Dale Steyn vs Allan Donald vs Shaun Pollock

[pardus]

Didn't watch much of Steyn's bowling then?

Not as much as I watched Donald or Marshall or McGrath.

 

[ankitj]

I like all the posts in support of Donald even if I may not pick him as better of the top 2 SA pace bowlers. Looked at their stats again. Don't think Donald's stats are any less complete, may even be more so.

 

[honestbharani]

With all due respect to Donald, I think Steyn is in the very top tier of fast bowlers and Donald a level below it.

 

[stephen]

In Test match cricket, for me it is Donald. I haven't seen anywhere as much of Steyn as I saw of Donald. My strong memory of Steyn is from his Test match against India in 2006 (where Ganguly scored a delightful 50 after being hit in the head by Steyn - Steyn just couldn't get Ganguly out in that innings despite being able to hit him at will). I also remember Steyn from Sehwag's 319 match in Feroz Shah Kotla.

The thing for me against Steyn is, if multiple batsmen have gotten 300+ scores against South Africa while Steyn was in the attack, and if someone like Stephen Fleming (with all due respects to him) could score 262 while he was in the attack, and if Michael Clarke could score 600+ runs in a 3 Test series while he was in the attack, then there is something amiss. I just cannot imagine Fleming scoring a 262 in a Test innings against a peak Donald or McGrath no matter how batsmen-friendly the conditions.

I never really heard of so many batsmen feasting so many runs against South Africa while Donald was leading the attack (I think only 1 batsman ever got to a double-century against South Africa back then). Yes, it could be argued that pitches/rules/batsmen were different in Donald's time or that Donald had better all round support (but Morkel, Ntini & Kallis weren't bad support either). Yes, it could also be argued that those batsmen feasted on other bowlers while seeing Steyn off. But it still doesn't convince me. It just never felt that easy against the SA attack led by Donald in the 90s.

The comparison reminds me of the comparison between Hadlee & Lillee. I prefer Lillee any day despite Hadlee's slightly superior stat numbers.
Steyn was probably more consistent, and statistically superior since Donald's career started late because of ban on SA. However I just feel Steyn lacked the explosiveness & the sheer aggression that I have seen in Donald (or McGrath or Marshall).

This is an interesting viewpoint.

The counterpoint to this is that Pat Cummins averaged just under 28 against India in the 2018/19 series. In that series India scored 622, 443 and 307 in a four test series. Pujara scored three hundreds in that series with a top score of 196. None of that makes me think any less of Cummins, who was exceptional in that series despite (relatively) poor returns. He happened to be the best Australian bowler and a lot was asked of him with Australia's batting collapsing and forcing him to bowl four days in a row at times.

Marshall, Ambrose, Roberts, Garner and Holding all got belted around at times (not often) and saw big scores compiled against their bowling.

Steyn was a bit of a newbie back in 2006 and batting was strongest worldwide at that point. Steyn won multiple matches and series on the back of his efforts. He was a beast. Dismantling the best Indian batting at home in 2010 was just incredible. The most wonderful bowler post-McGrath IMO.

 

[trundler]

I think it's fair to say that on a bad day a really good batsman could get on top Steyn which happened a lot less often with McGrath or Ambrose. But Steyn tore through lineups with a ridiculous vigour that it evens out. If Steyn didn't get thrashed more often he'd be the uncontested best ever and if McGrath did those magical things Steyn did he'd be a league above everyone too. But they don't and it all evens out.

 

[honestbharani]

And hence, Marshall...

 

[trundler]

Skill-wise he's the most well-rounded ever but the relative strengths of guys like Ambrose, Hadlee and Steyn mean they're in the running too imo. At this point we all know what they are, haha.

 

[Engle]

Also, Donald felt the need to clonk Sultan Zarawani on the noggin when he came out to face him without a helmet. An act unbecoming of a great fast bowler who at least should see humor when it presents itself.

 

[pardus]

This is an interesting viewpoint.

The counterpoint to this is that Pat Cummins averaged just under 28 against India in the 2018/19 series. In that series India scored 622, 443 and 307 in a four test series. Pujara scored three hundreds in that series with a top score of 196. None of that makes me think any less of Cummins, who was exceptional in that series despite (relatively) poor returns. He happened to be the best Australian bowler and a lot was asked of him with Australia's batting collapsing and forcing him to bowl four days in a row at times.

Marshall, Ambrose, Roberts, Garner and Holding all got belted around at times (not often) and saw big scores compiled against their bowling.

Steyn was a bit of a newbie back in 2006 and batting was strongest worldwide at that point. Steyn won multiple matches and series on the back of his efforts. He was a beast. Dismantling the best Indian batting at home in 2010 was just incredible. The most wonderful bowler post-McGrath IMO.

