Best fast bowler in the world ATM?

[Rik]

Got to be Mahwire for me!

On Ceefax I almost collapsed laughing when I saw the explination for Mahwire taking Blignaut's place after Blignaut was injured in the 1st Test. After proving he's not even close to County Standard, he's nearly allways round or about for the Test side, and this time they said he would help them with his extra pace! Now if England thought Harmison or Jones would be able to help them with their pace, then fair enough, but Mahwire?????

 

[Rik]

IMO it highlights the sheer dominance of the batsman rather than the dearth of quality bowlers...

Shoaib, Pollock, McGrath would have been class in any era...

Hmmm well I'd have to disagree. Most of the attacks around the world are very weak, and no coincidence that players like Dravid, Ponting and Hayden are scoring runs all the time and the Test World Record Score has come down either...

Yes there are very good batsmen, but weak attacks and flat pitches are making the very good seem great.

 

[age_master]

Gillespie than Pollock

 

[Anil]

IMO it highlights the sheer dominance of the batsman rather than the dearth of quality bowlers...

Shoaib, Pollock, McGrath would have been class in any era...

The dominance of the batsmen has been in part due to the dearth of quality bowlers.....(I don't think the batsmen of this era have got that much better....)

I never denied the class of those three, I mean compared to previous cricketing generations, we have very few of these kind of fast bowlers operating now, got it?

 

[Swervy]

The dominance of the batsmen has been in part due to the dearth of quality bowlers.....(I don't think the batsmen of this era have got that much better....)

I never denied the class of those three, I mean compared to previous cricketing generations, we have very few of these kind of fast bowlers operating now, got it?

its a funny one is this (not in the 'hahaha' way)...if you think about it how many class fast bowlers were there in the 80's, if you take away the West Indies...England didnt have one for most of that decade, neither did Australia (McDermott developed into a very good one in my opinion,Alderman was great in England as well),New Zealand had Hadlee,Pakistan had Imran,and then late in the 80's Wasim,India didnt have a true world class pace man,neither did Sri Lanka...these days we have Pollock,Mcgrath,Gillespie,maybe Akhter,possibly Bond, i dont think we are that short of greats at the moment...i just think the pitches have become easier to bat on

 

[Anna]

Ntini & Gillespie, with Pollock 3rd.

 

[Andre]

Despite some indifferant form of late, I still think Gillespie is the one. Shoaib comes a fairly close second, and from there most of the top fast bowlers are on pretty much the same level.

Pollock is slowly but surely losing his ability as a strike bowler - a bowler who relies on accuracy and movement is nice, but he also needs a yard of pace to be effective. Now that he has lost that yard that he once had, he's struggling to take wickets at the same rate. Ntini is a superior striker but his accuracy is lacking at times, plus he's a bit too one-dimensional to be in the top 4 or 5 quicks in the world.

Richard - did you see Australias sub-continent tours of recent years? You will have seen that Gillespie can infact bowl in conditions that aren't to his liking.

 

[Craig]

Got to be Mahwire for me!

:O

 

[Tim]

Richard you'll find that Tuffey did bowl quite well in last year's test series against India in India.

 

[warrioryohannan]

It got to be Akhter, noone has been so devastating in test matches lately as Akhter, atleast on current form he's way ahead of others.

 

[Eclipse]

Richard - did you see Australias sub-continent tours of recent years? You will have seen that Gillespie can infact bowl in conditions that aren't to his liking.

I agree 100% Richard is so wrong on this it's not funny.

 

[Craig]

Since England 2001 Shoaib has improved, got terrible again, improved, got terrible again, and improved.
His most recent improvement has lasted longer than any of his previous ones.

So he's inconsistent? Plus you can include his disclpine problems in there as well.

 

[Richard]

its a funny one is this (not in the 'hahaha' way)...if you think about it how many class fast bowlers were there in the 80's, if you take away the West Indies...England didnt have one for most of that decade, neither did Australia (McDermott developed into a very good one in my opinion,Alderman was great in England as well),New Zealand had Hadlee,Pakistan had Imran,and then late in the 80's Wasim,India didnt have a true world class pace man,neither did Sri Lanka...these days we have Pollock,Mcgrath,Gillespie,maybe Akhter,possibly Bond, i dont think we are that short of greats at the moment...i just think the pitches have become easier to bat on

IMO Vaas is far closer to greatship than Bond.
Even though they were part of one team, all the West Indies lot aren't an anomaly in the pattern. And India didn't have one - the '80s was Kapil Dev's good time.
In the '70s, meanwhile, we had Lillee, Hadlee, Holding, Garner and Roberts, Thomson (debatable I know - obviously he wasn't as good as the aforementioned, but still IMO better than plenty of today), Imran late on, Willis and Snow.
And in the '90s we had Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Wasim, Waqar, Gough, Fleming, Chaminda and Srinath to an extent, and to an even lesser one Allott and Nash.
Cricket is a cyclical game, it seems.

 

[Richard]

Richard you'll find that Tuffey did bowl quite well in last year's test series against India in India.

Or rather in The Second Test of that series.
I didn't see it so I can't really comment.
But certainly, he's got to do it more often - it's not like his overseas record was anything short of humiliating before that.

 

[Richard]

Richard - did you see Australias sub-continent tours of recent years? You will have seen that Gillespie can infact bowl in conditions that aren't to his liking.

In Sri Lanka? Where he had that horrific accident? And In India? Where he averaged 30 (however much people protested that he "deserved more" - did he have catches dropped off good balls?)
If Gillespie can bowl in subcontinent conditions it proves, rather than that he can bowl in conditions that aren't to his liking, that there are no conditions that aren't to his liking.
The best bowlers are suited to all conditions.
Gillespie has yet to demonstrate, when I have had the fortune of watching, that he can bowl the cutters and reverse-swing demanded by conditions that do not suit his favoured seam and swing.
Maybe he did in West Indies last spring; if so, full credit to him. However, since then he had a mediocre series in similar conditions against India (indeed, the 'Gabba Test offered plenty).
We'll see him tested again in the upcoming subcontinental tours - which I will be able to watch some if not all of.

 

[Kent]

I didn't see it so I can't really comment.

Bu...

nah, too easy. :saint:

 

[marc71178]

And in the '90s we had Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Wasim, Waqar, Fleming, Chaminda and Srinath to an extent, and to an even lesser one Allott and Nash.

You seriously are off your rocker if you include Fleming, Vaas and Srinath but omit McGrath, Pollock, Gillespie, heck even Gough.

If Fleming was so good, how come the selectors didn't pick him very often?

 

[Choora]

So he's inconsistent? Plus you can include his disclpine problems in there as well.

Lately he has been very consisten, in all the series played after World Cup, Akhter destroyed opponents.Same can't be said about other bowlers.

 

[Richard]

You seriously are off your rocker if you include Fleming, Vaas and Srinath but omit McGrath, Pollock, Gillespie, heck even Gough.

If Fleming was so good, how come the selectors didn't pick him very often?

Yet again you simply resort to "statistics show that you are off your rocker" - sorry, I've never said this has anything to do with statistics.
Fleming, Chaminda and Javagal could do things McGrath, Pollock and Gillespie can't.
Regardless of how consistent they are (all tend\tended to be very, very inconsistent) that wasn't what I was talking about.

 

[marc71178]

But how can you class them in the greats category when in some cases they weren't even Test regulars because of other better bowler who aren't in the greats?

Nice sneaky edit in of Gough BTW