Best fast bowler in the world ATM?

[Rik]

his case doesnt show anything but he is useless outside the sub continent.

Interisting comment. Considering that the conditions found in the sub-continent are considered to be the hardest conditions for fast bowlers to gain any assistance from, often known as a fast-bowler's graveyard, I'd have thought that would be plus points for a seamer...not to mention an oddity. Remembering his series in England, I've got highlights from the Tests on video and whilst Caddick and Hoggard were getting quite a bit of movement, Vaas bowled accurately enough but vary rarely did he get any movement, which is odd for a natural swing bowler in swinging conditions.

 

[Beleg]

Vaas is a very good bowler on Sub-continent pitches. [Specially in Sharjah and Pakistan.]

 

[Richard]

Because Vaas doesn't create as much pressure.

Just look at the RPO's in question.

Given that McGrath's has been going down for ages now and Vaas' has been fairly constant at around 2.6, I don't see that even the relatively small difference of 0.1 means much.
Even if there is a difference between "extremely accurate" and "very accurate" (eg the difference between Pollock and McGrath\Vaas) then both are still, surely, accurate enough to supposedly suffocate the batsmen?

 

[Richard]

Interisting comment. Considering that the conditions found in the sub-continent are considered to be the hardest conditions for fast bowlers to gain any assistance from, often known as a fast-bowler's graveyard, I'd have thought that would be plus points for a seamer...not to mention an oddity. Remembering his series in England, I've got highlights from the Tests on video and whilst Caddick and Hoggard were getting quite a bit of movement, Vaas bowled accurately enough but vary rarely did he get any movement, which is odd for a natural swing bowler in swinging conditions.

All I could think of from that series was that Vaas expected seam and swing, and got basically none. If he'd bowled like he does in Sri Lanka, I'm fully confident he'd have torn through like he does so often.
Sadly, he bowled as if England were England. But that summer especially, and almost as bad last, it wasn't - it was far more like Sri Lanka.

 

[Craig]

Given that McGrath's has been going down for ages now and Vaas' has been fairly constant at around 2.6, I don't see that even the relatively small difference of 0.1 means much.
Even if there is a difference between "extremely accurate" and "very accurate" (eg the difference between Pollock and McGrath\Vaas) then both are still, surely, accurate enough to supposedly suffocate the batsmen?

So Vaas is just as accurate as McGrath is then Richard?

 

[Richard]

IMO yes.
Not as tall as him, but just as accurate.

 

[Swervy]

IMO yes.
Not as tall as him, but just as accurate.

well that is just not true (apart from the height bit)

 

[marc71178]

All I could think of from that series was that Vaas expected seam and swing, and got basically none. If he'd bowled like he does in Sri Lanka, I'm fully confident he'd have torn through like he does so often.

One would suggest that someone as experienced as him should've realised it wasn't doing much for him and should've corrected the manner in which he bowled.

 

[V Reddy]

The things ur missing Richard are

1. McGrath is tall while Vaas isn't. It makes a difference.

2. Glenn bowls from close to the stumps while it isn't the case with Vaas.

3. Glenn while being economical makes the batsman play 5 out of 6

4. Glenn makes it move of the seam while Vaas swings it

5. Glenn is good at reverse swing while Vaas isn't ( atleast i haven't seen him doing it )

6. Glenn bowls in that in-between length where batsman is found wanting which is even more hard when coupled with his height

 

[Armadillo]

I don't agree that McGrath makes the batsman play 5 out of 6 :O

 

[Tom Halsey]

Neither do I.

But the idea that Vaas is as good as McGrath is ludicrous.

 

[Armadillo]

I think he is, in my opinion McGrath is finished, he didn't perform well at all in the world cup.

 

[Richard]

One would suggest that someone as experienced as him should've realised it wasn't doing much for him and should've corrected the manner in which he bowled.

Certainly he should have done, never said he shouldn't - can you think of another reason why he should not have exploited the conditions that are so akin to those he has exploited time and again at home?

 

[Richard]

The things ur missing Richard are

1. McGrath is tall while Vaas isn't. It makes a difference.

2. Glenn bowls from close to the stumps while it isn't the case with Vaas.

3. Glenn while being economical makes the batsman play 5 out of 6

4. Glenn makes it move of the seam while Vaas swings it

5. Glenn is good at reverse swing while Vaas isn't ( atleast i haven't seen him doing it )

6. Glenn bowls in that in-between length where batsman is found wanting which is even more hard when coupled with his height

1, I know, I said as much. Indeed that relates to
6, he can bowl a much larger span of length without bowling Long-Hops or overpitched balls, because of his height.
2, I certainly disagree. Chaminda's arm is very near to the top of off when it comes over.
3, IMO on approximation I'd say 3 out of 6 of McGrath-dot-balls are blocked, 3 left. For Chaminda, I'd say about the same. Not that I think this matters - it's slow scoring, not playing balls, that makes the batsman feel under pressure.
4, McGrath can swing it - Chaminda is very adept when bowling well at both seam and swing.
5, I'd say the other way around. Certainly, I can tell you beyond question that Chaminda can bowl reverse-swing, and likewise, I've never heard or seen any evidence that McGrath can.
Basically, McGrath is as adept as anyone at exploiting green wickets, but Chaminda at his best can match him - he can also exploit non-seaming wickets, by getting movement off them with cutters, and movement in the air with both new and old ball.

 

[Langeveldt]

5. Glenn is good at reverse swing while Vaas isn't ( atleast i haven't seen him doing it )

Ive never seen McGrath reverse swing it... He isnt quick enough, and doesnt usually pitch it up enough

 

[Richard]

Neither do I.

But the idea that Vaas is as good as McGrath is ludicrous.

Purely because of the disparity in their Test averages of 8.
That's the only reason you think it's ludicrous. I've never denied Chaminda's extremely inconsistent. Just said he's far more talented than McGrath and when he bowls like he can he's far more dangerous and equally adept at not conceding runs.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Purely because of the disparity in their Test averages of 8.
That's the only reason you think it's ludicrous. I've never denied Chaminda's extremely inconsistent. Just said he's far more talented than McGrath and when he bowls like he can he's far more dangerous and equally adept at not conceding runs.

Likewise, I've never said Chaminda isn't talented.

But he is WAY too inconsistent.

 

[Richard]

I know - and I'll be surprised if I've ever said he's as brilliant as he could be.
Simply that when he does bowl brilliantly, no-one is as good as him. No number of poor strokes played against McGrath or anyone else can change that.

 

[marc71178]

Certainly he should have done, never said he shouldn't - can you think of another reason why he should not have exploited the conditions that are so akin to those he has exploited time and again at home?

Not off the top of my head, but I bet the likes of McGrath and Pollock would've done.

Only thing I can think of was he carrying a knock?

 

[Richard]

Not that I know of, but often these things aren't disclosed I suppose.
I highly doubt McGrath and Pollock would have exploited those conditions, as they've never demonstrated an ability to; depending on how well England played (I think it highly unlikely they would have played either as well as they played Chaminda, simply because history would suggest so) they'd have got figures accordingly.