I'll only say one last thing.
If anybody thinks Lillee only played on great seamers wicket in Australia, your wrong and many testimonies go into that. People think of Australia and they think of that Perth wicket that Lillee and Thommo were scary on. Lillee's best ground in Australia was the MCG. Based on average it's the GABBA, but he played mroe games at the MCG and took many more fivers. Stories of how he played on the MCG came into discussion on EPSN's Legends of Cricket. There's a tiny feature on how the pitch in the centenary test smoothened out on day three and people wanted a result for the queen. Lillee took a tenfer on a pitch that gave nothing to fast bowlers. Allan Davidson talked somewhat in depth on it. Then there's another game from the MCG in the 80s they talk about, and I think it was Bob Willis, who said Lillee bowled great at the MCG because conditions were horrid there for fast bowling and Lillee bowled his best when things were against him.
The MCG is brought up quite a bit actually... and from what was told, is was one of the more unresponsive wickets in Australia for fast bowling. England isn't always a seamers paradise. Lillee played plenty there and yet places like Trentbride often produce high scores. The Oval does too.
Personally it doesn't suprise me that he hasn't got the best record in Perth because, on a pitch like that, a small nick with his pace could easily go for four. You could argue that despite having a few good seaming wickets, there were also some fast wickets and faster outfields. I don't know, I'm not going to guess, which is what some people have done.
On that same show the last few minutes were in discussion of how good Lillee was in bad conditions and how he used conditions better than anybody ever. This entire thing about bowling on bad pitches comes off barely a handful of subcontinent matches. I don't think people should be judging on such limited chances. Lillee never played in India or Sri Lanka... only Pakistan and he has three matches there. Not much to go on. There are, however, bad seaming wickets around the world, and reputations don't build themselves without testimonies.
There was talk of him being the real MOTM in the centenary test and how people thought it was an injustice because he got a tenfer on a completely unresponsive wicket.
What's funny is that when Legends of Cricket did a piece on Malcolm Marshall, he got high praise for bowling on bad wickets, and do you know where those wickets were? Australia. They told stories about the SCG and how the ball never gave any bounce above stump height, yet Marshall did it. Then they talk about how one of Marshall's goals was to perform well on Australian wickets because he felt they were a stamp of approval that you can play well on varying pitches.
This idea that Australia is only seaming wickets is nothing more than a guess... maybe an educated guess since that Perth pitch is renound for pace. But testimonies eliminate all guessing.
Lillee was good on bad wickets. Nobody here knows how well each certain wicket played. I didn't know the MCG produced some horrid seaming wickets until I heard testimonies. I don't know if Old Trafford was good for seaming one day and bad the next. Nobody can guess that Lillee played on just great wickets for seaming because the same wicket can play different ways in different series. Do you know how we can know though? By listening to the people who actually saw him play, and they can give us stories of him on good and bad wickets and the jury is in: A rash of people have praised Lillee as the best fast bowler on bad wickets.
So if "intangible" means guessing about Lillee's bowling on pitches when there are people who actually saw him and say otherwise with backed up stories... well...
