View Poll Results: Who was better?

Voters
62. You may not vote on this poll
  • Dennis Kieth Lillee

    33 53.23%
  • Joel Garner

    29 46.77%
Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 205

Thread: Joel Garner vs. Dennis Lillee (Tests only)

  1. #1
    Global Moderator Teja.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    z
    Posts
    6,354

    Joel Garner vs. Dennis Lillee (Tests only)

    Both Top, ATG Fast bowlers,

    Dennis Lillee
    M-70
    W-355
    Avg-23.9
    Econ.-2.75
    SR-52
    10w-7
    BBM-11/123

    Joel Garner
    M-58
    w-259
    Avg.-20.9
    Econ.-2.47
    SR-50.8
    10w-0
    BBM-9/108

  2. #2
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Voting with my patriotism hat on. DKL deserves to be considered in the top two quicks in Australia's history. Garner is in the top 4 West Indian quicks. Very even contest IMO.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    1,221
    Garner....proved himself all over the world including the subcontinent.

  4. #4
    Global Moderator Teja.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    z
    Posts
    6,354
    Garner.
    Last edited by Teja.; 26-04-2010 at 09:27 PM.


  5. #5
    JJD Heads Athlai's Avatar
    Duck Hunt Champion! Plops Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl:lsFJg/s
    Posts
    27,498
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Voting with my patriotism hat on. DKL deserves to be considered in the top two quicks in Australia's history. Garner is in the top 4 West Indian quicks. Very even contest IMO.
    West Indian quicks > Australian quicks tbh
    Direbirds FTW!

    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Wellington will win the whole thing next year. Mark my words.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I'll offer up my avatar to Athlai forever if Wellington wins the Champions League.
    President of T.I.T.S
    Tamim Is Talented Society

  6. #6
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    West Indian quicks > Australian quicks tbh
    DWTA. The reason they seem better is that the great WI quicks all came at once - Hall, Roberts, Garner, Holding, Marshall, Ambrose and finally Walsh. All of these came within (mostly) a 30 year timeframe. Australia's quicks have come one at a time for a century - Spofforth, Miller, Lindwall, Davidson, Lillee, Reid and McGrath are for the most part just as good as their WI counterparts but have come over a longer period of time.

  7. #7
    International Captain Himannv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SL
    Posts
    6,237
    Voted for Garner.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    4,793
    Garner but had Lilee not lost out on precious peak years due to World Series Cricket, he'd end up with much more wickets which would've tilted it in his favor.

  9. #9
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    Garner but had Lilee not lost out on precious peak years due to World Series Cricket, he'd end up with much more wickets which would've tilted it in his favor.
    It's a travesty that anyone would discount those years in assessing anyone's overall record.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    4,793
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    It's a travesty that anyone would discount those years in assessing anyone's overall record.
    I guess travesty is perhaps a strong word, as I believe there are genuine reasons why WSC couldn't be equated to regular test matches. But I don't wish to discuss them here.

    Also to be noted is Garner's brilliant consistency and Lilee's ability to scythe through oppositions when on song. Garner doesn't have one ten for, while Lilee has 7 which probably indicates Lilee had to shoulder more burden than Garner through his career.

  11. #11
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    I guess travesty is perhaps a strong word, as I believe there are genuine reasons why WSC couldn't be equated to regular test matches. But I don't wish to discuss them here.

    Also to be noted is Garner's brilliant consistency and Lilee's ability to scythe through oppositions when on song. Garner doesn't have one ten for, while Lilee has 7 which probably indicates Lilee had to shoulder more burden than Garner through his career.
    I have yet to hear one argument that has been in any way convincing as to why WSC should be discounted from a player's record.

    I am genuinely interested in hearing why people believe it should be discounted.

  12. #12
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    11,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    Also to be noted is Garner's brilliant consistency and Lilee's ability to scythe through oppositions when on song. Garner doesn't have one ten for, while Lilee has 7 which probably indicates Lilee had to shoulder more burden than Garner through his career.
    It was a bit difficult to get 10 in a match when you had 3 other top bowlers in the same side every game.

    Garner for me.

  13. #13
    International Coach morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dishing out broken ****ing floggings
    Posts
    11,094
    Lillee. Garner still gun though.
    5-0

    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

    Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.

  14. #14
    International Debutant Dissector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    India
    Posts
    2,255
    Lillee was unquestionably the more complete fast bowler with a bigger bag of tricks. But ultimately it's effectiveness that counts and Garner was at least as effective in a wider range of countries. Their relative performances in Pakistan is the tie-breaker for me. Garner had a pretty good series whereas Lillee had a notoriously terrible one. It's not a huge deal but both were undoubtedly great bowlers but I would give the edge to Garner.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    4,793
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    I have yet to hear one argument that has been in any way convincing as to why WSC should be discounted from a player's record.

    I am genuinely interested in hearing why people believe it should be discounted.
    There are many. Including arbitrary World XIs.

    Never mind as both have good records in World Series, Lilee has better strike rate while Garner better average.

    Further, it's also to be noted while Lilee had to shoulder much burden, his place was never really in great danger owing to lack of competition from fellow fast bowlers. That was not the case with Garner, as demonstrated by only 50 odd tests over a decade long career. It's only fair to assume had he been in any other team he'd have had much more tests than that, and probably even 400 test wickets.

Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mystery Draft 3 - Global Premier League
    By Athlai in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 712
    Last Post: 19-04-2010, 02:06 AM
  2. Mystery Draft V.2 (1989-2009)
    By Mupariwa_Magic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 492
    Last Post: 21-11-2009, 01:00 PM
  3. Dennis Lillee man handled
    By Ilovecric in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 16-11-2009, 02:17 AM
  4. Mystery Draft (ODI XI and Test XI, 79-09)
    By Athlai in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 973
    Last Post: 24-03-2009, 03:54 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •