How would you rank the bowling attacks in world cricket as of today ?

[MW1304]

No, thats the point, many would disagree. I would have Bollinger in for Hilfenhaus on a bouncy pitch, and Hauritz in for Hilfenhaus on a potential turner. No Hilfenhaus at all.

 

[Ruckus]

The Australian bowling is being dealt pretty harshly imo. The opening post says first choice, so that for me (not including uncapped players) would be Harris, Johnson, Bollinger, Siddle (or Hauritz) which is pretty decent.

1. SA
2. Eng
3. Aus
4. WI
5. Ind
6. Pak
7. Sri
8. NZ
9. Ban

 

[Prince EWS]

I've got into trouble expressing my opinion of bowling attacks on here by people completely misinterpreting my position, but it's probably my fault for not making it completely clear, so I'm going to post two completely different lists in this post.

Here's how I think the bowling attacks of each country have performed over the last 2-3 years:

1. South Africa
2. England
3. Australia
4. Pakistan
5. India
6. Sri Lanka
7. New Zealand
8. West Indies
9. Bangladesh

And now for the more interesting part of my post, I'm going to rate the current attacks in terms of quality, moving forward over the next year or two, predictively. I'm ignoring team results and looking at player quality within attacks - I've also taken players with fitness problems into account. I'm not even going to use team names because it'll give the impression that I actually care about past team results in this analysis.

1. Anderson, Broad, Tremlett and Swann
2. Steyn, Morkel, Tsotsobe, Kallis and Harris/Botha/Tahir
3. Bollinger/Harris, Siddle, Johnson, Watson and Beer/Harris/Hilfenhaus/Smith
4. Zaheer/Sharma, Sreesanth, Harbhajan, Ohja/Sharma/Unadkat and Sehwag
5. Gul, Tanvir, Wahab, Rehman, Younis and Hafeez
6. Any two of: Malinga/Lakmal/Fernando/Kulasekara/Prasad, plus one of Herath/Mendis, plus another one of any mentioned, plus Mathews and Dilshan
7. Roach, Taylor/Edwards/Russell/Pascal, Sammy, Bravo, Benn and Gayle
8. Martin, Southee, Arnel, Vettori and Williamson
9. Mashrafe/Shahadat/Rubel, Shafiul, Shahadat/Rubel/Razzak, Shakib and Mahmudullah

So basically I've swapped England and South Africa because they've brought in Tremlett; I've swapped India and Pakistan because Pakistan have lost an entire bowling attack, and I've swapped West Indies and New Zealand because I think West Indies bowlers have improved a bit and I rate Russell potentially. New Zealand have also lost O'Brien in that time.

 

[Prince EWS]

India not even top 5 in some of these rankings? Lol.

It's as if actual results don't even matter to some people.

I actually think India's attack has performed worse on the whole in comparison to other teams than their actual player strength indicates tbh. They've won series despite and not because of the performances of their bowlers.

 

[vcs]

I actually think India's attack has performed worse on the whole in comparison to other teams than their actual player strength indicates tbh. They've won series despite and not because of the performances of their bowlers.

Performing at the right time >> picking up bags of wickets against lesser opposition, picking up inconsequential wickets etc. India's attacks have repeatedly done the job when series have been on the line in the last 2-3 years. That counts for a fair bit in my book.

 

[Prince EWS]

Could be pushed to put the current West Indian attack above the Sri Lankans in that second list of mine. I'd do it in a heartbeat if all their players actually stayed fit. That the only two settled members of Sri Lanka's attack bat in the top six and wouldn't get anywhere near the team on bowling alone is awful. They really need to decide who their best bowlers are - Australia have a similar problem though, really.

 

[sanga1337]

If everyone were available

England
South Africa
Pakistan
India
Australia
West Indies
Sri Lanka
New Zealand
Bangladesh

England have the best attack in the world atm. 2 world class bowlers in Anderson and Swann combined with great fast bowling depth makes them superior to South Africa who rely a lot on Steyn and Morkel. South Africa's lack of a decent spinner also hurts them.

 

[smash84]

Performing at the right time >> picking up bags of wickets against lesser opposition, picking up inconsequential wickets etc. India's attacks have repeatedly done the job when series have been on the line in the last 2-3 years. That counts for a fair bit in my book.

