Ranking the Bowlers

[chaminda_00]

Actually, I'm sure there are a good number that have watched Marshall bowl or at least been alive when he played. Trueman is an old-timer, relatively speaking. No ****, he's not as ancient as Barnes, Lohmann or Rhodes, but he's still from early times for the majority of posters on here. Just like W.G. Grace and Bradman are both old-timers even though there was a gap of several decades between them. The further back you go in time, the less people trust statistics because there is uncertainty with regard to the pitches and quality.

Last time i checked Trueman played on covered pitches, so i don't think that the quality of the pitches is a big. In fact you could argue that pathetic flat nature of pitches today means you can't trust statistics of current players, as players from the past never played on pitches this flat. In a couple post later your saying that Hobbs and Sobers would be in most people top 3, but here your saying that Trueman didn't play against quality batsmen. I can understand someone questions the pitches and quality of opperisition per WW2, but to do say for someone who played in 60s, is just dumb.

EDIT: Also i think you'll find that most people on this forum are 14 to 24, so at best majority of people on this forum would have been 10 when Marshall retired. If 10 yo told you that Marshall was the best bowler in the world, you would laugh at him.

 

[adharcric]

Last time i checked Trueman played on covered pitches, so i don't think that the quality of the pitches is a big. In fact you could argue that pathetic flat nature of pitches today means you can't trust statistics of current players, as players from the past never played on pitches this flat. In a couple post later your saying that Hobbs and Sobers would be in most people top 3, but here your saying that Trueman didn't play against quality batsmen. I can understand someone questions the pitches and quality of opperisition per WW2, but to do say for someone who played in 60s, is just dumb.

EDIT: Also i think you'll find that most people on this forum are 14 to 24, so at best majority of people on this forum would have been 10 when Marshall retired. If 10 yo told you that Marshall was the best bowler in the world, you would laugh at him.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything about Trueman. I just gave the reason why people generally hesitate in rating guys from that long ago very highly. There is "uncertainty"; hope you understand that the term doesn't imply that pitches were better or worse in the past. After doing more research on pitches and quality, one gets a better idea of what someone's statistics really mean, but most people don't do that research.

 

[chaminda_00]

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything about Trueman. I just gave the reason why people generally hesitate in rating guys from that long ago very highly. There is "uncertainty"; hope you understand that the term doesn't imply that pitches were better or worse in the past. After doing more research on pitches and quality, one gets a better idea of what someone's statistics really mean, but most people don't do that research.

Fair enough it just sounded like you were saying that pitches and the quality of players was worse back then.

 

[adharcric]

Fair enough it just sounded like you were saying that pitches and the quality of players was worse back then.

Nah just saying that's the natural conclusion people come to sometimes just because they didn't watch players from those times.

Update: Hadlee 9, Warne 6

 

[aussie tragic]

Update: Hadlee 9, Warne 6

And Trueman 2

 

[chaminda_00]

And Trueman 2

Don't worry we'll get him in there once these modern day wanabe get out of the way.

 

[adharcric]

Don't worry we'll get him in there once these modern day wanabe get out of the way.

Trust me, there's more to come. Wasim, Lillee, Imran, Donald, Holding.
Hell, someone might just take Gillespie over Barnes and Trueman.
Oh wait, he's not a contender.

 

[Mister Wright]

Hadlee

 

[adharcric]

The old-timers should be getting votes right about now. On another note, Warne, anyone?

The List
1. Malcolm Marshall
2. Muttiah Muralitharan
3. Glenn McGrath
4. Curtly Ambrose
5. Richard Hadlee

The vote for the #6 bowler of all-time begins now.

The Contenders

 

[chaminda_00]

Trueman, again might as well keep going until some Englishmen back me up. I'll be very surprised if Warne doesn't make it this round.

 

[oz_fan]

Warne

 

[Dasa]

Ambrose.

 

[Perm]

#6 Warne

 

[nightprowler10]

Warne

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah, Warne.

 

[adharcric]

Ambrose.

He's already at #4. Please vote again.

 

[Matt79]

Warne.

 

[adharcric]

Warne.

I'm considering voting for Lohmann or Barnes ahead of Warne here. What do you think?

 

[Matt79]

Barnes I'd actually be ok with - I disagree but its an opinion I could respect. Lohmann probably less so, but still, I'd be much happier to accept that than both Ambrose and Hadlee, great though they were, being ranked ahead of Warne.

 

[adharcric]

Barnes I'd actually be ok with - I disagree but its an opinion I could respect. Lohmann probably less so, but still, I'd be much happier to accept that than both Ambrose and Hadlee, great though they were, being ranked ahead of Warne.

I'm not too sure about Ambrose at #4 either, but that's democracy. Anyways, your wish is granted ... Barnes for me.