• 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.

Courtney Walsh - Where does he rank?

Noble One

Noble One

International Vice-Captain
I am interested in hearing the opinions of members on West Indian great Courtney Walsh.

A workhorse of a fast-bowler who combined years of longevity with probing accuracy, terrific cutters and sometimes terrifying pace. Was a contributing member of one of the greatest line-up of fast bowlers throughout the mid to late 80's and early 90's. Then moving onto leading a two pronged attack with Ambrose for the best part of a decade.

A statistical great, his record stacks up against the greatest of all time. But when it comes to ranking the greatest bowlers of his time he barely gets a mention against the likes of Donald, Akram, McGrath, Younis etc. Walsh many would consider not even the greatest amongst West Indies quicks of his career in Walsh, Bishop, Holding, Garner, Roberts and Marshall.

So I ask, where do you rank Courtney Walsh? Is he an all time great? Is it just his statistical record that makes him worth remembering? What are your memories of great Courtney Walsh spells?


Courtney Walsh's record
Cricinfo - Players and Officials - Courtney Walsh

Youtube Tribute
YouTube - (1/2) Courtney Walsh Career Highlights
YouTube - (2/2) Courtney Walsh Career Highlights
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
I can give you the opinions of some of his peers.

Botham on Walsh

Walsh is neither the fastest bowler of all time, nor was he the best, but nobody can match his longevity. Walsh has been able to put together his remarkable record only by staying largely injury-free - he hardly ever pulls up with a niggle. He is tall and slim but he has a natural suppleness that has allowed him to keep going brilliantly.

In his early days, Walsh was the support act for the likes of Michael Holding, Malcolm Marshall and Joel Garner. . . In those days, as a rookie, he was asked to bowl into the wind or uphill, or both. But gradually as others retired, one by one, Walsh gradually became ... the joint no. 1 with Ambrose. (Their) partnership has to be rated amongst the great fast bowling duos of history. Without them West Indies would have been in an even greater mess than they found themselves in recent years. . .

Walsh always loved bowling. . . . he is a great technician who has worked out his strengths and formulated a game plan to keep the batsmen under pressure.

Walsh has basically been a seam bowler, not a swing bowler, who brings the ball down from a great height with a snap of his wrist. Although not express, he was capable of extremely hostile spells.

Walsh may be fast but he can be very slow ! Towards the end of his career he developed a devastating slower delivery which dropped like a doodlebug from the heavens. Graham Thorpe was bamboozled by it twice during the summer of 2000 proving Walsh is also a cunning, thinking bowler.​
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
We may find out soon where he ranks. From the CW rank the bowlers thread - I'm thinking Walsh will just miss out on the top 25 though..
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Longevity aside, his statistical record isn't actually as good as you seem to think. Not in the same echelon as Ambrose, Marshall or Garner, which would coincide with the widely-held opinion of him.
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Was the Windies' enforcer a lot of the time. Not afraid to rough batters up (overstepped the mark sometimes, famously sent down about a dozen bumpers to Devon Malcolm once) to allow Ambrose to play the straight man and bowl line-and-length.
 
bagapath

bagapath

International Captain
Uppercut said:
Longevity aside, his statistical record isn't actually as good as you seem to think. Not in the same echelon as Ambrose, Marshall or Garner, which would coincide with the widely-held opinion of him.
Click to expand...
among the second tier greats, he should be above willis, s.pollock, kapil, botham, vaas, akhthar and snow. but below waqar, roberts, bedser, miller, pete pollock and neil adcock.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Walsh is nowhere near being the best West Indian of them all - Marshall, Ambrose, Holding and Garner were all comfortably better than him. Bishop, Roberts and Hall better too; Croft, Daniel and Clarke were probably better as well but never got the chance to show it at Test level (Croft through his own choice for Rebel tours rather than bad selection and\or strength in depth).

Obviously, though, he was a very fine bowler between 1986/87 and 1997, and an even better one from 1997/98 to 2000.



If I was to rank the seam-bowlers I'd probably put in the top tier:
Marshall; Ambrose; Richard Hadlee; McGrath; Garner; Imran Khan; Trueman; Donald; Holding; Lindwall; Wasim Akram; Lillee; Miller.
Davidson, Adcock and Bishop were almost certainly in it as well but had slightly too short careers to really prove it as conclusively as the above did.

Then in the second tier:
Bill Johnston; Peter Pollock; Walsh; John Snow; Fazal Mahmood; Brian Statham; Monty Noble; Bob Willis; Andy Roberts; Maurice Tate.

Alec Bedser, Wesley Winfield Hall, Shaun Pollock, Ian Botham, Waqar Younis and Chaminda Vaas all had careers where they fitted in the top tier for a time but were not even good enough for the second tier for another time.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Not among the top tier of bowlers but an excellent bowler neverthless. He performed really well at the end of his career, a juncture where many a quick has struggled.
 
popepouri

popepouri

State Vice-Captain
Loved the slower ball that he developed. Even with super slo-mo, you could hardly tell the difference between this normal delivery.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pratters said:
Not among the top tier of bowlers but an excellent bowler neverthless. He performed really well at the end of his career, a juncture where many a quick has struggled.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the especially unusual thing about him. Between 1997/98 and 2001, in his 39 Tests he averaged 21.61. Personally I find it difficult to believe many will have bowled that much better over the course of a five-match series than he did in England in 2000. Relentless is too soft a word.

Whereas between 1986/87 and 1997, his average in 86 matches was 25.74. Even this is relatively meaningless, over such a long period - he had a bit of a lean trot in 1997, and just one single game out of those 86 (where he took a flabbergasting 13-55 in New Zealand) makes quite a difference.

Either way, there's no disputing that he was far better in his last 39 games than the first 86 which he played after fully establishing himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top