Warne vs Steyn (Test bowling)

[ma1978]

2006 SA was Clark.

you’re descending into irrelevance again

 

[subshakerz]

Nah. They generally don’t get the new ball and often only enter the attack when batsmen are already set.

Why don't they get the new ball? Because of what we are talking about.

 

[Sunil1z]

2006 SA was Clark.

He took 15 wkts in 3 Test . I would say , he did fine .

 

[Sunil1z]

Why don't they get the new ball? Because of what we are talking about.

Why would spinners take new ball in SENA conditions?

 

[ma1978]

Why don't they get the new ball? Because of what we are talking about.

Ashwin was great with the new ball in Australia

 

[subshakerz]

Ashwin was great with the new ball in Australia

How about England?

 

[subshakerz]

He took 15 wkts in 3 Test . I would say , he did fine .

Your point was that Warne didn't need support and Clark took 19 wickets in that series.

 

[Sunil1z]

Your point was that Warne didn't need support and Clark took 19 wickets in that series.

He didn’t need McGrath . A lot of people believe that Warne wouldn’t be that great bowler without McGrath . And although Stuart Clark did very well in SA , he was no McGrath .

 

[subshakerz]

Steyn being slightly overrated here in this thread but not to the extent that Warne is.

Steyn was an all conditions matchwinner and if you look at the rate SA won games when Steyn clicked, it's insane.

Warne was awesome but didn't escape the inherent limitations of being a spinner.

 

[subshakerz]

He didn’t need McGrath . A lot of people believe that Warne wouldn’t be that great bowler without McGrath . And although Stuart Clark did very well in SA , he was no McGrath .

I agree, Warne didn't need McGrath to be successful, but Australia did need McGrath more.

 

[Sunil1z]

I agree, Warne didn't need McGrath to be successful, but Australia did need McGrath more.

Yeah and McGrath is definitely better than Steyn . So , not sure it helps you in Warne vs Steyn

 

[kyear2]

I am copying someone’s quote and modifying it .

In next 50 years , there might be 5 another Steyn but there would be 0 Warne .

This along with longevity and probably the best arguments for Warne, but while this one makes him more unique, does it make him better?

Not taking a shot, legit question.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah, he gets the edge over Ambrose now. But I think his place is nowhere short of the other top 4 (except possibly McGrath).

CW consensus has only changed a little bit, in favor of McGrath, so that in the current order it's M & M, then Hadlee (who gets an a small, but committed contingent for top spot), and then a gap with Steyn.

But Steyn is the best strike bowler of the lot, and did it with less support than Marshall. There are other factors in favor of Marshall, notably more consistency, but I don't see Steyn as below him. And he had very different circumstances and style to both McGrath and Hadlee, so there's points in favor or against both in a comparison. But Steyn isn't truly seen as their peer and gets the short stick. Reasons for that could be many, including even demographics/rose tinted glasses, but I think Steyn really should be seen as shoulder to shoulder with almost any giant of the game.

He's not as good as the top 3 because he record isn't nearly as consistent as the other 3, same way that Ambrose post surgery wasn't as destructive. At these heights it's the little things that matter.

His record vs Australia and England aren't stellar, and that's not even looking at home and away, he was the s/r king but was also way more hittable than the others. He also had no advantages over the others that would make up from the detractions.

Steyn - not as consistent across opponents , hittable
Ambrose - less destructive post surgery
Imran - home vs away

As I said, imho, the little things that separates.

 

[Sunil1z]

This along with longevity and probably the best arguments for Warne, but while this one makes him more unique, does it make him better?

Not taking a shot, legit question.

I am giving extra points to Warne for being more match winner than Steyn.
Let’s say Steyn is qualitatively 5% better bowler than Warne.
But I consider Warne 10% more match winner than Steyn .
Except Marshall and McGrath I am not going to rate anyone above Warne /Murali.

 

[kyear2]

No, they don’t get the same Condition.

Pacer always get to bowl at new batsmen with new ball which even in worse case does something for atleast 10 overs

Spinners on the other hand have to bowl to a completely settled batsmen many times . It isn’t the same thing .

In fairness they also take disproportionally higher number of tail end wickets.

 

[Sunil1z]

In fairness they also take disproportionally higher number of tail end wickets.

They also keep your fast bowlers fresh for their 2nd or 3rd spell .

 

[kyear2]

I agree, Warne didn't need McGrath to be successful, but Australia did need McGrath more.

This i believe also.

 

[kyear2]

They also keep your fast bowlers fresh for their 2nd or 3rd spell .

This is also true.

 

[kyear2]

I am giving extra points to Warne for being more match winner than Steyn.
Let’s say Steyn is qualitatively 5% better bowler than Warne.
But I consider Warne 10% more match winner than Steyn .
Except Marshall and McGrath I am not going to rate anyone above Warne /Murali.

I'll add Hadlee and Steyn, and Ambrose was more destructive in his pomp, but wouldn't argue.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah and McGrath is definitely better than Steyn . So , not sure it helps you in Warne vs Steyn

I think it's much easier to make the case that Steyn is closer to McGrath than Warne.

I am giving extra points to Warne for being more match winner than Steyn.

Let’s say Steyn is qualitatively 5% better bowler than Warne.

But I consider Warne 10% more match winner than Steyn .

Except Marshall and McGrath I am not going to rate anyone above Warne /Murali.

What does that mean? You mean winning more games overall because he played more?

Because Steyn definitely was a better matchwinner pound by pound. He took 26 fifers overall, and SA only on 3 occasions did SA not win.

However, I will admit that Warne was much more consistent than Steyn as a bowler.