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

[pasag]

When was the last time we had such an 'ordinary' (comparatively of course) best fast bowler? It's pretty clear he is the best and no one would dispute he's a superb player but is he only the best because of the lack of great bowlers going around currently? Compared to others in recent times he does come up a bit short and one wonders as well if Bond and Asif were still playing would he even have the title?

[archie mac]

Originally Posted by pasag

When was the last time we had such an 'ordinary' (comparatively of course) best fast bowler? It's pretty clear he is the best and no one would dispute he's a superb player but is he only the best because of the lack of great bowlers going around currently? Compared to others in recent times he does come up a bit short and one wonders as well if Bond and Asif were still playing would he even have the title?

He is a little raw, and his still learning, but as Simpson said (and I am sure he was not the first) 'you can't teach a player to bowl quick'

But yes I agree, I can't remember when the best fast bowler in the world would not be considered for an all time XI, maybe he would make an SA all time team?

[PhoenixFire]

Talking of Bond..

Did he get injured or did he go ICL?

[bagapath]

Originally Posted by archie mac

He is a little raw, and his still learning, but as Simpson said (and I am sure he was not the first) 'you can't teach a player to bowl quick'

But yes I agree, I can't remember when the best fast bowler in the world would not be considered for an all time XI, maybe he would make an SA all time team?

For the SA all time XI you can choose two fast bowlers from Allan Donald, S. Pollock, P. Pollock, and N. Adcock. You can always choose an allrounder from Kallis and Procter as your third pacer. Or if you want to choose Faulkner as your leg spinning all rounder you still have the remaining two pacers to add to your attack. I am assuming tayfield will be your first spinner. Steyn is not in my pool of probables.

[pasag]

Originally Posted by archie mac

He is a little raw, and his still learning, but as Simpson said (and I am sure he was not the first) 'you can't teach a player to bowl quick'

But yes I agree, I can't remember when the best fast bowler in the world would not be considered for an all time XI, maybe he would make an SA all time team?

Yeah he's only 25, there's no reason he can't go on to be a great, but I'm more talking about this point in time, right now.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by PhoenixFire

Talking of Bond..

Did he get injured or did he go ICL?

Yeah, he went to the ICL.

[archie mac]

Originally Posted by bagapath

For the SA all time XI you can choose two fast bowlers from Allan Donald, S. Pollock, P. Pollock, and N. Adcock. You can always choose an allrounder from Kallis and Procter as your third pacer. Or if you want to choose Faulkner as your leg spinning all rounder you still have the remaining two pacers to add to your attack. I am assuming tayfield will be your first spinner. Steyn is not in my pool of probables.

Well he is not finished yet, but I am very impressed with your reasoning

Hein (spelling) was another mean SA bowler who might get consideration, and also Rice was a handy fellow

[chaminda_00]

It is not often that a fast bowler is rated as the best so early in his career. I do think however he will go down as a great once he is finished.

Considering Brett Lee was rated as world's best fast bowler last year. He would have to go down as the worst.

Also if you look back through at the late 60s after Trueman retired, was there really a standout fast bowler. McKenzie was probably the best quick around that time and he was worse the Steyn.

EDIT: Looking back maybe Peter Pollock was No 1 around that time. But still he is on par with Steyn for mine.

[Manee]

No, he is by no means the worst ever best fast bowler in the world. He is playing in a generation of the flattest pitches of all time and has come out of it with a superb strike rate all over the world. He is a classical wicket taking swing bowler capable of sharp reverse swing. He has taken a lot of wickets against tail enders and is not at his strongest against left handed batsmen but all things taken into account, he is the world's best bowler on average against any team, any batsman and in any conditions. He visibly does not appear to be a great bowler, you won't see quite the pace of a Shoaib Akhtar nor the beauty of an Allan Donald, accuracy of an Ambrose, etc, but he gets results and that is all that matters.

[Precambrian]

I am really surprised at of all Pasag would start a topic with an inflammatory headline.

Surely only last year, a certain Brett Lee was hailed as the best test fast bowler going around, with a career avg over 30??? I think he should be the frontrunner for the post.

As to my opinions, Manee and Chaminda_oo have echoed them above.

[pasag]

Hard to say Lee was the undisputed best fast bowler in the world though, it was pretty subjective and there wasn't a clear leader like there is now.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by pasag

When was the last time we had such an 'ordinary' (comparatively of course) best fast bowler? It's pretty clear he is the best and no one would dispute he's a superb player but is he only the best because of the lack of great bowlers going around currently? Compared to others in recent times he does come up a bit short and one wonders as well if Bond and Asif were still playing would he even have the title?

I think not rating a guy is one thing, but you definitely can't argue with the kind of stats he has currently stacked up, Bond and Asif were very talented, but one was injured half the time and the other was busy doping, so really don't know how they would be in with a shout for that title.

Steyn has done a remarkable job to pick wickets in almost every condition, yeah he is a bit ragged, but the thing i like about him is, that being a swing bowler, he isn't afraid to pitch the ball up, even if it means going for some runs, not many bowlers do that nowadays, and that is the reason why Steyn is getting a lot more wickets then them.

So the more wickets you take, the better you are considered, Johnson is a good example of this, lot of Aussie fans (including myself) were not in favour of him being in the test team, but since the Indian tour he has picked a lot of wickets, and perceptions of him that a lot of people have changed quite a lot since then.

[pasag]

Originally Posted by Precambrian

I am really surprised at of all Pasag would start a topic with an inflammatory headline.

Hardly inflammatory. The fanboys may take offense (but I don't even think there are any, tbh).

[biased indian]

he is good enough for the best of the current batsmen .....and going by the ratings, its not that his rating is near 600 (talking about ICC player ranking points), he is the best !!!!!!!!

[pasag]

Originally Posted by pup11

I think not rating a guy is one thing, but you definitely can't argue with the kind of stats he has currently stacked up, Bond and Asif were very talented, but one was injured half the time and the other was busy doping, so really don't know how they would be in with a shout for that title.

Steyn has done a remarkable job to pick wickets in almost every condition, yeah he is a bit ragged, but the thing i like about him is, that being a swing bowler, he isn't afraid to pitch the ball up, even if it means going for some runs, not many bowlers do that nowadays, and that is the reason why Steyn is getting a lot more wickets then them.

So the more wickets you take, the better you are considered, Johnson is a good example of this, lot of Aussie fans (including myself) were not in favour of him being in the test team, but since the Indian tour he has picked a lot of wickets, and perceptions of him that a lot of people have changed quite a lot since then.

Missed the point, congrats.