Battle of the Test Bowling

[Sanz]

Laker

 

[Goughy]

I rate the the Flintoff spell very highly and I think it deserves to be there and the Laker innings was on a track made for his type of bowling.

But lets face it the guy took all 10 and really it aint that close a competition.

Laker

 

[Slifer]

Flintoff (pity vote)

 

[BoyBrumby]

Laker. 19/90, what else can you say? Think we have a winner already IMHO.

 

[oz_fan]

Laker

 

[cameeel]

Laker

 

[honestbharani]

Laker

 

[silentstriker]

Laker wins it 12-2


Next battle:


A Kumble 10 for 74 Ind Pak Delhi 1998-99
http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1998-99/PAK_IN_IND/SCORECARDS/PAK_IND_T2_04-08FEB1999.html

vs.

Jeff Thomson, 5/62 vs West Indies, MCG 1975
http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1970S/1975-76/WI_IN_AUS/WI_AUS_T3_26-30DEC1975.html


By the way, if you could post why you think your choice is best (for the non obvious ones at least). That will start arguments and its more fun than one word responses.

 

[alternative]

Kumble

 

[Sanz]

ANIL KUMBLE for me.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Kumble.

 

[Dasa]

Kumble.

 

[Goughy]

Kumble

 

[Hugh]

Anil Kumble. Same reasoning as Laker...a 10fer is a 10fer.

 

[Anil]

kumble

 

[Slifer]

Kumble.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Thomson's spell must have been something, but it's hard to beat a ten-for against the closest rivals. Kumble.

 

[oz_fan]

Kumble a 10 fer against some very good batsmen.

 

[silentstriker]

10-0 to Kumble. I am ending this four hours earlier since Kumble isn't losing from here and I may not be able to get on tomorrow morning:

Next Battle:

JC Laker 9/37 Eng Aus Old Trafford 1956
http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1950S/1956/AUS_IN_ENG/AUS_ENG_T4_26-31JUL1956.html

vs.

Glenn McGrath, 5/53 vs England, Lords 2005
http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005/AUS_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/AUS_ENG_T1_21-25JUL2005.html

 

[benchmark00]

Laker.