silentstriker said:
Well you can say that my comments are biased, but so far I've only said facts. You can disagree with my criteria - but thats a bit far from being biased.
By the way, Garner also played one series in Pakistan (a place notoriously difficult to tour) and averaged 19.
In any case, to say that Garner is a "level below" Lillee is just a ludicrous statement. By what reasoning do you say that?
Fair Play, SS - I should say your interpretation of the facts.
As bagapath has said, Garner lacks the capacity to run through a side with only 7 5 fers in 58 tests, a ration of over 8 tests per 5 fer. Moreover, he has taken no 10 wicket hauls during that time - he may have been a good bowler, but he was not a destructive bowler - imo, one of the key characteristics of any all-time fast strike bowler. Moreover, it was not just a case of not being able to take the wickets because of who he was bowling with, as a look at the stats of his contemporaries would indicate:
Holding for instance had 13 5 fers and 2 10 fers in 60 tests
Marshall had 22 5 fers and 4 10 fers in 81 tests
Roberts had 11 5 fers and 2 10 fers
Therefore it was possible.
Moreover, lets raise that hoary old chestnut - the WI had the best batting line-up in that period without question, and Garner never had to bowl to it. Lillee on the other hand was part of one of the weaker Australian teams for the latter part of his career, post Packer, and only G Chappell and R Marsh and himself really kept it competitive (as seen by what happened when all three of them retired at the same time). These things count.
I am not going into the bowling support pov at this point - except to state that in the case of fast bowlers it does matter imo, and does make it better to take wickets and have lower SR, though perhaps less so with spinners. I am also one of those who believe Warne to be just better than Murali - so I have no conflicts there.
Last, I want to draw your attention to the nature of those tests that Lillee played on Pakistani soil. Pakistan won the 1st test by 7 wickets, whilst the subsequent 2 tests were drawn. Qasim and Tauseef bore the brunt of the bowling for Pakistan, and Ray Bright (along with Lillee) bowled the most overs for Australia and took the most wickets. Apart from the 1st test, the series was a batting bonanza with comparatively high scores and plenty of overs for the bowlers - most of which were carried by the spinners. The conditions, to say the least, were not conducive to fast bowling - and though this is usually the case on the subcontinent, it is not always the case. This is not to excuse Lillee but to put those matches into proper perpective and into their correct context. The fact that Lillee hardly played outside Aus/Eng/NZ is a black mark against him, however it was not intentional, and that means that one has to judge with what one has. Anyway, I have added the cricinfo bio link here:
http://content-www3.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/6295.html
Therefore we can only judge on what we know, and what the judgements were of his peers and of other knowledgeable cricket observers and commentators. Almost unanimously, afaik, those judgements were and are of unstinting admiration and respect.
Moreover, as I have said before, I tend to give a player - especially a great player - the benefit of the doubt. Therefore my belief that Ponting is better than Dravid - even though he has not scored in India, and my belief that he will score big in India the next time he tours. (If he does not, then I will be proved wrong and happy to accept it)
In the same vein, I see Lillee and rank him above all those bowlers except for Marshall and Hadlee who were really, also, exceptionally outstanding bowlers. Within a certain range, I hold all these bowlers to be equal.
(I would agree that McGrath is the superior bowler, but I would also say that a good case can be made for Lillee to rank in the top 5 of pace bowlers)
wasn't questioning his right to be there - just think it would be good for the thread to talk about someone other than Lillee! 
