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

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Precambrian

The question is, why do you think Steyn would struggle to be among the best bowlers during any other period in cricket history??

Because 1993-2007 McGrath. Prior to that Ambrose. Prior to that Imran/Lillee. That's until 1970, and Steyn would certainly struggle for the past 40 years. A little before that Wes Hall, and Trueman. And you're already near Bradman's time. There has usually almost always been an all time great fast bowler operating somewhere.

That is the whole point of this thread. No one is saying Steyn sucks.

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Originally Posted by Precambrian

This whole business of him not having 300 wickets being a disqualification is laughable.

Here's the list of the greatest (statistically atleast) bowlers who ended up with between 100 to 200 wickets in their entire career.

All of those players played in era's where significantly less cricket was played than now. The best fast bowlers from the last 10-15 years mostly top 300 and they should because they have way more opportunity to do so. All of the bowlers on that list would have more than 300 (or close enough to) if they played in the last decade.

I never said Steyn was a bad bowler at all (he's an awesome bowler). You're taking this as though it's an insult to him as a player and as a bowler, but really, all this thread is discussing is whether there's ever been a time when the clear best bowler in the world was as raw and as unproven over time as Steyn is. It's not questioning his ability to go on and be one of the best.

[biased indian]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Because 1993-2007 McGrath. Prior to that Ambrose. Prior to that Imran/Lillee. That's until 1970, and Steyn would certainly struggle for the past 40 years. A little before that Wes Hall, and Trueman. And you're already near Bradman's time. There has usually almost always been an all time great fast bowler operating somewhere.

That is the whole point of this thread. No one is saying Steyn sucks.

and this could be styens decade !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mcgrath was not the best in the world in 93 -- 95..so may be one day we all might say styen was the best between 2007 -- 2015 ????

[Precambrian]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Because 1993-2007 McGrath. Prior to that Ambrose. Prior to that Imran/Lillee. That's until 1970, and Steyn would certainly struggle for the past 40 years. A little before that Wes Hall, and Trueman. And you're already near Bradman's time. There has usually almost always been an all time great fast bowler operating somewhere.

That is the whole point of this thread. No one is saying Steyn sucks.

I am not saying Steyn would get ranked as Number ONE in all eras. But he'd end up being in the top 5 in any era.

[Precambrian]

Originally Posted by dontcloseyoureyes

All of those players played in era's where significantly less cricket was played than now. The best fast bowlers from the last 10-15 years mostly top 300 and they should because they have way more opportunity to do so. All of the bowlers on that list would have more than 300 (or close enough to) if they played in the last decade.

I never said Steyn was a bad bowler at all (he's an awesome bowler). You're taking this as though it's an insult to him as a player and as a bowler, but really, all this thread is discussing is whether there's ever been a time when the clear best bowler in the world was as raw and as unproven over time as Steyn is. It's not questioning his ability to go on and be one of the best.

So finally it comes down to Steyn simply not having played enough number of tests, rather than any suspicion about his skills or ability right??

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by biased indian

and this could be styens decade !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And no one said it couldn't either. We are talking about right now.

Originally Posted by biased indian

Mcgrath was not the best in the world in 93 -- 95

But Ambrose was there. As were Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Walsh...

Originally Posted by biased indian

..so may be one day you will say styen was the best between 2007 -- 2015 ????

Yes, and when you create that thread in 2015, that might make sense....

[fredfertang]

The worst era for fast bowling was the void between Larwood in 1933 and the late 40's when Lindwall and Miller arrived - Off the top of my head I cant think of anyone in that era who was genuinely quick let alone of any real class

The 60's was a tad grim too but there was Wes Hall and, latterly, the criminally underrated John Snow

So no I don't think Dale Steyn is the worst best fast bowler ever but I do think it's an interesting question

[_Ed_]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Because 1993-2007 McGrath. Prior to that Ambrose. Prior to that Imran/Lillee.

And Hadlee.

[PhoenixFire]

Originally Posted by biased indian

and this could be styens decade !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jesus, have you actually read the OP?

It is utterly irelevant as to whether Steyn is the best fast bowler this decade. The point is that the previous so called best bowlers in the world are debatebaly far superior to Steyn at the current time.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by _Ed_

And Hadlee.

Yea, well, there is no shortage there in the 80s - you can pick at will. You could have the three best fast bowlers out due to injury and the fourth guy would still make a run for an all time side. If Ambrose and Marshall were out, you could have Hadlee or Imran. If they were out, you still had Holding and Roberts, and Garner, and whoever else.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Precambrian

I am not saying Steyn would get ranked as Number ONE in all eras. But he'd end up being in the top 5 in any era.

No one is denying this, or implied this. Now I will though - I'd actually venture that in the early nineties, when you had Marshall, Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh, he wouldn't make the top five. Probably at various points in the eighties too, with Hadlee, Imran, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh, or earlier with Garner, Holding, Marshall, Lillee, Imran.

[Precambrian]

Originally Posted by PhoenixFire

Jesus, have you actually read the OP?

It is utterly irelevant as to whether Steyn is the best fast bowler this decade. The point is that the previous so called best bowlers in the world are debatebaly far superior to Steyn at the current time.

Was not Allan Donald hailed as the best during the end years of 2000? I don;t think he had truckloads of wickets more than Steyn had...

[Precambrian]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

No one is denying this, or implied this. Now I will though - I'd actually venture that in the early nineties, when you had Marshall, Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh, he wouldn't make the top five. Probably at various points in the eighties too, with Hadlee, Imran, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh, or earlier with Garner, Holding, Marshall, Lillee, Imran.

Interesting point. With merits. However I'd rate Steyn above Holding and Wasim of the late 80s and early 90s.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by _Ed_

Disappointing thread. Was intrigued by the opening post.

Indeed.

Have to say that from the time I've been watching it's hard to recall a player who was (by consensus rather than ranking) regarded as the best who was such a (relatively) minor talent.

Still slightly agnostic about Steyn, I have to say, mainly based around him being mediocre against England.

Nice to have someone other than this man:



to share a first name with tho.

[Precambrian]

Name		Country		Matches	Innings	Wickets	 Bowav 	 ER 	 SR 	5W	10W
DW Steyn	South Africa	30	56	154	 23.08 	 3.62 	 38.20 	11	3
CEL Ambrose	West Indies	30	57	124	 23.12 	 2.49 	 55.50 	4	1
Imran Khan	Pakistan	30	53	119	 30.01 	 2.72 	 66.00 	7	1
Wasim Akram	Pakistan	30	51	105	 26.75 	 2.54 	 63.10 	7	2
GD McGrath	Australia	30	58	130	 24.51 	 2.68 	 54.70 	7	0
Waqar Younis	Pakistan	30	53	169	 19.30 	 3.14 	 36.70 	17	3
AA Donald	South Africa	30	53	144	 22.88 	 2.87 	 47.70 	7	2

An analysis of great bowlers at the end of their 30th test.