-
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.
CW Ranks the Bowlers
- Thread starter adharcric
- Start date
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
More of the same please.
You might want to take a look at their respective Test records for an explanation. Larwood was not especially impressive in Test cricket - his only successful series was the bodyline one in 1932-33. Marshall probably has the best Test record of any fast bowler.
Noble One
International Vice-Captain
Pretty tough to stand out amongst the following fast bowlers of Lindwall's time. Bedser, Statham, Trueman, Miller, Davidson, Tyson, Hall, Mahmood.
adharcric
International Coach
Not if you're talking about all-time greats. For instance, only Trueman from that list has entered the ranking so far.
Slifer
International Captain
All due respect, they dont have a patch on the very good/great fast men of recent vintage: Mcgrath, Lillee, Mcdermott, Gillespie, Hadlee, Wasim, Waqar, Imran, Shoaib, Donald etc
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The reason I made the point I did is because that's exactly what you shouldn't do. Put in context their test careers simply aren't comparable
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Grimmett
Lindwall
Lindwall
BoyBrumby
Englishman
1) JC Laker
2) RR Lindwall
Lindwall looks to have this one sewn up, which is fair enough. Played his last test at 38 (which was very old for an Australian of his era, with the reticence they always had about paying cricketers anything much past 30 was rare-ish) and still maintains an average a tick over 23. If he'd retired after the 54/55 Ashes, for instance, by which time he was already 33, he'd have over 170 wickets at under 21 apiece (cricinfo).
2) RR Lindwall
Lindwall looks to have this one sewn up, which is fair enough. Played his last test at 38 (which was very old for an Australian of his era, with the reticence they always had about paying cricketers anything much past 30 was rare-ish) and still maintains an average a tick over 23. If he'd retired after the 54/55 Ashes, for instance, by which time he was already 33, he'd have over 170 wickets at under 21 apiece (cricinfo).
Last edited:
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
Spofforth
Verity
Verity
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Hmmmmm...
I think you'll be in a small minority if you consider that Bedser, Statham, Trueman, Miller, Davidson, Tyson, Hall, and Mahmood "don't have a patch on" Jason Gillespie and Craig McDermott. If you ranked those 10 bowlers in order, Gillespie and McDermott would be numbers 9 and 10.
And to say that Lillee (or Hadlee or Imran) is of "recent vintage" is really stretching things - his Test career began 38 years ago and ended over 25 years ago. If you're going back that far, you should equally add Larwood, Constantine, Martindale, Tate, Gilligan, Bowes, and others from the 1920s and 1930s (and perhaps even the 1910s) to the list of Lindwall's comparators.
And by the same logic, why should you lump Lillee in with the "recent bowlers" rather than as near-contemporaries of Lindwall? Lillee's Test career began just 11 years after Lindwall's ended and, as I've said, Lillee's Test career ended over a quarter of a century ago. So if we're bringing Lillee into the comparison at all, it should be as a near-contemporary of Lindwall's rather than a bowler of "recent vintage". Pretty much the same goes for Hadlee too.