PlayerComparisons
International Vice-Captain
.
He will need 2-3 more years to get into the Steyn category & not LindwallLindwall was a ATG. What Bumrah is doing is phenomenal and his this years performance has been one of the best ever by a bowler. 2-3 more years and he surpass Lindwall imho.
But,I am quite certain in saying that Lindwall in today’s date would be the premier quick for Australia and with a proper career no WW2 and not came out of retirement etc. would have a legit shot on being a top 5-6 quick ever. I swear to god I saw 3 ish delivery of Lindwall from footage all Yorkers where he swang the Yorkers pretty much Waqar Younis ish. Can’t find the footage but from my memory first one was bit wide of leg side which swang a lot and other two were basically like the one that Waqar bowled to Lara which the batsman barely survived.
Also to add Lindwall got I think 42 ish percent wicket bowled. That’s the record ever.
Yeah and that category surpasses Lindwall.He will need 2-3 more years to get into the Steyn category & not Lindwall
I think Bumrah has already surpassed Lindwall by having a much better average and strike rate.Yeah and that category surpasses Lindwall.
I'd say it's fair, but I rate Lindwall as one of top 14 quicks. Wouldn't rate Bumrah as highly yet as Lindwall has a much longer career. And also lost a few years to the war. So, his numbers would have been way better.I think Bumrah has already surpassed Lindwall by having a much better average and strike rate.
If he does all those, I am rating him number 1 or 2.Let Bumrah play for 4/5 more years, end up with 350 wickets @20 or sub 20, and an ATG series in NZ, he'll be up there with the top 3 quicks.
who gaf about New Zealand? Seriously this analysis by checklist has to stop.I'd say it's fair, but I rate Lindwall as one of top 14 quicks. Wouldn't rate Bumrah as highly yet as Lindwall has a much longer career. And also lost a few years to the war. So, his numbers would have been way better.
Let Bumrah play for 4/5 more years, end up with 350 wickets @20 or sub 20, and an ATG series in NZ, he'll be up there with the top 3 quicks.
Where did I do "analysis by checklist"? And if you don't give a **** about NZ, that's your choice, and your choice can suck my ass.who gaf about New Zealand? Seriously this analysis by checklist has to stop.
Guess I'll join the legacy as well.If he does all those, I am rating him number 1 or 2.
No no.....you're doing analysis by checklist......this needs to stop.......Lindwall at Bumrah’s age
124 @ 20.4
Wonder if Bumrah plays til he’s 38.
Pretty sure that’s not analysis by checklist.No no.....you're doing analysis by checklist......this needs to stop.......
No no...... it's analysis by checklist...... whatever I don't know is analysis by checklist........this needs to stop.....(ma69420 voice)Pretty sure that’s not analysis by checklist.
the fact that you feel he somehow needs a great series in NZ is analysis by checklist at its worst. Picking up onsome small sample size meaningless event and making it meaningful.Where did I do "analysis by checklist"? And if you don't give a **** about NZ, that's your choice, and your choice can suck my ass.
Fk off.
That is classic analysis by checklist though: claiming that Bumrah's record against NZ needs to be improved, as if that's any more important than improving his record against England or Australia.Where did I do "analysis by checklist"? And if you don't give a **** about NZ, that's your choice, and your choice can suck my ass.
Fk off.
And where did I say that? If I'm gonna rate a bowler from this era in the tier one, he needs to do something special; and having a near perfect record is one of them. Don't know how that's controversial in any way.That is classic analysis by checklist though: claiming that Bumrah's record against NZ needs to be improved, as if that's any more important than improving his record against England or Australia.