Peak Wes Hall vs Peak Dennis Lillee

[shortpitched713]

Which fast bowler was greater during their peak? Lillee's did last about twice as many Tests as Hall's, but this is more on the quality.

I think it's a great comparison, as they both look incredible by the eye test. I'd say Hall looked just a touch quicker though. Also, most importantly of all they both dripped swag, which is every bit as important for a proper fast bowler as the numbers indicating effectiveness y'all nerds obsess over. For real, besides for your odd Shoaib, Malinga, Mitch Johnson, swag has become a more and more rare commodity.

I'll go Hall, just, but what do you guys think?

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Tough one

 

[BazBall21]

I have a huge spot for Wes Hall.but he's just not better than Lillee

 

[The Sean]

Not that it means a huge amount in the grand scheme of things, but interestingly in 1982 Tom Graveney ranked this pair one after the other as the second and third greatest post-war fast bowlers to that point, with Hall ahead. (Lindwall was number one)

 

[Line and Length]

Having seen both perform live I can say they both made very positive impressions. Given the local crowd support for Lillee at the WACA he probably had the biggest impact but Hall seemed just as quick.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Better Bowler has to be Lillee by a margin. Though, Hall might have been the quickest between Larwood and Thommo except Typhoon.

 

[Coronis]

I don’t like players who drip.

Also aren’t Wes Hall’s peaks two single seasons a couple years apart?

 

[shortpitched713]

I don’t like players who drip.

Also aren’t Wes Hall’s peaks two single seasons a couple years apart?

Nah, I'd take everything 1964/65 ( at which point he started to break down physically from overbowling presumably) and earlier as his peak where he was effective. The idiosyncrasies you're mentioning have more to do with inconsistent international Test tour scheduling (West Indies could go a whole year without a Test at times!) by pretty much every nation barring England, around that time than inconsistency of Hall. He was pretty much just excellent domestically or internationally in early career.

It's obviously still a lot less Tests (about 30), from which to judge, as compared to Lillee, whose peak seemed to last for a period entailing about 60 Tests, into like 81/82, I'd reckon.

 

[Coronis]

Nah, I'd take everything 1964/65 ( at which point he started to break down physically from overbowling presumably) and earlier as his peak where he was effective. The idiosyncrasies you're mentioning have more to do with inconsistent international Test tour scheduling (West Indies could go a whole year without a Test at times!) by pretty much every nation barring England, around that time than inconsistency of Hall. He was pretty much just excellent domestically or internationally in early career.

It's obviously still a lot less Tests (about 30), from which to judge, as compared to Lillee, whose peak seemed to last for a period entailing about 60 Tests, into like 81/82, I'd reckon.

Idk. Its just that he really only has those India/Pak series to hang his hat on doesn’t he?

 

[BazBall21]

Record against Australia and England isn't great. Think Snow and Pollock were better. Hall had the toughest home conditions though.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Record against Australia and England isn't great. Think Snow and Pollock were better. Hall had the toughest home conditions though.

Adcock too. Think Hall is overrated and so is Lillee too. Though Lillee is lot ahead.

 

[number11]

DKL is as good as anyone.

 

[Coronis]

DKL is as good as anyone.

He’s not as good as Matthew Hoggard.