I don't know. I guess it is psychological after seeing what I have seen. Sehwag was pretty dismissive of Steyn in his innings of 319. I have never seen Sehwag being similarly dismissive of McGrath in Test match cricket.
I haven't seen either Garner or Ambrose or Donald getting belted to that extent. Yes, batsmen might have occasionally gotten big 100s against these bowlers, that's a different thing. But I haven't
seen them being belted with utter disdain (no matter how batsmen-friendly the track was).

I have seen Marshall getting hit once (by Gavaskar in 1983 series in India). Marshall knocked the bat out of Gavaskar's hands in the first Test at Kanpur, which was very frightening to see.
And Marshall had already hit Sunny on the head in the previous Test series in the West Indies. Talk was beginning that maybe Gavaskar was vulnerable against hostile pace (a blemish that no great
batsman of that era liked). Gavaskar determined to do something about it, and he went after Marshall in the next Test match at Delhi (I think the exact same place where Sehwag scored 319).

To me, it appeared pretty much impossible for a batsman to score a 300 against attacks led by a peak Marshall or Donald or McGrath. It isn't surprising it was never done even once against these bowlers.
Very few batsmen even got 200s against attacks led by these bowlers. And most of the times a batsman got to 200 against them, their innings was celebrated as one of the best ever (Laxman's 281 or Lara's 213 or Gavaskar's 236*).
It is somewhat shocking to me that multiple batsmen have scored their 300s against Steyn led attacks. I just can't wrap my head around something similar happening to Donald/McGrath/Marshall.

Frequency with which batsmen tonked around Steyn led attacks seems to be much much higher than the frequency with which the same was done to Donald or McGrath or Marshall led attacks.

Again, it could be purely psychological on my part. Multiple times I have seen Donald come up with astonishing deliveries to dismiss some of the greatest batsmen of the game that I haven't seen Steyn doing.
At least not to batsmen of that caliber. Maybe I missed those accomplishments of Steyn. Like for example Donald's delivery to get rid of Tendulkar in Durban Test in 1996 (Tendulkar hit Donald's previous 2 deliveries
for boundaries) or Donald's delivery to get rid of Lara in Centurion Park Test in 1999 (again Lara hammered 30 runs off 2 overs in Donald's first spell making Cronje to take Donald off the attack).

For whatever reason, to me piling runs against Steyn led attacks never seemed as daunting as it did against Donald/McGrath/Marshall led attacks.

 

[trundler]

Steyn not bowling magic balls is a pretty indefensible stance

 

[smash84]

I don't know. I guess it is psychological after seeing what I have seen. Sehwag was pretty dismissive of Steyn in his innings of 319. I have never seen Sehwag being similarly dismissive of McGrath in Test match cricket.
I haven't seen either Garner or Ambrose or Donald getting belted to that extent. Yes, batsmen might have occasionally gotten big 100s against these bowlers, that's a different thing. But I haven't
seen them being belted with utter disdain (no matter how batsmen-friendly the track was).

I have seen Marshall getting hit once (by Gavaskar in 1983 series in India). Marshall knocked the bat out of Gavaskar's hands in the first Test at Kanpur, which was very frightening to see.
And Marshall had already hit Sunny on the head in the previous Test series in the West Indies. Talk was beginning that maybe Gavaskar was vulnerable against hostile pace (a blemish that no great
batsman of that era liked). Gavaskar determined to do something about it, and he went after Marshall in the next Test match at Delhi (I think the exact same place where Sehwag scored 319).

To me, it appeared pretty much impossible for a batsman to score a 300 against attacks led by a peak Marshall or Donald or McGrath. It isn't surprising it was never done even once against these bowlers.
Very few batsmen even got 200s against attacks led by these bowlers. And most of the times a batsman got to 200 against them, their innings was celebrated as one of the best ever (Laxman's 281 or Lara's 213 or Gavaskar's 236*).
It is somewhat shocking to me that multiple batsmen have scored their 300s against Steyn led attacks. I just can't wrap my head around something similar happening to Donald/McGrath/Marshall.

Frequency with which batsmen tonked around Steyn led attacks seems to be much much higher than the frequency with which the same was done to Donald or McGrath or Marshall led attacks.

Again, it could be purely psychological on my part. Multiple times I have seen Donald come up with astonishing deliveries to dismiss some of the greatest batsmen of the game that I haven't seen Steyn doing.
At least not to batsmen of that caliber. Maybe I missed those accomplishments of Steyn. Like for example Donald's delivery to get rid of Tendulkar in Durban Test in 1996 (Tendulkar hit Donald's previous 2 deliveries
for boundaries) or Donald's delivery to get rid of Lara in Centurion Park Test in 1999 (again Lara hammered 30 runs off 2 overs in Donald's first spell making Cronje to take Donald off the attack).

