wickets generally favor spin (especially SL and India). He also played extensively vs England who were inept vs spin. And Warne was not part of a more competitive attack. Ambrose competed in his early career with at least 2 other greats. Then it dwindled down to one. Either way fine, his wpm was lower but he had a much better average, strike rate and economy. And Ambrose was decisively better outside his home country. So this point about home wickets not favoring Warne is still moot. Ambrose's worst average in any country is 25 in Pakistan. For Warne its 43 in India and 40 in the WI. I can't imagine Ambrose averaging 40 in the WI vs Carl Hooper and Ridley Jacobs....lol lol

As for home wickets, in the Caribbean only Sabina and Kensington favor pace. Ambrose has an outstanding record on the flattest wicket in the world aka the ARG in Antigua.

I specified unhelpful home wickets dude.

 

[Godard]

Still Ambrose had more helpful conducive home wickets than Warne relatively

 

[Godard]

Warne bowled on unhelpful wickets where? He played extensively in Asia where wickets generally favor spin (especially SL and India). He also played extensively vs England who were inept vs spin. And Warne was not part of a more competitive attack. Ambrose competed in his early career with at least 2 other greats. Then it dwindled down to one. Either way fine, his wpm was lower but he had a much better average, strike rate and economy. And Ambrose was decisively better outside his home country. So this point about home wickets not favoring Warne is still moot. Ambrose's worst average in any country is 25 in Pakistan. For Warne its 43 in India and 40 in the WI. I can't imagine Ambrose averaging 40 in the WI vs Carl Hooper and Ridley Jacobs....lol lol

As for home wickets, in the Caribbean only Sabina and Kensington favor pace. Ambrose has an outstanding record on the flattest wicket in the world aka the ARG in Antigua.

Dude, Ambrose never bowled in Ind where Warne sucked. Also I have specified Ambrose barely played in NZ and SL, and very little in SA. Ambrose took a lot of wickets vs some of the worst English batting lineups ever. Ambrose is not decisively the better bowler. Warne did well in SA, SL, Nz, Pak, Eng and at home. Ambrose did well in Aus, SA and Eng, but his record in Pak, NZ and SL is based on a very very small sample size, and he never played in Ind.