• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ranking the Bowlers

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Odd that the top six bowlers of all time have played in the last 25 years (I'm guilty of voting recent too).

The batting list has a couple players like Hobbs, Bradman and Sobers, and Hammond might come in soon. Its doubly weird that three bowlers out of six (Murali, warne, Mcgrath) are still playing cricket - in an era where we (including me) bemoan the lack of quality bowlers.
 

adharcric

International Coach
silentstriker said:
Odd that the top six bowlers of all time have played in the last 25 years (I'm guilty of voting recent too).

The batting list has a couple players like Hobbs, Bradman and Sobers, and Hammond might come in soon. Its doubly weird that three bowlers out of six (Murali, warne, Mcgrath) are still playing cricket - in an era where we (including me) bemoan the lack of quality bowlers.
The lack of quality bowlers does not refer to guys who are on their way out (Murali, McGrath, Warne, Kumble, Pollock). As far as the top 3, I think it's spot on. Marshall and Murali have no comparison. McGrath has done what Hadlee did on flatter pitches. I'm slightly doubtful about Ambrose being that high, but by no means is it an outrageous pick.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
silentstriker said:
Odd that the top six bowlers of all time have played in the last 25 years (I'm guilty of voting recent too).

The batting list has a couple players like Hobbs, Bradman and Sobers, and Hammond might come in soon. Its doubly weird that three bowlers out of six (Murali, warne, Mcgrath) are still playing cricket - in an era where we (including me) bemoan the lack of quality bowlers.
I think that's because the current player's exploits are still fresh in everyone's minds. Also, in today's age where bowling standards are generally considered to be in decline, we get doubly impressed by the few bowlers who are actually capable of greatness.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
adharcric said:
The lack of quality bowlers does not refer to guys who are on their way out (Murali, McGrath, Warne, Kumble, Pollock). As far as the top 3, I think it's spot on. Marshall and Murali have no comparison. McGrath has done what Hadlee did on flatter pitches. I'm slightly doubtful about Ambrose being that high, but by no means is it an outrageous pick.
I agree that its spot on. But I still think its odd that we have three of the top six bowlers of all time playing right now, and yet batsman's averages are skyrocketing. It really highlights the fact that aside from those at the very top, everyone just kind of sucks.
 

C_C

International Captain
I'm slightly doubtful about Ambrose being that high, but by no means is it an outrageous pick.
Having seen a lot of cricket in the 90s, i am not surprised at all.
Ambrose was a tad less effective than McGrath on flat pitches ( he didnt cut the ball as much as Pidge does but he got a helluva lot more bounce) but on pitches with bounce,he'd brutalise you. And if anything, he was more accurate than anyone i've ever seen play-McGrath included.
Definately deserving of top 5 position alltime.
 

C_C

International Captain
silentstriker said:
I agree that its spot on. But I still think its odd that we have three of the top six bowlers of all time playing right now, and yet batsman's averages are skyrocketing. It really highlights the fact that aside from those at the very top, everyone just kind of sucks.

The last 20-25 years is very misleading.
If anything, 1975-2000 was the age of bowlers.
The drastic drop in bowling came in the early 2000s - when Waqar lost much of his potency, Wasim was on the way out, Donald fast losing accuracy, Ambrose gone, Walsh retiring and Pollock getting on in the years.
I dont think cricket has ever lost bowlers of the magnitude of Donald, Akram, Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, etc. in a space of 2-3 years.
Today, the pitches dont help bowlers at all either. Which makes cricket overall a more boring and unbalanced game.
 

Top