Top 10 Greatest Fast Bowlers of All Time in Tests?

[Daemon]

You just know if Lillee averaged 7 against SL Migara would just say SL was too weak and irrelevant back then (as they are now)

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I don't know how you could rate Dennis Lillee below Allan Donald, Shaun Pollock or Courtney Walsh tbh. But it's always subjective

Lillee and Donald bowling equivalents of Lara or Viv.
Pollock / Walsh..i would say..Dravid category.

Donald is under rated mainly due to his lack of Longevity. Lost prime 3-4 years to the Ban of SA.

He deserved 100 tests and 460 wickets at 22.

 

[Burgey]

He deserved to have a dig when things were going against him tbh

 

[ataraxia]

Of course it is. Believe in Sir RJ

sorry but 'Sir RJ' refers to Hadlee, not Jadeja.

 

[subshakerz]

Donald's team was a better side than the ones Steyn was in at the start of his career. One often felt like South Africa should have been beating Aus regularly during the 90s but they just never did. Steyn was the difference.

Donald was a fine bowler but one gets the feeling that his stats flatter him somewhat, having played half his career in South Africa. He bowled a very good line and was quick, but was often a bit too short (he was basically a much better Jason Gillespie). This meant his average and economy were usually better looking than his actual in game impact. Not to say he was bad by any means - he would easily have partnered McGrath with the new ball were he born in Australia, only that one should really have expected a bit more in the results column.

The other problem that he had was the his career overlapped some of the finest quicks the game has ever produced - Ambrose, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh and Pollock. He was always going to get a little lost amongst such peers, even if he was up there with all of them.

I agree. One thing I have pointed out is that Allan Donald, outside of South Africa and maybe England, didn't really have any matchwinning spells (sealing or setting up a victory). Steyn by comparison won multiple matches in Australia, England, West Indies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India.

Donald ended up with pretty figures in most countries but in terms of actual impact, he wasn't really there. That factor, along with the fact that virtually none of the major 90s batsmen mention his name as the best they face (it is either Wasim or Ambrose), means I don't rank him as top tier as the others.

Lillee on the other hand, suffers because he was unproven in the subcontinent and West Indies, but the fact that he was rated so highly by his peers allows me to rank him higher than Donald.

 

[Burgey]

sorry but 'Sir RJ' refers to Hadlee, not Jadeja.

I actually thought that’s who he was referring to.

 

[Migara]

Donald's team was a better side than the ones Steyn was in at the start of his career. One often felt like South Africa should have been beating Aus regularly during the 90s but they just never did. Steyn was the difference.

Donald was a fine bowler but one gets the feeling that his stats flatter him somewhat, having played half his career in South Africa. He bowled a very good line and was quick, but was often a bit too short (he was basically a much better Jason Gillespie). This meant his average and economy were usually better looking than his actual in game impact. Not to say he was bad by any means - he would easily have partnered McGrath with the new ball were he born in Australia, only that one should really have expected a bit more in the results column.

The other problem that he had was the his career overlapped some of the finest quicks the game has ever produced - Ambrose, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh and Pollock. He was always going to get a little lost amongst such peers, even if he was up there with all of them.

Rather, Warne was the difference. Steyn still would have been better against that GOAT Aussie side, because he possesses what Aussies disliked most - the swing.

 

[subshakerz]

Rather, Warne was the difference. Steyn still would have been better against that GOAT Aussie side, because he possesses what Aussies disliked most - the swing.

Steyn would likely have done as he did against other strong sides he faced, have 1 matchwinning spell in the series and be tonked around the rest of the time. Which is still better than what Donald did.

 

[fredfertang]

Sylvers!

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Sylvers!

The Windies could have had an attack of Clarke and Daniel for 10 years. I know the likes of Holding, Roberts, Garner and Marshall weren't exactly journeymen, but the fact that Colin Croft played more Tests than Clarke and Daniel put together should mean Clive Lloyd is ostracised by the entire cricket world.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Donald was a better bowler than McGrath. McGrath played longer and had more wickets but wasn’t really a better bowler.

This is a bot right

 

[Magrat Garlick]

This is a bot right

No? He's been here for ages.

This is his reasoning, you might disagree with it or not but to call him a bot just cos he posts not in the exact ritual terms that dominate Yet Another ATG discussion is a bit harsh

Being a free scoring attacking batsman is highly desirable and beneficial, and makes you a better cricketer.

Obdurate defensive batting is fine and has its place, but a guy like Sobers who can score big and freely and quickly is a massive advantage in terms of winning tests. In my eyes it places Sobers above Kallis by a significant margin when everything else is seemingly equal.

That’s exactly why I rate Steyn, Donald and Marshall ahead of McGrath and his line and length by a significant margin.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Still looks a bit botty. The fact that McGrath bowled with great accuracy in between the more destructive spells is what separates him, not what marks him down.

