joel garner #1
Cricket Spectator
I vote Joel Garner Marshall and Hadlee.
A better strike rate, more wickets/match, a better average.A great bowler full stop. Could swing it both ways at pace, and with accuracy. What more could you want from an ODI opening bowler?
Like SS said, it matters what he acctualy did, not what he could/should/would have done.A great bowler full stop. Could swing it both ways at pace, and with accuracy. What more could you want from an ODI opening bowler?
By comparing each to their peers.Bowling is where it's most crazy of all to have this blurring of the eras. How on Earth are you seriously supposed to compare Malcolm Marshall and Joel Garner to Wasim Akram, Allan Donald and Glenn McGrath?
Judging by his location being Hyderabad then I think not. Obviously he appreciates the magnificent economy rate of Hadlee and strike rate of Bond.Raghav, are you a Kiwi living in India?
I never considered Waqar TBH. I opted for the economy of Joel Garner, consistency of Glenn McGrath and the variety of Wasim Akram.I am very surprised at the lack of votes for Waqar. The man took 4 wickets or more one in every ten matches he played, which is astonishing. Only Saqlain, Lee and Bond have better records in this regard, and they have played far lesser matches.
Is it Waqar's E/R of 4.6 that is turning people off?
well said. i second that.I never considered Waqar TBH. I opted for the economy of Joel Garner, consistency of Glenn McGrath and the variety of Wasim Akram.