New Zealand fast bowlers who are 'definitely' better than Kapil Dev

[Fuller Pilch]

Graham Gooch described NZ as "World XI at one end (Hadlee) and Ilford 2nd XI at the other" even though NZ's other bowlers were still decent.

Also forget peer rankings. Hadlee was ranked no 1 bowler in the world for a while (ahead of the incomparable Marshall) - both clearly ahead of Lillee and Akram.

 

[ZK$]

Graham Gooch described NZ as "World XI at one end (Hadlee) and Ilford 2nd XI at the other" even though NZ's other bowlers were still decent.

Also forget peer rankings. Hadlee was ranked no 1 bowler in the world for a while (ahead of the incomparable Marshall) - both clearly ahead of Lillee and Akram.

Graham Gooch picked Marshall, Lillee, and Wasim in his all time xi.

I do think that McGrath and Hadlee were both better than Lillee and Wasim. I was just pointing out that Lillee and Wasim are rated higher by the majority of their peers, which is what I thought you were arguing against.

 

[Athlai]

Graham Gooch probably picked his nose too. Who cares

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Graham Gooch picked Marshall, Lillee, and Wasim in his all time xi.

I do think that McGrath and Hadlee were both better than Lillee and Wasim. I was just pointing out that Lillee and Wasim are rated higher by the majority of their peers, which is what I thought you were arguing against.

Okay no worries.

 

[Starfighter]

I was just pointing out that Lillee and Wasim are rated higher by the majority of their peers

Said peers aren't necessarily right. Notice that the flashiness of Lillee and Wasim is preferred to the less demonstrative but more effective wiles of the other two.

Plus, not like you've done a survey?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Graham Gooch picked Marshall, Lillee, and Wasim in his all time xi.

Actually I'm surprised that he didn't pick Alderman.

 

[ZK$]

Said peers aren't necessarily right. Notice that the flashiness of Lillee and Wasim is preferred the less demonstrative but more effective wiles of the other two.

Yeah I agree they aren’t right and do think McGrath and Hadlee were both better.

 

[Daemon]

This doesn't really paint Bond in that good s light. West Indies were very ordinary at that time, even if he did get Lara once. And SL & Pak in NZ? Almost minnows tbh.

Kind of looks like Bond wasn't really challenged that much in the few series he did play in. I'll admit I was wrong and I've been overrating him, definitely letting his ODI performances skew my judgement

This is brilliant. Vandem argued his point so badly that it not only didn’t convince anyone but actually made TJB switch sides and admit he was wrong.

So good

 

[Zinzan]

Lillee and Wasim (and Marshall) are definitely rated higher than Hadlee and McGrath by the majority of their peers.

Based on what evidence? Anecdotes only? I'm still waiting on Trundler to post the study he was referring to earlier in making the same point, so I see can understand the sample size, and other parameters within the study to ensure it's scientific & not just anecdotal.

 

[cnerd123]

the Kiwis have gone way too far here

Can we put them in lockdown in a separate sub forum till they're fit to mingle with the rest of the populace again?

 

[sunilz]

Based on what evidence? Anecdotes only? I'm still waiting on Trundler to post the study he was referring to earlier in making the same point, so I see can understand the sample size, and other parameters within the study to ensure it's scientific & not just anecdotal.

You can read all articles in detail. I have posted screenshot. Team was picked by retired cricketers.

 

[sunilz]

Posting both XI

 

[Zinzan]

You can read all articles in detail. I have posted screenshot. Team was picked by retired cricketers.

Thanks, found the article. So this study of the cricketers XI according to that was made up of; one former captain from each of the top Test-playing teams - Ian Chappell, Clive Lloyd, Tony Greig, Duleep Mendis, Ali Bacher, Intikhab Alam, John Wright, Ajit Wadekar - and four cricket historians and writers. So basically a dozen people.

I thought people were referring to something somewhat scientific, with a reasonable sample set of players who played evenly across the eras which they are judging their peers, and some other criteria in order to minimize other biases like where they played a certain opposition significantly more etc.

 

[Shady Slim]

not saying this to flame kiwis i promise but would bond be talked about as much if he had the exact same career arc came from a country like australia or the windies which has a history of excellent pacers? or does the what could have been factor play in a bit more due to the at the time relative lack of atg tier pacers nz had to an australia or the windies

also good to see you back @sunilz, enjoy what you bring to the forum

 

[Athlai]

Dunno why people are so obsessed with Bond’s pace. Was only a piece of what made him gun.

 

[TheJediBrah]

not saying this to flame kiwis i promise but would bond be talked about as much if he had the exact same career arc came from a country like australia or the windies which has a history of excellent pacers? or does the what could have been factor play in a bit more due to the at the time relative lack of atg tier pacers nz had to an australia or the windies

also good to see you back @sunilz, enjoy what you bring to the forum

Stuart Clark is a significantly better Test bowler than Bond but I doubt you hear anywhere near as much about him, so maybe

different type of bowler though. Someone that bowls 150+ and swings it both ways is more exicting than a line & length, move it off the seam operator

 

[trundler]

Stuart Clark is a significantly better Test bowler than Bond but I doubt you hear anywhere near as much about him, so maybe

different type of bowler though. Someone that bowls 150+ and swings it both ways is more exicting than a line & length, move it off the seam operator

Yeah exactly Bond didn't even do as much as a Stuart Clark or Simon Jones in his test career

 

[Flem274*]

not saying this to flame kiwis i promise but would bond be talked about as much if he had the exact same career arc came from a country like australia or the windies which has a history of excellent pacers? or does the what could have been factor play in a bit more due to the at the time relative lack of atg tier pacers nz had to an australia or the windies

also good to see you back @sunilz, enjoy what you bring to the forum

yes and no. when you have loads of great players they tend to overshadow each other.

bond is definitely in the public conscious more because he was an odi ATG from a country lacking them and was one of the most talented and effective test bowlers in an era stacked towards batsmen.

but

i think this goes similarly to how bruce reid is viewed by a certain generation of aussies (and how harris is viewed by me). it isn't uncommon to see australian fans of a certain vintage say 'lol he's just that good, zip it virgin' and how a lot of people from the era before that said similar about barry richards (who played 4 tests and you will find many people irl who insist he is atg).

bond's value was exacerbated by the era he played in, but it isn't unusual for a bowler to make a big impression from relatively few games.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Part of the mythology was that he'd get injured so much that when he could play it was hyped up because it was such a rare event. I think his final test against Pakistan was like that, hadn't played in like two years and ended up winning the test match for us.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah similar sort of hype over Patto here