-
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.
Which was the greater WI Pace Quartet ?
- Thread starter Bert
- Start date
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Yk it feels kinda wrong that Maco played more with Curtly and Courtney than Holding and Garner....
Yes because in the Roberts, Holding, Garner, Croft era Marshall was only good enough to be a back-up bowler
Last edited:
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
If its at their peak? The second set. If its based on career? The second set. If its based on the matches they actually played? The second set. If its based on the most iconic? The first set.
Ofc it also depends on however long you define their peak to be. Marshall and Ambrose had the best peaks anyway imo. Bishop’s peak is almost Croft’s whole career. Walsh’s peak > Roberts peak.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
He was express with the ability to swing the ball, all with the smoothest of actions.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
Well selectors didnt think so. Even though all were available between 1984 and 1987 these 4 were only selected for 4 Tests together (played 3 of 5 tests vs Aus in 1984/85 and 1 of 3 tests vs NZ in 1987)
Garner - 18 wkts @ 24.83
Holding - 15 wkts @ 23.20
Marshall - 15 wkts @ 28.33
Walsh - 11 wkts @ 29.81
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
If I recall correctly, quite a few games Holding was injured... Harper may have also got a few games in between.
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Then what are we judging the "quartet" on???
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
11 games. But honestly just the relative form and skills of the bowlers at the time.
DrWolverine
International Regular
If they are fully fit and at their peaks, second one
Well since Marshall was the best bowler of the 2nd quartet but wasn't good enough to become a permanent member of the 1st quartet, I'll take the 1st 4
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
First one.
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
Well assuming that Bishop never had his back issues and Ambrose never had shoulder surgery it's the 2nd quartet easily for me.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
That attack could have been ****ing ridiculous for a very long time.
What could have been.
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
Brother, if Bishop was healthy and Ambrose didn't have surgery or at the very least had surgery but wasn't reduced in ability, WI aren't losing at home at least until two of those bowlers retire. They'd probably still lose away to Pakistan in 97 and South Africa in 1998 but not so heavily.