Ranking the Bowlers

[chaminda_00]

Trueman

 

[Dasa]

Ambrose.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Hadlee again.

 

[Matt79]

Warne. It will keep on being Warne til he gets up. This list is turning into a disgrace IMO.

 

[nightprowler10]

Nah, I like the top 3 tbh.

 

[a massive zebra]

Sydney Barnes

 

[silentstriker]

Warne. It will keep on being Warne til he gets up. This list is turning into a disgrace IMO.

Ambrose. Warne should get in at #6 to #8 IMO. Still Hadlee, Ambrose to go, at least.

 

[Johnners]

4. Shane Warne

 

[Matt79]

Ambrose. Warne should get in at #6 to #8 IMO. Still Hadlee, Ambrose to go, at least.

Not to tie up the thread, but you're mad!

You ridiculously overrate seamers at the expense of spinners - possibly because India have always had decent spinners but no quicks?

Ambrose/Hadlee/McGrath/Marshall - they're all different, but all pretty interchangeable in the end - any of them could replace the other in the team and not change the team's strength or balance overall. In the last 40 years of cricket there has been one spinner who has been as good as Warne, and people voted him number 2.

 

[Matt79]

Not to tie up the thread, but you're mad!

You ridiculously overrate seamers at the expense of spinners - possibly because India have always had decent spinners but no quicks?

Ambrose/Hadlee/McGrath/Marshall - they're all different, but all pretty interchangeable in the end - any of them could replace the other in the team and not change the team's strength or balance overall. In the last 40 years of cricket there has been one spinner who has been as good as Warne, and people voted him number 2.

BTW - peace man, you know I'm a fan. The lack of love for Warney's got me in a similar state as Dravid over the lack of love for Sachin in the parallel thread!

 

[silentstriker]

Not to tie up the thread, but you're mad!

You ridiculously overrate seamers at the expense of spinners - possibly because India have always had decent spinners but no quicks?

Ambrose/Hadlee/McGrath/Marshall - they're all different, but all pretty interchangeable in the end - any of them could replace the other in the team and not change the team's strength or balance overall. In the last 40 years of cricket there has been one spinner who has been as good as Warne, and people voted him number 2.

Yea, but Murali's stats in terms of strike rate and average are comparable to other all time greats, as well as the fact that he averages an astounding 6 wickets per test. Warne is the 2nd best among spinners, but his stats don't "quite" measure up to the other pacers.

And we aren't picking the best 'team', we are ranking the bowlers on their merits. Otherwise I'd have Marshall/McGrath/Ambrose/Murali/Warne.

Just an opinion though obviously. If Warne gets in now, I won't really mind. Whereas I was getting positively angry at McGrath not getting in .

 

[silentstriker]

Basically Warne usually gets in when time is right for spinners (usually) because the Aussie pacemen he has had during his career have been outstanding. Murali is thrown in games before most spinners should be, because he doesn't have the pace support, and still averages lower and has a better strike rate. Again, this is not murali vs. warne, but murali vs. other bowlers and warne vs. other bowlers.

If I want to pick a team, I might very well take Warne over Murali because of his cricketing brain, and the fact that I hate the doosra (I don't think it has ever been bowled legally). But the ICC has declared it legal, so there we are.

 

[Jono]

Warne. It will keep on being Warne til he gets up. This list is turning into a disgrace IMO.

Yeah cos Marshall, Murali and McGrath were horrible bowlers

Never seen the word 'disgrace' used so inappropriately.

 

[aussie tragic]

4. Fred Trueman beacause:

307 wkts (then a World record) at 21 (same as McGrath) and a strike rate of 49 (better than McGraths 51), as well as 4.6 wkts per match (again better than McGrath), plus his reputation all makes for an obvious choice IMO

 

[Slifer]

Hadlee

 

[PhoenixFire]

I'll go Trueman as well, he was the best pace bowler ever imo.

 

[Fusion]

Warne until he gets in.

 

[Perm]

4. Sir Richard Hadlee

 

[adharcric]

Hadlee, fairly comfortably over Ambrose.

 

[adharcric]

Warne. It will keep on being Warne til he gets up. This list is turning into a disgrace IMO.

I'm looking at Ambrose at 5 and Warne at 6. After that, the old legends (Barnes, Lohmann, Trueman, etc) and the second-tier modern era greats (Akram, Imran, Lillee, etc)