• 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.

Top 10 ODI fast bowlers of all time

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Off the top of my head, in no particular order, my ten would be something like:
McGrath
Bracken
Lee
Bond
Wasim
Waqar
Garner
Hadlee
Donald
Pollock
You missed Ambrose! I won't blame you since the list, as you admitted, was off the top of your head. I hope that was just a miss...Among others Vaas will be a strong contender. Not necessary that they must be in top 10, but if someone wants me to select 2 ODI bowlers from Vaas, Lee and Waqar I shall have a tough time, just that...
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
You missed Ambrose! I won't blame you since the list, as you admitted, was off the top of your head. I hope that was just a miss...Among others Vaas will be a strong contender. Not necessary that they must be in top 10, but if someone wants me to select 2 ODI bowlers from Vaas, Lee and Waqar I shall have a tough time, just that...
Vaas, gun though he was, was probably not good enough to dislodge any of those ten.

Ambrose and Holding are probably the two stiffest calls. On one hand I think "there's no way they're NOT top ten", and on the other I think "who comes out of the ten I nominated".

Here's a hint, I said "no particular order" but Bracken wasn't the tenth person on that list.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Ambrose and Holding are probably the two stiffest calls. On one hand I think "there's no way they're NOT top ten", and on the other I think "who comes out of the ten I nominated".
Ambrose, any day, is a better ODI bowler than Lee and Waqar. The person, who played most of his cricket in the 90s and yet managed to keep the economy rate below 3.2 has to be there in the top 10, if not in the top 5 (though I shall consider keeping him in top 5). And his average of 24 is as good as anyone in the list bar 2 or 3. In fact, his ODI record can be compared to almost anyone in the list, specially keeping in mind the era in which he played.
 

Beleg

International Regular
Waqar Younis is the greatest strike bowler of all time and should be among the first few names on the list.


Pollock
Wasim
Murali
Waqar
Donald

is would be my first choice attack.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Ambrose, any day, is a better ODI bowler than Lee and Waqar. The person, who played most of his cricket in the 90s and yet managed to keep the economy rate below 3.2 has to be there in the top 10, if not in the top 5 (though I shall consider keeping him in top 5). And his average of 24 is as good as anyone in the list bar 2 or 3. In fact, his ODI record can be compared to almost anyone in the list, specially keeping in mind the era in which he played.
Scoring in ODIs was a fair bit harder than it has been in the last ten years, and he was generally part of a pretty good attack in that time, so it's not quite the lay-down misere. That said, yeah, he's pretty awesome and probably should be on the list. I'll just have to have a really good look to see who makes way...
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Comparing ER, SR and average across eras is tricky. What should be compared is how a particular bowler has done against stats os rest of the world. Having an ER of 4.5 now is far greater achievement than having the same thing at 1985.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Scoring in ODIs was a fair bit harder than it has been in the last ten years, and he was generally part of a pretty good attack in that time, so it's not quite the lay-down misere. That said, yeah, he's pretty awesome and probably should be on the list. I'll just have to have a really good look to see who makes way...
Was thinking that would damage his ER because if he's the sole quality bowler they'll be more willing to see him off.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
But on the flip side if there are wickets falling regularly at the hands of the other bowlers, then you're bowling at new-to-the-crease batsmen who aren't able to get any partnerships going. When you come on for a new spell, you're less likely to be facing a set opponent.

It also gives you the chance to more regularly bowl at tailenders.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Comparing ER, SR and average across eras is tricky. What should be compared is how a particular bowler has done against stats os rest of the world. Having an ER of 4.5 now is far greater achievement than having the same thing at 1985.
Everyone knows that! ... What's new?
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Scoring in ODIs was a fair bit harder than it has been in the last ten years, and he was generally part of a pretty good attack in that time, so it's not quite the lay-down misere. That said, yeah, he's pretty awesome and probably should be on the list. I'll just have to have a really good look to see who makes way...
Come on, Waqar played in the same era too...ER of 3.18 is great for any era; it would have been 'great' even for 70s and 80s, it's 'unbelievable' in the 90s (when Ambrose played the most) and would have been 'impossible' now...And both Waqar (always) and Lee (for a large part of his career) played in better bowling attacks...So, the two points you raised are not applicable at all in this case...
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Well, my top 10 will be -

Akram
McGrath
Hadlee
Ambrose
Garner
Pollock
Bond
Donald
Bracken
Vaas

Well, this list is off the top of my head and it may change even tomorrow, but 7-9 names in that list will be in my top 10 any day...
 

sammy2

Banned
almost 400 wickets with an economy rate no one in his era (well after 2000) comes close to at the moment?
He is a good bowler, but chanderpaul and gayle really proved how easy it could be to be play him.

You have alot of players with excellent records but it's not always because they were constantly threatening.

no one should have pollock included in their top ten greatest fast bowlers while leading out legends like micheal holding.

Patrick Patterson has a strike rate of 33 in ODI,and an Ave of 24 with brutal pace. I would prefer him than pollock anyday.

Pollock played way more games than most players, so ofcourse he is going to have more wickets.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
He is a good bowler, but chanderpaul and gayle really proved how easy it could be to be play him.

You have alot of players with excellent records but it's not always because they were constantly threatening.

no one should have pollock included in their top ten greatest fast bowlers while leading out legends like micheal holding.

Patrick Patterson has a strike rate of 33 in ODI,and an Ave of 24 with brutal pace. I would prefer him than pollock anyday.

Pollock played way more games than most players, so ofcourse he is going to have more wickets.
You miss the point in that Pollock is one of the most economical bowlers of all time, in his 303 ODI's he only went at more than a run a ball 12 times over his whole career!

This all during the era of powerplays and fielding restrictions and the advent of T20 power hitting.

Against the West Indies he averaged 24.20 with an economy of 3.56.

While he wasn't one of the greatest strikers with the ball in history (though by no means terrible at it) he was by far one of the most measly bowlers in history. In ODI cricket that is extremely valuable.
 

Top