Ranking the Bowlers

[Slifer]

Imran

 

[social]

Imran

Lightning pace and swung it both ways - brilliant bowler, shrewd captain, good bat (despite playing for his average)

 

[adharcric]

Imran quite comfortably at #10.

The List
1. Malcolm Marshall (WI)
2. Muttiah Muralitharan (SRI)
3. Glenn McGrath (AUS)
4. Curtly Ambrose (WI)
5. Richard Hadlee (NZ)
6. Shane Warne (AUS)
7. Fred Trueman (ENG)
8. Dennis Lillee (AUS)
9. Sydney Barnes (ENG)
10. Imran Khan (PAK)

The vote for the #11 bowler of all-time begins now.

The Contenders

 

[adharcric]

With Imran gone, Donald easily IMO.

 

[oz_fan]

Donald although I considered going with Spofforth (don't think he has got a vote yet) or Grimmett.

 

[Dasa]

Donald.

 

[aussie tragic]

11. Donald, with Alan Davidson close behind

 

[nightprowler10]

Wasim Akram, then Donald for me.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Grimmett

 

[a massive zebra]

Grimmett

I would always pick O'Reilly over Grimmett. He was almost universally recognised as the best of the two by contemporaries, and Grimmett was far less successful against the very best team of the time, England.

O'Reilly v England 19 7864 2587 102 7/54 25.36 1.97 77.0 8 3
Grimmett v England 22 9164 3439 106 6/37 32.44 2.25 86.4 11 2

This is what a leading 1930s journalist said shortly before he died in the early 80s:

``Grimmett was a short man who bowled with a low action, halfway to roundarm, which helped conceal the googly as you don't have to bend the wrist so far with a low action. He gave the ball plenty of air and spun it a lot, getting a great deal of movement off the pitch. However, his Test figures may be flattering as I think that, like Titch Freeman, he took advantage of the weaker teams and tail-enders contributed a lot to the total of his victims.''

``O'Reilly was unquestionably the greater bowler, and I am sure was the more feared by top class batsmen. He bowled a genuine medium pace, with an occasional fast-medium. He didn't turn the ball as much as Grimmett, but enough to beat the bat. His long loping run-up and general demeanour were the very picture of hostility, though he never descended to the level of bad temper and abuse of Lillee or Holding. Laker may have been the best spinner of all on a wicket that suited him but not otherwise.''

O'Reilly it is.

 

[Mister Wright]

Akram

 

[silentstriker]

Wasim

 

[shortpitched713]

Between Grimmet and Wasim for me. Going to go Wasim because he has more votes.

 

[C_C]

Wasim.

 

[Fusion]

Wasim

 

[Lillian Thomson]

We are here to post our opinion, but when you post it and say that some of the best bowlers of all time are "laughable" makes you seem ridiculous and people won't listen to you. Lillee was, as somebody mentioned a whilen ago, "a ***y bowler".

I didn't say anything about any bowler being laughable. Of course they are all world class bowlers, it's their inflated ranking in the list of all time bowlers that is laughable. In most cricket circles that want to be taken seriously the notion that Imran Khan is one of the top 10 bowlers of all time and Dennis Lillee an unworthy also-ran would be treated with derision and considered too silly to even bother discussing..

 

[C_C]

In most cricket circles that want to be taken seriously the notion that Imran Khan is one of the top 10 bowlers of all time and Dennis Lillee an unworthy also-ran would be treated with derision and considered too silly to even bother discussing..

In most cricketing circles I've encountered ( ie, subcontinental, west Indian and occasionally the English), Lillee is NOT rated as highly as Imran is. He is seen as a great bowler but also someone who's worth is massively exgaggerated in England/Australia because of his Ashes exploits. Imran on the other hand is genuinely seen as a top-10 bowler, someone who's just perhaps a smidgen behind Marshall and Hadlee of his era and distinctly superior to Lillee- simply because he bowled mostly in unfavourable conditions compared to Lillee, didnt get clobbered anywhere nearly as much, had less of a support cast and when he hit his peak form, he was a force of nature that Lillee never was.

 

[shankar]

Donald

 

[Fusion]

I didn't say anything about any bowler being laughable. Of course they are all world class bowlers, it's their inflated ranking in the list of all time bowlers that is laughable. In most cricket circles that want to be taken seriously the notion that Imran Khan is one of the top 10 bowlers of all time and Dennis Lillee an unworthy also-ran would be treated with derision and considered too silly to even bother discussing..

Are you saying that Imran being considered a top 10 bowler is silly? Or that Lille not being included along with him is silly? Do you consider Wisden to be a worthy enough source? Imran is number 9 on their top 10 Test bowlers list. Silly indeed.

 

[silentstriker]

I didn't say anything about any bowler being laughable. Of course they are all world class bowlers, it's their inflated ranking in the list of all time bowlers that is laughable. In most cricket circles that want to be taken seriously the notion that Imran Khan is one of the top 10 bowlers of all time and Dennis Lillee an unworthy also-ran would be treated with derision and considered too silly to even bother discussing..

Yes, if by cricketing circles you mean a bar in Manchester or Sydney.