Is Dale Steyn the worst ever best fast bowler in the world?

[ankitj]

Of all the rightly or wrongly hyped up English cricketers, Larwood is least worthy of the hype.

There I said it.

 

[Top_Cat]

The sPEWS and Bench in-joke club gets my vote as the most annoying forum feature to date.

 

[benchmark00]

The sPEWS and Bench in-joke club gets my vote as the most annoying forum feature to date.

 

[Spikey]

The sPEWS and Bench in-joke club gets my vote as the most annoying forum feature to date.

you should watch what you say bro. benchmark00 is the executor of your will too

 

[Viscount Tom]

You killed Burgey!

 

[kyear2]

You killed Burgey!

 

[smash84]

You killed Burgey!

 

[Red]

Infract? In my day, mods didn't have to play with the new infractions rule and could easily intimidate lesser posters!

Underrated post imo.

 

[Migara]

I'd be interested to see the stats on finger injuries but it's always seemed to me that those have become more prevalent as time has passed rather than less so. As for batsmen being scared (all fast bowlers will always try to intimidate - that's their job) - I can't really see how that comes into the equation as techniques vary from batsman to batsman and evolve over time anyway

Using Larwood as the example it is true that the odd tailender would back away from him but then they do that to quicks now. Some of the Australians (eg Woodfull, Ponsford and Fingleton) just let him hit them, Bradman danced all over the place in order to find a way of playing him whilst McCabe and Richardson stood toe to toe with him and took him on - I don't think it can be said that any of them were scared

Intimidation is not the fact that batsmen are ****ting in their pants! If you look at the old footage, you'd see that pulls and hooks were played by getting inside the line of the ball, which basically was a necessity since batsman have to protect their faces. Getting inside the line takes a massive amount of skill it self. If the batsman is not quick enough for that, usual response would be to duck or weave out of the line.

Now compare how the modern game (and Viv Richards) plays the hook and the pull. Since the batsmen have the luxury of the helmet, now you could see players hooking and pulling balls in front of their faces. Great batsmen with quick foot work still get inside the line to play the short ball (but even they will play it in front of their face when they want it to play straighter), but lesser ones hook and pull in front of the face due to the protection they have. Now the intimidation factor of short bowling is less, because you can play it with 75% of the technique needed in old days.

And about the finger injury thingy; I can think of two reasons. First, the batsmen did have a better technique, or played more upright (may be lack of reverse swinging yorkers as a wicket taking option). Seconly, fast bowlers of yesteryear may not have been fast as todays ones.

 

[fredfertang]

I asked a friend of mine about the finger injury thing yesterday. Unlike me he was a decent cricketer and has a number of coaching badges, and he reckoned the preponderance of finger injuries is as high as it is because whatever you do to the glove you can't alter the jarring on the bat handle - another bloke we were with, equally well qualified, said he thought that was nonsense, but I have to say it makes some sense to me.

 

[uvelocity]

nonsense

also there's this one old **** we play against who wears no gloves. yet to hit to old ****. not for lack of trying either

 

[Migara]

I asked a friend of mine about the finger injury thing yesterday. Unlike me he was a decent cricketer and has a number of coaching badges, and he reckoned the preponderance of finger injuries is as high as it is because whatever you do to the glove you can't alter the jarring on the bat handle - another bloke we were with, equally well qualified, said he thought that was nonsense, but I have to say it makes some sense to me.

Interesting! Did you specifically ask about thumb injuries? The current gloves have a good thumb protection.

 

[intcricket]

Dale Steyn is easily the worst ever fast bowler in the world. He is not even in the same league as the illustrious Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad, Mitchell Johnson, Steve Finn and other fantastic bowlers who average 90000 in the subcontinent and are as good as net bowlers when playing away from home.

 

[Dan]

Dale Steyn is easily the worst ever fast bowler in the world. He is not even in the same league as the illustrious Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad, Mitchell Johnson, Steve Finn and other fantastic bowlers who average 90000 in the subcontinent and are as good as net bowlers when playing away from home.

This post is completely irrelevant. Nobody has compared Steyn to Finn, Broad et al. in this thread, nor has anyone suggested Steyn is the worst fast bowler ever.

Cut it out.

 

[Jager]

Dale Steyn is easily the worst ever fast bowler in the world. He is not even in the same league as the illustrious Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad, Mitchell Johnson, Steve Finn and other fantastic bowlers who average 90000 in the subcontinent and are as good as net bowlers when playing away from home.

Is this the worst post in forum history?

 

[Burgey]

Is this the worst post in forum history?

Nah, there are a fair few by Jono that are worse.

But it belongs in the argument, for sure.

 

[Dan]

Throwing stuff?

 

[Prince EWS]

Throwing stuff?

That post was a different kind of ****.

 

[Jono]

Nah, there are a fair few by Jono that are worse.

Please see this post for my response.

 

[Dan]

That post was a different kind of ****.

I know, just gave me an excuse to mention it

In all seriousness though, there's plenty of **** posts to pick from. Stacks are from me, TBF.