For whatever reason, to me piling runs against Steyn led attacks never seemed as daunting as it did against Donald/McGrath/Marshall led attacks.

Lara's 99 series with his 153 and 213 seems to be forgotten here?

 

[honestbharani]

I don't know. I guess it is psychological after seeing what I have seen. Sehwag was pretty dismissive of Steyn in his innings of 319. I have never seen Sehwag being similarly dismissive of McGrath in Test match cricket.
I haven't seen either Garner or Ambrose or Donald getting belted to that extent. Yes, batsmen might have occasionally gotten big 100s against these bowlers, that's a different thing. But I haven't
seen them being belted with utter disdain (no matter how batsmen-friendly the track was).

I have seen Marshall getting hit once (by Gavaskar in 1983 series in India). Marshall knocked the bat out of Gavaskar's hands in the first Test at Kanpur, which was very frightening to see.
And Marshall had already hit Sunny on the head in the previous Test series in the West Indies. Talk was beginning that maybe Gavaskar was vulnerable against hostile pace (a blemish that no great
batsman of that era liked). Gavaskar determined to do something about it, and he went after Marshall in the next Test match at Delhi (I think the exact same place where Sehwag scored 319).

To me, it appeared pretty much impossible for a batsman to score a 300 against attacks led by a peak Marshall or Donald or McGrath. It isn't surprising it was never done even once against these bowlers.
Very few batsmen even got 200s against attacks led by these bowlers. And most of the times a batsman got to 200 against them, their innings was celebrated as one of the best ever (Laxman's 281 or Lara's 213 or Gavaskar's 236*).
It is somewhat shocking to me that multiple batsmen have scored their 300s against Steyn led attacks. I just can't wrap my head around something similar happening to Donald/McGrath/Marshall.

Frequency with which batsmen tonked around Steyn led attacks seems to be much much higher than the frequency with which the same was done to Donald or McGrath or Marshall led attacks.

Again, it could be purely psychological on my part. Multiple times I have seen Donald come up with astonishing deliveries to dismiss some of the greatest batsmen of the game that I haven't seen Steyn doing.
At least not to batsmen of that caliber. Maybe I missed those accomplishments of Steyn. Like for example Donald's delivery to get rid of Tendulkar in Durban Test in 1996 (Tendulkar hit Donald's previous 2 deliveries
for boundaries) or Donald's delivery to get rid of Lara in Centurion Park Test in 1999 (again Lara hammered 30 runs off 2 overs in Donald's first spell making Cronje to take Donald off the attack).

For whatever reason, to me piling runs against Steyn led attacks never seemed as daunting as it did against Donald/McGrath/Marshall led attacks.

Watch the 2004 tests in India where Sehwag smashed McGrath around.. Esp. the last ball of the test (as it turned out) - the last ball on day 4 with India needing 240 off the last day with all wickets in tact on a pitch where Gillespie could bat out a session against Kumble and Harbhajan at their peak. It was more dismissive than anything he did to Steyn, which coincidentally was also in Chennai (the 319) and hence I watched all these innings live and literally from the pavilion stand for those two games at least.

 

[honestbharani]

Lara's 99 series with his 153 and 213 seems to be forgotten here?

Also a 100 off 82 balls in there. And there is Lara's 226 in Australia as well as 182.

 

[pardus]

Lara's 99 series with his 153 and 213 seems to be forgotten here?

No, I mentioned it (as I mentioned Laxman's 281 against McGrath). And those series of Lara & Laxman are (rightfully) considered as two of the greatest batting series
performances in Test cricket.
If anything it reinforces my point, their batting performances are rated so highly because of how challenging it was to score against those McGrath led attacks they played.
BTW McGrath took 30 wickets in the 1999 series against West Indies, and 17 wickets in 3 Tests in the 2001 series against India.

OTOH, I haven't seen many talk about Jayawardene's 374 or Sehwag's 319 or Clarke's 576 runs (in 3 Tests) against Steyn led attacks in the same breath. For sure these
batting performances were spectacular too, not denying that. But somehow not rated by many in the same league as Lara's or Laxman's performances against McGrath.

 

[honestbharani]

No, I mentioned it (as I mentioned Laxman's 281 against McGrath). And those series of Lara & Laxman are (rightfully) considered as two of the greatest batting series
performances in Test cricket.
If anything it reinforces my point, their batting performances are rated so highly because of how challenging it was to score against those McGrath led attacks they played.
BTW McGrath took 30 wickets in the 1999 series against West Indies, and 17 wickets in 3 Tests in the 2001 series against India.

