McGrath. Ambrose. Steyn.

[DrWolverine]

In which order do you rank them in test cricket?

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Went McGrath > Steyn > Ambrose but could easily swap the latter two on a different day.

 

[kyear2]

In which order do you rank them in test cricket?

You woke up today and chose violence didn't you, lol

Edit, sorry, though it included a fourth participant.

 

[kyear2]

Went McGrath > Steyn > Ambrose but could easily swap the latter two on a different day.

Think this is it as well. During his peak Ambrose is easily ahead of Steyn, but post surgery Ambrose brings him a smidge behind Steyn.

 

[DrWolverine]

Think this is it as well. During his peak Ambrose is easily ahead of Steyn, but post surgery Ambrose brings him a smidge behind Steyn.

If we are comparing peaks, Curtly Ambrose is ahead of McGrath as well - He was meaner and faster version of McGrath.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Mcgrath

 

[subshakerz]

Think this is it as well. During his peak Ambrose is easily ahead of Steyn

Are you sure?

Steyn had a 10 year peak averaging 21 and taking 5 wickets a test. That's pretty long.

 

[subshakerz]

Strangely enough, there isn't a huge difference overall between Ambrose pre and post peak.

Ambrose 88 to 94 is 219 wickets in 48 tests@21, 95 to end career is 186 in 50 tests@20.

The difference is that he dropped off in terms of penetration in the latter career half while still being tight.

The reason I rate Steyn ahead of Ambrose is to me Ambrose has big question marks over how he would do in the SC. In fact, his career is basically Aus, Eng and WI.

 

[Prince EWS]

I find it pretty hard to split Imran, Ambrose and Steyn after the top three (McGrath, Marshall and Hadlee).

I'm at Ambrose > Imran > Steyn at the moment so voted accordingly but I change my mind all the time.

 

[Coronis]

Strangely enough, there isn't a huge difference overall between Ambrose pre and post peak.

Ambrose 88 to 94 is 219 wickets in 48 tests@21, 95 to end career is 186 in 50 tests@20.

The difference is that he dropped off in terms of penetration in the latter career half while still being tight.

The reason I rate Steyn ahead of Ambrose is to me Ambrose has big question marks over how he would do in the SC. In fact, his career is basically Aus, Eng and WI.

Well looking at pre/post injury stats.

Pre
48 matches 91 innings 219 @ 21.08 11 5’fers 3 10’fers

4.56 WPM, 2.41 WPI
41 Overs per match, 21.4 Overs per innings

Post
50 matches 88 innings 186 @ 20.88 SR 55.3 11 5’fers 0 10’fers

3.72 WPM, 2.11 WPI
34.2 Overs per match, 19.3 Overs per innings


The bigger deal (statistically at least) seems to be him bowling less after his injury, plus the Windies bowling twice less often after his injury.

 

[kyear2]

Ambrose and Steyn are almost as diametrically opposed in style and function as two players can be, but I have them practically identically rated with the very slightest of advantages to Steyn.

But yeah, their MO couldn't be further apart.

 

[subshakerz]

Ambrose and Steyn are almost as diametrically opposed in style and function as two players can be, but I have them practically identically rated with the very slightest of advantages to Steyn.

But yeah, their MO couldn't be further apart.

I think Ambrose with his MO would have likely been moderate to failure in the SC with more tests, so I think Steyn has a clear advantage over him.

In fact, Steyn just has a more proven allround record than Ambrose. Ambrose is just WI, Aus and Eng.

 

[sledger]

If we are comparing peaks, Curtly Ambrose is ahead of McGrath as well - He was meaner and faster version of McGrath.

This implies McGrath would have been better if he was "meaner and faster", which strikes me as a somewhat dubious contention. Part of what made McGrath so good was the way he didn't need express pace.

 

[DrWolverine]

This implies McGrath would have been better if he was "meaner and faster", which strikes me as a somewhat dubious contention. Part of what made McGrath so good was the way he didn't need express pace.

Exactly. Curtly wasn’t express pace as well.

Peak Curtly Ambrose = A faster McGrath

 

[subshakerz]

Exactly. Curtly wasn’t express pace as well.

Peak Curtly Ambrose = A faster McGrath

Nah.