Yes performing at the right time is crucial but as much as you seem to be making your point you tend to forget that India have the batting muscle to put enough runs on the board to put pressure on any opposition and the batting does that quite a lot. Try getting the Indian bowling attack with a batting line-up like Pakistan and then try and see how good they really are. I am sure they will struggle to win so many series if they have a weak batting. The point that posters make regarding india winning because of their batting is quite valid IMO

 

[centurymaker]

Can't see anyone with the order that is in my mind-

1. SA
2. Eng
3. Aus
4. Ind
5. SL
6. Pak
7. NZ
8. WI
9. Ban

 

[Blaze 18]

Yes performing at the right time is crucial but as much as you seem to be making your point you tend to forget that India have the batting muscle to put enough runs on the board to put pressure on any opposition and the batting does that quite a lot. Try getting the Indian bowling attack with a batting line-up like Pakistan and then try and see how good they really are. I am sure they will struggle to win so many series if they have a weak batting. The point that posters make regarding india winning because of their batting is quite valid IMO

What about the times when India bowl first ?

 

[Blaze 18]

Can't see anyone with the order that is in my mind-

1. SA
2. Eng
3. Aus
4. Ind
5. SL
6. Pak
7. NZ
8. WI
9. Ban

Same as mine except that you have Sri Lanka above Pakistan.

 

[Xuhaib]

Eng should be # 1 for the depth they have rest of the sides are too dependent on one or two personal there is a lot of uncertanity about many attacks.

 

[kingjulian]

I've got into trouble expressing my opinion of bowling attacks on here by people completely misinterpreting my position, but it's probably my fault for not making it completely clear, so I'm going to post two completely different lists in this post.

Here's how I think the bowling attacks of each country have performed over the last 2-3 years:

1. South Africa
2. England
3. Australia
4. Pakistan
5. India
6. Sri Lanka
7. New Zealand
8. West Indies
9. Bangladesh

And now for the more interesting part of my post, I'm going to rate the current attacks in terms of quality, moving forward over the next year or two, predictively. I'm ignoring team results and looking at player quality within attacks - I've also taken players with fitness problems into account. I'm not even going to use team names because it'll give the impression that I actually care about past team results in this analysis.

1. Anderson, Broad, Tremlett and Swann
2. Steyn, Morkel, Tsotsobe, Kallis and Harris/Botha/Tahir
3. Bollinger/Harris, Siddle, Johnson, Watson and Beer/Harris/Hilfenhaus/Smith
4. Zaheer/Sharma, Sreesanth, Harbhajan, Ohja/Sharma/Unadkat and Sehwag
5. Gul, Tanvir, Wahab, Rehman, Younis and Hafeez
6. Any two of: Malinga/Lakmal/Fernando/Kulasekara/Prasad, plus one of Herath/Mendis, plus another one of any mentioned, plus Mathews and Dilshan
7. Roach, Taylor/Edwards/Russell/Pascal, Sammy, Bravo, Benn and Gayle
8. Martin, Southee, Arnel, Vettori and Williamson
9. Mashrafe/Shahadat/Rubel, Shafiul, Shahadat/Rubel/Razzak, Shakib and Mahmudullah

So basically I've swapped England and South Africa because they've brought in Tremlett; I've swapped India and Pakistan because Pakistan have lost an entire bowling attack, and I've swapped West Indies and New Zealand because I think West Indies bowlers have improved a bit and I rate Russell potentially. New Zealand have also lost O'Brien in that time.

I would interchange India and Srilanka in your second list.

Also Unadkat is no where near first choice Inian bowler, and i have no idea how he has fluked his way up to playing one international test. But it's fair to say that he won't be playing test cricket for a while.

 

[smash84]

What about the times when India bowl first ?

they can more than match the runs put on the board by their opposition. The batting order with Gambhir, Tendy, Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag is quite intimidating for a lot of teams.

 

[Prince EWS]

I would interchange India and Srilanka in your second list.

Also Unadkat is no where near first choice Inian bowler, and i have no idea how he has fluked his way up to playing one international test. But it's fair to say that he won't be playing test cricket for a while.