 

[TheJediBrah]

No? He's been here for ages.

This is his reasoning, you might disagree with it or not but to call him a bot just cos he posts not in the exact ritual terms that dominate Yet Another ATG discussion is a bit harsh

Based on his history of posts, which have been objectively terrible for a while. Generally something a long the lines of "how can I vilify and/or insult Australian player/person x, y or z today"

 

[Starfighter]

This is a bot right

I had the exact same argument with him three years ago. It's just nationalistic blinders.

 

[bagapath]

No? He's been here for ages.

This is his reasoning, you might disagree with it or not but to call him a bot just cos he posts not in the exact ritual terms that dominate Yet Another ATG discussion is a bit harsh

Nicely put!

I do believe the Donald McGrath comparison would have invited more straight forward arguments if they both had finished with 300-350 wickets from 70 - 80 tests. but the pigeon man went on and on; and with sheer longevity he has killed all traditional comparative arguments before they can be made.

Saying that Donald was easily a better bowler than McGrath is like saying Weekes was easily a better batsman than Ponting. in both these comparisons the first player had a stellar career and the other one actually had two stellar careers rolled into one that it is not possible to put down the second player so casually. may be the argument would have been valid in a different scenario where their career lengths were similar. in reality it can't be made anymore.

having said that, this argument is not necessarily "botty".

 

[TheJediBrah]

Nicely put!

I do believe the Donald McGrath comparison would have invited more straight forward arguments if they both had finished with 300-350 wickets from 70 - 80 tests. but the pigeon man went on and on; and with sheer longevity he has killed all traditional comparative arguments before they can be made.

Saying that Donald was easily a better bowler than McGrath is like saying Weekes was easily a better batsman than Ponting. in both these comparisons the first player had a stellar career and the other one actually had two stellar careers rolled into one that it is not possible to put down the second player so casually. may be the argument would have been valid in a different scenario where their career lengths were similar. in reality it can't be made anymore.

having said that, this argument is not necessarily "botty".

You're giving him way too much credit:

That’s exactly why I rate Steyn, Donald and Marshall ahead of McGrath and his line and length by a significant margin.

His point of view has nothing to do with thinking about the game. It's purely national identification, same as he's been doing every time I've seen post here.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Donald was a better bowler than McGrath. McGrath played longer and had more wickets but wasn’t really a better bowler.

I thought McGill was a decent bowler. Stand corrected.

Twice as good as Keith Miller. Should be inducted as a batsman and a bowler.

Cummins knew. He should be banned.

I don’t know if there is a future for test cricket but I know there is no future for Bancroft in test cricket.

On one hand, you have one of the greatest bowler of all time, who was known for his fiery temperament and never say die attitude. On the other hand you have Dennis Lillee. Easy choice.

If you remove the minnows from the rankings, Australia are the No 1 team.

I thought Australia was safe for middle aged men.

Miller played against farmers and plumbers. He wouldn’t make the current England XI over Sam Curran.

Do you think the racial abuse by the Australian crowd is caused by this line of thinking?

Wow that’s interesting. It shouldn’t be allowed to happen again. What does Australia plan to do about it now?

But he plays for Australia

This is all just from his last couple dozen posts. Bloke genuinely just logs in to say something negative about an Australian or Australia, some of it not even about cricket. At best he's got a worryingly large chip on his shoulder, at worst he's just a bigot.

 

[rtramdas]

My top 10 test fast bowlers

1.Curtley Ambrose - Nasty, fastness, adequate longevity, great record against the best team of his era, uniform record in all countries and yet a mammoth average of 20.99 ...such a complete fast bowler.
1. Richard Hadlee - lone warrior, great longevity, well rounded record in all nations
2. Dale Steyn - great longevity, performed in a relatively batting friendly era
3. Shaun Pollock - great longevity , well rounded record in all nations, was well below his standard against best team of his era.
4. Allan Donald - well rounded record in all nations , lacks adequate longevity
5. Glenn Mcgrath - presence of Warne helped him immensely otherwise would have put him much higher,such uniform record & mammoth longevity
6. Malcolm Marshall - statistically has the best average, posses a uniform record etc , but being in the company of other 3 great fast bowlers helped him a lot.
7. Joel Garner - one of the greatest averages ever for a fast bowler , such amazing uniformity , but lacks adequate longevity . Also being a part of such a strong bowling unit helped him a lot.
8. Courtney Walsh - such amazing longevity & uniform record, was below par against the best team of his era though.
9. James Anderson - completely turned it upside down in this relatively batting friendly era ,has a stretch of 460 wkts @23.93
10. Bob Willis - had enough longevity for the era he played in, had great uniformity, but was below par against the best team of his era.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Did Marshall ever get the ball to reverse? I ask because I've always thought of him and Akram as mirror images of sorts (Akram being a slight downgrade), capable of doing absolutely anything with the ball at the outset.