Who is the greatest ODI bowler of all time?

[SillyCowCorner1]

When did this thread deviated away from best ODI bowler to Dhoni?

Is everyone here Travis Dowlin?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

look mate, Kapil was a good all rounder. But saying he was 90% bowler of Pollock is an insult to Pollock. Pollock was a beast in ODIs and the one to one replacement for McGrath or Garner, sporting similar ERs.

Dont be silly, McGrath is clearly a superior bowler.Pollock's ER is probably the best ever in the history though.

Kapil Dev's ER was good too. I think Kapil's ER would have been around 3.5 if he was given the kind of Bowling and fielding support Pollock enjoyed. (3.5 in Kapil's Era )

If 90% Pollock hurts you, I can change it to 105% Marshall.. Is that ok?

 

[Gob]

Hayden 07
Tendulkar 97
Richards 75-81
Kohli 19
DeVilliers 15
Dhoni 11
Flintoff 05
Akram 92-95
Malinga 07
Muralidaran 06
McGrath 02-04

Malinga was specifically to bowl at the death. I'd bowl McGrath out upfront

 

[_00_deathscar]

Hayden 07
Tendulkar 97
Richards 75-81
Kohli 19
DeVilliers 15
Dhoni 11
Flintoff 05
Akram 92-95
Malinga 07
Muralidaran 06
McGrath 02-04

Malinga was specifically to bowl at the death. I'd bowl McGrath out upfront

Isn't that the year he had a decent but not great World Cup?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

00s

Sehwag
Tendulkar
Ponting
Pieterson
Kallis
Sangakarra
Dhoni
Vettori
Steyn
Johnson
Anderson

10s

Warner
De Kock
ABDV
Kohli
Taylor
Buttler
Woakes/Stonis/Neesham
Starc
Zampa
Boult
Bumrah

Zampa? Surely you need Imran Tahir

 

[Bolo.]

Was he really?
Garner played between 1977 and 1987
98 innings, 146wkts
18.86 avg , 3.09 ER, 36.5 SR

Hadlee between 1977 and 1987
81 innings, 121wkts
19.62 avg , 3.2 ER, 36.7 ER

similar stats, Hadlee played for an inferior team.

I am not sure team strength is an argument. Could change things either way, or not at all.

Garner slightly better in this period, and Hadlee pretty mediocre outside of this period. You cant make a (eg.) Sachin vs xyz ATG argument by saying Sachins quality is not impacted by his longevity despite his stats being worse cos he was still (on the whole) excellent outside of his peak.

I dont think there is a reasonable conclusion that we can draw from stats other than that Garner was a notably better bowler. Before my time, so its mostly stats, but Garner had all the characteristics that typically define the most successful bowlers to an extent that nobody, let alone Hadlee can match.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Donald over Bond.

Fair call

 

[Migara]

Dont be silly, McGrath is clearly a superior bowler.Pollock's ER is probably the best ever in the history though.

Kapil Dev's ER was good too. I think Kapil's ER would have been around 3.5 if he was given the kind of Bowling and fielding support Pollock enjoyed. (3.5 in Kapil's Era )

If 90% Pollock hurts you, I can change it to 105% Marshall.. Is that ok?

Tha is called wishful thinking. We lasoc ould say if Pollock had Murali in his side his ER would have been 3.0 yadda, yadda, yadda.

I don't rate Marshall in ODI game much. So you can draw any comparison of yourself.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I am not sure team strength is an argument. Could change things either way, or not at all.

Garner slightly better in this period, and Hadlee pretty mediocre outside of this period. You cant make a (eg.) Sachin vs xyz ATG argument by saying Sachins quality is not impacted by his longevity despite his stats being worse cos he was still (on the whole) excellent outside of his peak.

I dont think there is a reasonable conclusion that we can draw from stats other than that Garner was a notably better bowler. Before my time, so its mostly stats, but Garner had all the characteristics that typically define the most successful bowlers to an extent that nobody, let alone Hadlee can match.

One thing is clear, in the Garner era his numbers were similar to Hadlee. ( and possibly Hadlee was the better bowler throughout Garner's career because Hadlee played without much support.)

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Tha is called wishful thinking. We lasoc ould say if Pollock had Murali in his side his ER would have been 3.0 yadda, yadda, yadda.

I don't rate Marshall in ODI game much. So you can draw any comparison of yourself.

Better fielders takes more catches and saves more runs FYI. That helps Bowler's stats.Its not wishful thinking.

 

[Bolo.]

One thing is clear, in the Garner era his numbers were similar to Hadlee. ( and possibly Hadlee was the better bowler throughout Garner's career because Hadlee played without much support.)

You have a point about fielders (assuming WI were a better fielding outfit than NZ).

Playing in a stronger batting or bowling outfit is likely to raise SR and economy as bats need to take more chances against you. Overall, distinctly unclear. Garner fractionally better on both measures though, even when comparing his career to what was effectively Hadlees peak.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You have a point about fielders (assuming WI were a better fielding outfit than NZ).

Playing in a stronger batting or bowling outfit is likely to raise SR and economy as bats need to take more chances against you. Overall, distinctly unclear. Garner fractionally better on both measures though, even when comparing his career to what was effectively Hadlees peak.

Not necessarily, number of wickets fallen plays a key role.. A stronger bowling attack likely to take wickets faster and puts pressure on batting team to avoid risks.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

One thing is clear, in the Garner era his numbers were similar to Hadlee. ( and possibly Hadlee was the better bowler throughout Garner's career because Hadlee played without much support.)

Ewen Chatfield was an ODI gun.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ewen Chatfield was an ODI gun.

Yeah.
But,Still its an ordinary support in comparison to West Indies pace battery.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Boult at 45th! 2nd best of the 2010s behind Starc imo.

Larsen (115th) should be much higher

Any NZ players who shouldn't be higher?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Any NZ players who shouldn't be higher?

Hadlee a bit high at 2.
Bond 11, Vettori 25, Mills 29 about right.
Chatfield 36 a bit low. Boult I've mentioned.
Oram at 63 is pretty accurate as is Morrison at 93.
Chris Cairns and Snedden are too high at 98 and 99. Larsen way too low at 102nd. Tuffey at 105th is about right.
Matt Henry and Chris Pringle (114 and 115) are too low. Will stop now.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hadlee a bit high at 2.
Bond 11, Vettori 25, Mills 29 about right.
Chatfield 36 a bit low. Boult I've mentioned.
Oram at 63 is pretty accurate as is Morrison at 93.
Chris Cairns and Snedden are too high at 98 and 99. Larsen way too low at 102nd. Tuffey at 105th is about right.
Matt Henry and Chris Pringle (114 and 115) are too low. Will stop now.

Should've known you'd be all over it

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Should've known you'd be all over it

Thanks mate!

 

[Athlai]

Hard to narrow it down to one but I'd say the top 4 are Starc, McGrath, Wasim and Murali.

 

[Julian87]

Bit puzzled by so many ATG lineups just straight up having Kapil as a lock at all rounder.

If that position in the team is to bat 7 and be the 4th seamer I'm picking Klusener every day of the week.