Holding. Garner. Donald.

[subshakerz]

yeah, I do think Ambrose was a lot quicker on average, so overall that allowed him to be more destructive than Garner

His destructive spells is a point in his favor.

 

[DrWolverine]

5 WPM in a series(3 or more Tests)

Donald : 5 out of 13 series
Holding : 4 out of 15 series
Garner : 5 out of 13 series

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Garner was genuinely fast at his peak like Ambrose. Garner actually has a better strike rate than Ambrose surprisingly.

 

[Coronis]

Donald has a bigger sample. I make a clear line at 300 wickets to establish the top tier of bowling quality.

I mean you specifically said career length which is why I mentioned it lol

 

[subshakerz]

I mean you specifically said career length which is why I mentioned it lol

You're correct sorry.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Why is Garner worse than Ambrose aside from shorter career.

Funny enough, I actually agree with this sentiment. Imo, Garner is 'worse' than a few bowlers above him only because of his shorter career and lower wicket tally. He took wickets cheaply and at a good enough sr. He certainly wasn't being carried; playing him regardless of era would've been difficult.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Donald would have been a contender for GOAT tag, if he was allowed to start 2-3 years earlier.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Donald would have been a contender for GOAT tag, if he was allowed to start 2-3 years earlier.

Honestly, that's quite possible.

 

[subshakerz]

Donald would have been a contender for GOAT tag, if he was allowed to start 2-3 years earlier.

Or his stats may have suffered.

 

[shortpitched713]

For @DrWolverine .

Donald is better than all of the bowlers in either of your last two polls, so better than these 2, and definitely better than all of Akram, Trueman, and Lillee too.

Think it's a good debate topic, but I think Donald is the best after the GOATs (top 5 pace bowlers, who have retired).

 

[subshakerz]

For @DrWolverine .

Donald is better than all of the bowlers in either of your last two polls, so better than these 2, and definitely better than all of Akram, Trueman, and Lillee too.

Think it's a good debate topic, but I think Donald is the best after the GOATs (top 5 pace bowlers, who have retired).

Donald isn't better than Akram Lillee and likely Trueman too.

 

[Johan]

For @DrWolverine .

Donald is better than all of the bowlers in either of your last two polls, so better than these 2, and definitely better than all of Akram, Trueman, and Lillee too.

Think it's a good debate topic, but I think Donald is the best after the GOATs (top 5 pace bowlers, who have retired).

 

[Johan]

Donald beat both Lillee and Trueman in polls, **** is depressing

 

[Thala_0710]

Donald beat both Lillee and Trueman in polls, **** is depressing

As he should

 

[Johan]

As he should

He shouldn't but there's an inherent 90s > everything before bias around so it's just natural.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

This poll result was pretty surprising even though Donald didn’t win

Imran Khan vs Allan Donald

Two top tier quicks

www.cricketweb.net

 

[Johan]

Donald is particularly rated higher by the Indian fans from my experience because he was monsterous against them, never felt he was rated as high by the English and ofcourse the Australian fans.

 

[Thala_0710]

He shouldn't but there's an inherent 90s > everything before bias around so it's just natural.

As opposed to the older the better bias?

 

[Johan]

As opposed to the older the better bias?

That doesn't exist on this site, I mean, we are on the site where a few believe Sydney Barnes to be a Sourav Ganguly level bowler, what bias? Average CW old age bias

 

[sayon basak]

As opposed to the older the better bias?

If I may ask, who has that bias?