Replace Unadkat with [insert whoever the selectors feel the fourth best quick in the country is], basically.

As we saw in that Test Unadkat played, there are going to be times where Zaheer is injured and India don't want to play two spinners.

 

[Jacknife]

I've got into trouble expressing my opinion of bowling attacks on here by people completely misinterpreting my position, but it's probably my fault for not making it completely clear, so I'm going to post two completely different lists in this post.

Here's how I think the bowling attacks of each country have performed over the last 2-3 years:

1. South Africa
2. England
3. Australia
4. Pakistan
5. India
6. Sri Lanka
7. New Zealand
8. West Indies
9. Bangladesh

And now for the more interesting part of my post, I'm going to rate the current attacks in terms of quality, moving forward over the next year or two, predictively. I'm ignoring team results and looking at player quality within attacks - I've also taken players with fitness problems into account. I'm not even going to use team names because it'll give the impression that I actually care about past team results in this analysis.

1. Anderson, Broad, Tremlett and Swann
2. Steyn, Morkel, Tsotsobe, Kallis and Harris/Botha/Tahir
3. Bollinger/Harris, Siddle, Johnson, Watson and Beer/Harris/Hilfenhaus/Smith
4. Zaheer/Sharma, Sreesanth, Harbhajan, Ohja/Sharma/Unadkat and Sehwag
5. Gul, Tanvir, Wahab, Rehman, Younis and Hafeez
6. Any two of: Malinga/Lakmal/Fernando/Kulasekara/Prasad, plus one of Herath/Mendis, plus another one of any mentioned, plus Mathews and Dilshan
7. Roach, Taylor/Edwards/Russell/Pascal, Sammy, Bravo, Benn and Gayle
8. Martin, Southee, Arnel, Vettori and Williamson
9. Mashrafe/Shahadat/Rubel, Shafiul, Shahadat/Rubel/Razzak, Shakib and Mahmudullah

So basically I've swapped England and South Africa because they've brought in Tremlett; I've swapped India and Pakistan because Pakistan have lost an entire bowling attack, and I've swapped West Indies and New Zealand because I think West Indies bowlers have improved a bit and I rate Russell potentially. New Zealand have also lost O'Brien in that time.

Yes, like what you've done here and agree on all fronts.

 

[kingjulian]

Replace Unadkat with [insert whoever the selectors feel the fourth best quick in the country is], basically.

As we saw in that Test Unadkat played, there are going to be times where Zaheer is injured and India don't want to play two spinners.

Yup i agreed mostly with you, and on potential i thought India would be rated below SL and Windies for that reason. I was just surprised to see Unadkat's name in a list of first choice Indian test bowlers right now.

 

[Uppercut]

Indian attack vs. Australian attack is a properly tough comparison. I'm not entirely sold on the killer instinct idea because it hasn't been going on for very long so I don't know whether to credit that to a superior mentality or just cricket being cricket. And I'm much more inclined to give England credit for playing the Aussie bowlers especially well than I am to dramatically reassess my opinion of them based on the latest series. Their depth is still entirely incomparable, especially considering Zaheer's fitness.

But on the other hand, I think Harbhajan Singh's a faaaaar bigger factor than he's getting credit for here at the moment. You can see off the Australian attack, and it really shows. If you get to 350, you'll have a fantastic shot at getting to 600. Harbhajan can bowl very long, tight, threatening spells, which also keeps the seamers comparatively fresh. And obviously, when the occasional big-turning pitch does show up, it's a no-contest.

Can't really call this one at the moment- need to see what the Ashes fallout brings for Australia. It would help if they'd both played even one remotely comparable series in the past couple of years.

 

[Xuhaib]

What about the times when India bowl first ?

this year India won 3 tests after conceding 450 by bowling first and then chasing 200+ on a 5th day sub cont tracks not sure many teams an win after conceding 450 first up Indian bowlers do get underrated over here but they are definetley a support cast to a monster batting line up.

 

[vcs]

they can more than match the runs put on the board by their opposition. The batting order with Gambhir, Tendy, Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag is quite intimidating for a lot of teams.

But then people also say Dravid is past it, Gambhir, Dhoni and Sehwag are flat-track bullies who aren't worth **** away from home, no one at No. 6...