OTOH, I haven't seen many talk about Jayawardene's 374 or Sehwag's 319 or Clarke's 576 runs (in 3 Tests) against Steyn led attacks in the same breath. For sure these
batting performances were spectacular too, not denying that. But somehow not rated by many in the same league as Lara's or Laxman's performances against McGrath.

You are forgetting that those great innings were not played against McGrath alone, but against one of the greatest test match line ups of all time and also included a little guy called Warne who is very much in the conversation for the greatest bowler of his style... Steyn had Paul Harris.

 

[ankitj]

Clarke's 500 something series is rated as one of the greatest performances. Pretty sure DoG's rating rates Clarke's knock in 48 all out and 90 something all out test very highly

 

[pardus]

You are forgetting that those great innings were not played against McGrath alone, but against one of the greatest test match line ups of all time and also included a little guy called Warne who is very much in the conversation for the greatest bowler of his style... Steyn had Paul Harris.

Warne was really irrelevant in both the series. He was so horrible in the 1999 series that he was actually dropped in the last Test.
McGrath's presence clearly had a huge psychological impact - not just on opposition batsmen - but also on his own support bowlers.
Remove McGrath, and Australia would have had to climb a mountain in both those series (Indian batsmen would have most likely
destroyed the Aussie attack exactly like how they did in 1998).

We need to remember it was McGrath who dismissed Lara when Lara scored his hurricane 100 in Antigua in the 1999 series.
Aussies would have had it real tough if McGrath hadn't dismissed Lara. Momentum was completely with the West Indies.
Aus were really demoralized by Lara's knock.

Look at Australia's series performances in that time frame whenever McGrath was absent.

Even in 2005 Ashes, Aus never lost a single Test match in which McGrath played.

Steyn had Morkel & Kallis for support in plenty of matches. To be honest, comparatively Donald had horrible support in the first
few years of his career until Pollock came along, but even in the early 90s scoring against Donald-led-SA-attack was always considered
a great accomplishment for batsmen (like for example when India toured there in 1992 - I think Kapil was the only Indian batsman who
averaged above 35 in the series, despite SA having no real great bowler other than Donald).

I don't think any batsman managed to score 300s (or even 200s) against Donald led attacks in the early 90s even when there was no Pollock
for support.

From what it looks like to me, the very presence of McGrath or Donald seems to uplift their support bowlers, which is exactly what I expect
from the greatest.

 

[Bolo.]

Steyn went missing across spells or innings more than other top tier bowlers. Seldom whole games though. And when he went missing he often caught some serious stick because of his tendency to bowl full, his height, his extra pace, and in his early days his lower levels of control. But when on song he was better than all the other top bowlers, and he was on song a lot.

 

[honestbharani]

Warne was really irrelevant in both the series. He was so horrible in the 1999 series that he was actually dropped in the last Test.
McGrath's presence clearly had a huge psychological impact - not just on opposition batsmen - but also on his own support bowlers.
Remove McGrath, and Australia would have had to climb a mountain in both those series (Indian batsmen would have most likely
destroyed the Aussie attack exactly like how they did in 1998).

We need to remember it was McGrath who dismissed Lara when Lara scored his hurricane 100 in Antigua in the 1999 series.
Aussies would have had it real tough if McGrath hadn't dismissed Lara. Momentum was completely with the West Indies.
Aus were really demoralized by Lara's knock.

Look at Australia's series performances in that time frame whenever McGrath was absent.

Even in 2005 Ashes, Aus never lost a single Test match in which McGrath played.

Steyn had Morkel & Kallis for support in plenty of matches. To be honest, comparatively Donald had horrible support in the first
few years of his career until Pollock came along, but even in the early 90s scoring against Donald-led-SA-attack was always considered
a great accomplishment for batsmen (like for example when India toured there in 1992 - I think Kapil was the only Indian batsman who
averaged above 35 in the series, despite SA having no real great bowler other than Donald).

I don't think any batsman managed to score 300s (or even 200s) against Donald led attacks even when there was no Pollock for support.

From what it looks like to me, the very presence of McGrath or Donald seems to uplift their support bowlers, which is exactly what I expect
from the greatest.

Nah man, could not disagree with you more. I am not denying Donald was a great bowler but I feel there is a touch of romaticism in how you are viewing his achievements vis-a-vis Steyn's. You remind me of how some Indian fans talk about Sachin's knocks when we compare him with Virat, for example, especially in ODIs. If you think Morkel was support and Fanie De Villiers was not, I don't think we ever watched the same game.

 

[pardus]

Clarke's 500 something series is rated as one of the greatest performances. Pretty sure DoG's rating rates Clarke's knock in 48 all out and 90 something all out test very highly

Numbers-wise, it is in the same league for sure. No wonder DoG's rating has it super high. All I am saying is, I just haven't heard connoisseurs of the game (so to speak) rate it as high as Lara's 99 series.