Ambrose wasn't a particularly imaginative bowler at all. Just blessed with height and accuracy so he can bang it just short of length bowl after bowl boringly. No capacity to swing it, or even clever use of cutters like Walsh. Occasional bouncer sure but wasn't the type to do a barrage or something. Didn't let loose on high pace regularly too.

Whereas McGrath had actual nous and could adjust his length and line to the batsmen's weaknesses. Just a better bowler.

 

[kyear2]

I think Ambrose with his MO would have likely been moderate to failure in the SC with more tests, so I think Steyn has a clear advantage over him.

In fact, Steyn just has a more proven allround record than Ambrose. Ambrose is just WI, Aus and Eng.

Care to share your crystal ball?

Those were where he played, because they were the marque match ups of his day.

Steyn played all of two matches in Pakistan, 4 in the UAE where he did struggle, and 3 the Caribbean. Steyn didn't play double digit tests in literally any other country besides SA. So besides his 6 matches in India, there's no basis for your assumptions.

Ambrose missed the India tour due to injury, he didn't duck or was omitted from the matches. So no basis for your assumptions that he would have been a failure.

 

[kyear2]

Nah.

Ambrose wasn't a particularly imaginative bowler at all. Just blessed with height and accuracy so he can bang it just short of length bowl after bowl boringly. No capacity to swing it, or even clever use of cutters like Walsh. Occasional bouncer sure but wasn't the type to do a barrage or something. Didn't let loose on high pace regularly too.

Whereas McGrath had actual nous and could adjust his length and line to the batsmen's weaknesses. Just a better bowler.

The mere fact that you believe Ambrose didn't have any variety or was incapable of adjusting his length makes me wonder if you ever watched him bowl, especially in the early years.

He was the best bowler in the world from around 89 till his surgery, you didn't think he knew how to bowl?

 

[subshakerz]

Care to share your crystal ball?

Those were where he played, because they were the marque match ups of his day.

Sure. I see Ambrose struggling to make any impact with his back of the length bowling unless there is some life in the wicket like in the 90 Pak series when Imran pushed for pace friendly pitches and maybe in the odd seaming pitch in SL. Otherwise he will be neutralised like he was humiliatingly in Pak in 97 since he doesn't have a good cutter like McGrath which enabled him to do well in India.

Steyn played all of two matches in Pakistan, 4 in the UAE where he did struggle, and 3 the Caribbean. Steyn didn't play double digit tests in literally any other country besides SA. So besides his 6 matches in India, there's no basis for your assumptions.

You don't know much about Steyn, do you? He had a matchwinning performance in the Pak series to win them it. In UAE, the first series was a dud with neither side being bowled out and in the second series he helped bowl Pakistan out for 99. In the Caribbean he also had at least one solid outright matchwinning performance. And you completely skipped SL where his matchwinning performance in 2014 helped win them the series. So Steyn shined even in his few appearances while Ambrose has nothing like that to compare outside Eng and Aus.

Steyn is just flat out a better proven pacer than Ambrose.

Ambrose missed the India tour due to injury, he didn't duck or was omitted from the matches. So no basis for your assumptions that he would have been a failure.

So? Never suggested Ambrose chickened out. Just that he wouldn't be effective there or in the SC generally.

 

[subshakerz]

The mere fact that you believe Ambrose didn't have any variety or was incapable of adjusting his length makes me wonder if you ever watched him bowl, especially in the early years.

He was the best bowler in the world from around 89 till his surgery, you didn't think he knew how to bowl?

I am not suggesting that he literally never adjusted his length. But yeah he tended to bowl in that corridor but with more pace and bounce than your average medium pacer.

You tell me what his variety was.

 

[Migara]

Strangely enough, there isn't a huge difference overall between Ambrose pre and post peak.

Ambrose 88 to 94 is 219 wickets in 48 tests@21, 95 to end career is 186 in 50 tests@20.

The difference is that he dropped off in terms of penetration in the latter career half while still being tight.

The reason I rate Steyn ahead of Ambrose is to me Ambrose has big question marks over how he would do in the SC. In fact, his career is basically Aus, Eng and WI.

Loved to see a WI series in SAF when Donald was at his peak.