Rank the West Indian pace octet

[silentstriker]

Pick the top eight West Indian fast bowlers.

My ranking:

1. Marshall
2. Ambrose
3. Holding
4. Garner
5. Roberts
6. Hall
7. Walsh
8. Bishop

It's sick, you could virtually flip the middle part of it around and it would make perfect sense. And I feel like I'm missing someone. I left Croft out on purpose, as he didn't play as many Tests.

 

[ret]

8. Bishop
7. Hall
6. Walsh
5. Garner
4. Roberts
3. Holding
2. Ambrose
1. Marshall

 

[bond21]

1. Holding
2. Marshall
3. Roberts
4. Garner
5. Ambrose

 

[PhoenixFire]

I ws thinking the same as Manan, except with Garner and Holding the other way round.

 

[Sanz]

My Top 10 :-

1. Joel Garner
2. Malcom Marshall
3. Wes Hall
4. Colin Croft
5. Michael Holding
6. Andy Roberts
7. Curtly Ambrose
8. Sylvester Clarke
9. Ian Bishop
10. Courtney Walsh

 

[PhoenixFire]

ITSTL. Ambrose that low?

 

[Top_Cat]

Interesting indeed, particularly Croft well above Ambi and Clarke above Walsh.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Top 8:

1. Malcom Marshall
2. Curtley Ambrose
3. Joel Garner
4. Andy Roberts
5. Michael Holding
6. Courtney Walsh
7. Colin Croft
8. Ian Bishop

 

[Sanz]

ITSTL. Ambrose that low?

Yes, I dont rate Ambrose as highly as some people on this forum do. I watched him play against india quite a few times and I didn't find him anywhere good as any of the WI bowlers of the 80s.

Walsh, while being a great bowler, never in the league of great fearsom WI fast bowlers.

 

[PhoenixFire]

TBH, Bishop could have been as good as Marshall if he hadn't had those back injuries.

 

[Slifer]

Marshall
Daylight
Ambrose
GArner
Holding
Roberts
Walsh
Bishop
Croft
Hall
PAtterson/Griffith/S Clarke

 

[Richard]

1. Marshall (easily)
2. Ambrose
3. Garner
4. Bishop
5. Holding
6. Hall
7. Roberts
8. Walsh

Clarke, Croft and Daniel also very much worth a mention, but weren't good enough to displace those around them. And so easy to forget how good the likes of Winston Benjamin, et al were or could have been. And there's the likes of Franklyn Stephenson and Ezra Moseley who never or hardly even played due to electing for Rebel tours, and Roy Gilchrist who hardly played because he was a psychopath. There were the early greats like Constantine, Martindale, Francis and Griffith (H). Then the lesser lights like Griffith (C), Patterson, Davis (W), Small (M), Baptiste, Holder, etc. And don't forget Reon King who started so well and was ruined by injury.

There was even a decent spinner - Rangy Nanan - who is almost completely forgotten. Plus the decent spinner, decent lower-order batsman and superlative fielder Roger Harper.

 

[Manee]

Malcom Marshall
Andy Roberts
Curtley Ambrose
Michael Holding
Joel Garner
Courtney Walsh
Colin Croft
Ian Bishop

 

[bond21]

Ambrose would love this forum, hes more over rated here than hotdogs are at a Baseball stadium.

Putting Ambrose above Holding is just WTF material, seriously.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Haha, couldn't DWTA more if I tried.

Ambrose was waaay superior to Holding IMO.

 

[Richard]

Not sure about waaaaaaay, but I can't imagine all that many would put Ambrose below him, and if they did they'd have to have damn good reasoning. Holding was a bit quicker, and that's it. Ambrose got more bounce, hit much better lengths more consistently, and almost certainly bowled better off- and leg-cutters.

I never really had to think much before putting him second to Marshall among West Indians.

 

[ret]

Ambrose got more bounce, hit much better lengths more consistently, and almost certainly bowled better off- and leg-cutters.

Add to that the ability deliver under pressure

the game against Aus in Aus where he took some wkts at the end to give WI a victory, the game against SA in WI where he won it on his own ..... brilliant examples of delivering under pressure

 

[Richard]

Add to that the ability deliver under pressure

Well yeah, true, but Holding didn't lack in that respect either.

However, he also never really had much of a chance to play the lone ranger in a live Test. Had The Oval 1976 seen West Indies being 1-0 down (or even the series been 1-1) that'd have been a performance to rival all Ambrose's.

 

[ret]

Well yeah, true, but Holding didn't lack in that respect either.

yep, and thats the reason why these bowlers are so close and it's a thing here or there that we have to take to rank them apart

as a personal preference, if both were in my X1, i would hand the ball to Ambrose for a critical over

 

[silentstriker]

When a pitch offered even the hint of uneven bounce, I have a hard time believing too many people went on a rampage as well as Curtly did. It's one thing bowling exceptionally well, and quite another to be simply unplayable - and Curtly on his day and wicket was unplayable.