Courtney v Curtley

[Slats4ever]

With all these other battles going around I wanted to know what everyone thought about Walsh and Ambrose. In my opinion Ambrose was a heaps better player than Courtney. In my opinion Ambrose is amongst the top 10 bowlers to ever play cricket maybe even top 5 but Courtney is just good.

[vic_orthdox]

Much the same opinion as you, Slats. But Curtly benefited a lot from the pressure that Courtney exerted from the other end - a great bowling partnership.

[Dasa]

Ambrose easily. No contest.

[lionheart]

I'd say Curtley, but as vic said, they both benefited greatly from their partnership.

[sqwerty]

Originally Posted by Slats4ever

With all these other battles going around I wanted to know what everyone thought about Walsh and Ambrose. In my opinion Ambrose was a heaps better player than Courtney. In my opinion Ambrose is amongst the top 10 bowlers to ever play cricket maybe even top 5 but Courtney is just good.

Ambrose at his peak was frightening. Walsh played second fiddle to all West Indian attacks until there was nobody left and he had to be the spearhead.

The only reason he's talked about as a legend is because he played so long.

Walsh was good enough but 'Journeyman' is a description that always springs to mind as far as I'm concerned.

[FaaipDeOiad]

As everyone else has said, definately Ambrose. It's really like McGrath/Gillespie for me, although Gillespie at his peak was slightly better than Walsh, they both take similar roles in the partership, and McGrath and Ambrose were clearly the spearheads.

[Don]

ambrose for it.im sure if u ask courtney he'll tell u ambrose was alot better than him.the records show that ambrose was alot better too.

[honestbharani]

Ambrose.

[Slow Love™]

Originally Posted by sqwerty

Ambrose at his peak was frightening. Walsh played second fiddle to all West Indian attacks until there was nobody left and he had to be the spearhead.

The only reason he's talked about as a legend is because he played so long

That's one of the more accurate descriptions of Walsh I've seen here. He was a very decent quick, but he was certainly outshaded by a host of other bowlers he played with. After a while it was a bit of a shock to think just how long he'd been playing, and his legend status was bestowed upon him almost as an afterthought. He certainly deserves a lot of respect for maintaining such a high level of fitness over his career though.

[Pedro Delgado]

^^ Aye.

Amby for me.

[greg]

Originally Posted by Slow Love™

That's one of the more accurate descriptions of Walsh I've seen here. He was a very decent quick, but he was certainly outshaded by a host of other bowlers he played with. After a while it was a bit of a shock to think just how long he'd been playing, and his legend status was bestowed upon him almost as an afterthought. He certainly deserves a lot of respect for maintaining such a high level of fitness over his career though.

I don't know. If anything for the vast majority of his career Walsh was severely underrated as a bowler, simply because he was the "4th quick". 519 wickets @ 24 makes him an alltime great in my book. And still found the time to take 1300 other wickets in first class cricket!

Back on topic, Curtley was definitely a better batsman, although arguably wasted his talent more than Walsh

[twctopcat]

Easy one finally. Fee-fi-fo-fum, i smell the blood of an englishman, Curtly Ambrose every time.

[cameeel]

Ambrose convincingly, though both were excellent bowlers

[Slats4ever]

personally i think Curtley was the scariest bowler ever. He carried a heaps more scary aura than any of the current day Lee's or Akhtar. He used to be a hero of the backyard cricket scene in my opinion. If ever anyone wanted to scare their playmates they'd say they were going to bowl like Ambrose.

I think the guy looked really scary and probably was scary. he used to scare me in my dreams.