• 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.

Dennis Lillee vs Fred Trueman

Who is the better test bowler?

  • Total voters
    20
Johan

Johan

International Debutant
Either way, Trueman better at home while Lillee better in Ashes competitor's home though I do think Lillee got much better wickets in England than Trueman did in Australia. neither has any achievements in Asia.

Doing some math, the bowling output in Lillee's games in England is 29.4 after I removed Lillee's own numbers from the output and the bowling output in Trueman's games in Australia is 34.2, Lillee still wins mathematically but worth keeping in mind.

both in my top 10 tho in the second half.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
sayon basak said:
Will Cummins ever be a top ten quick?

Think he is fairly below Bumrah now.
@capt_Luffy what are your views on this?
Click to expand...
I can't see him finishing as a Top 10 honestly. If Bumrah maintains similar record for 300 wickets, I think he will be in Top 10, so by then Cummins have to be better than Lillee and Garner to be there. I don't think he will.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
Johan said:
Either way, Trueman better at home while Lillee better in Ashes competitor's home though I do think Lillee got much better wickets in England than Trueman did in Australia. neither has any achievements in Asia.

Doing some math, the bowling output in Lillee's games in England is 29.4 after I removed Lillee's own numbers from the output and the bowling output in Trueman's games in Australia is 34.2, Lillee still wins mathematically but worth keeping in mind.

both in my top 10 tho in the second half.
Click to expand...
Lillee is consistently rated higher than Hadlee etc from that era. And it seems to be pretty unanimous that he is seen as roo 3 by all who played him.

Do you think it's remotely possible that Lillee was better than we believe and Hadlee, for what ever reason just wasn't as good as his numbers say? Every book, list, recount of the era has Hadlee well below the top 2, and there does seem like there was seen to be a clear top 2.
 
Johan

Johan

International Debutant
kyear2 said:
Lillee is consistently rated higher than Hadlee etc from that era. And it seems to be pretty unanimous that he is seen as roo 3 by all who played him.

Do you think it's remotely possible that Lillee was better than we believe and Hadlee, for what ever reason just wasn't as good as his numbers say? Every book, list, recount of the era has Hadlee well below the top 2, and there does seem like there was seen to be a clear top 2.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of it has to do with him being exceptionally dominant over his peers

stats.espncricinfo.com

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com stats.espncricinfo.com

as well as being fundamentally the prototype for an ideal pacer, can move the ball both ways, 150kmph+, aggeessive, willing to bowl until blood etc. also think he's better than his numbers, comparatively even though I rate Hadlee higher he was a 130kmph guy in a bowler's era with Marshall/Imran/Holding/Garner all around so he seems a lot less box office than Lillee.

Lillee is a champion bowler though, I don't think having him as equal to say, IK or Steyn at all is a crazy take, top 7 of all time for me.
 
sayon basak

sayon basak

International Regular
kyear2 said:
Lillee is consistently rated higher than Hadlee etc from that era. And it seems to be pretty unanimous that he is seen as roo 3 by all who played him.
Click to expand...
If you go by aesthetics, this is pretty much expected. Could bowl 150 kmph, could swing the ball both ways, even developed an off cutter later in his career. On the other hand, don't think Hadlee didn't bowl way faster than 135/136 kmph and primarily depended on seam movement, similar to MaGrath.
Similar reason why Wasim is often rated higher than McGrath.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top