Most exciting bowler to watch

[Xuhaib]

Waqar to Hick was even more brutal short and merciless, actually feel sorry for Hick the most hyped young batsman in the world and he gets fed to 2 all time great fast bowlers bowling at their prime.Never fully recovered from it.

 

[aussie]

Yea Hick played in the wrong era. Was good enough to average 40+ & be a regular in the ENG team, especially when you see Cook, Bell, Collingwood benefiting & getting the chase to revive their test careers in this FTB era.

 

[AaronK]

Alan Donald, Shoaib Akhtar, Shane Warne, Muralitheran, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Shane Bond..
too bad not many playing right now.. I can think of Aamir but his career is over as he is a match fixer..

 

[honestbharani]

Loads or great entries above.

I'll give a different take. Excitement in terms of a Roman Colleseum sense was watching guns and their bunnies. You could see these bowlers licking their lips when these batsmen came to the crease.
Hadlee bowling to Dean Jones.
McGrath bowling to Atherton/Lara.
Any of the 1980s Windies quicks bowling to my Aussies.
Harbajhan bowling to Ponting.
Warne bowling to Cullinan.

There are probably more.

McGrath to Lara is the biggest myth in cricket.. Lara averaged 50+ against him.. McGrath himself mentioned it has been an even contest between them.

 

[honestbharani]

McGrath to Lara is the biggest myth in cricket.. Lara averaged 50+ against him.. McGrath himself mentioned it has been an even contest between them.

Ambrose, McGrath etc. were great to watch but somehow it was more of a feeling of inevitability with them as the batsmen could never get away. Warne was like this but he always gave the batsman a chance to tonk him if he be good enough.. That is why I feel him and Akhtar were better or more exciting to watch.

 

[NUFAN]

Ambrose and Warne closely followed by Wasim for me.

Out of players not mentioned, Steve Waugh was exciting particularly in ODI's early in his career

 

[honestbharani]

Ambrose and Warne closely followed by Wasim for me.

Out of players not mentioned, Steve Waugh was exciting particularly in ODI's early in his career

I always found Sachin a very exciting bowler to watch. You just never knew what he was gonna bowl next.. He had the whole array and would produce an absolute peach out of nowhere in between real lollipops..

 

[Spark]

I always found Sachin a very exciting bowler to watch. You just never knew what he was gonna bowl next.. He had the whole array and would produce an absolute peach out of nowhere in between real lollipops..

 

[smash84]

Ambrose and Warne closely followed by Wasim for me.

Out of players not mentioned, Steve Waugh was exciting particularly in ODI's early in his career

I am not sure Ambrose was as exciting. He was somewhat of a metronome. Like a McGrath. Warne and Wasim would throw so many different things at the batsmen. Very exciting to see the batsmen negotiating with those.

 

[kingkallis]

Loads or great entries above.

I'll give a different take. Excitement in terms of a Roman Colleseum sense was watching guns and their bunnies. You could see these bowlers licking their lips when these batsmen came to the crease.
Hadlee bowling to Dean Jones.
McGrath bowling to Atherton/Lara.
Any of the 1980s Windies quicks bowling to my Aussies.
Harbajhan bowling to Ponting.
Warne bowling to Cullinan.

There are probably more.

In that case,

Donald to Atherton
Waqar to Hick
Nel to Lara
Zaheer to Smith

 

[kingkallis]

I am not sure Ambrose was as exciting. He was somewhat of a metronome. Like a McGrath. Warne and Wasim would throw so many different things at the batsmen. Very exciting to see the batsmen negotiating with those.

Ambrose was not exciting??? Did you actually see him bowling?

 

[akilana]

McGrath to Lara is the biggest myth in cricket.. Lara averaged 50+ against him.. McGrath himself mentioned it has been an even contest between them.

Not sure about the average but when McGrath retired he said that Lara was the best batsman he bowled to in an interview during his retirement time.

 

[aussie]

McGrath to Lara is the biggest myth in cricket.. Lara averaged 50+ against him.. McGrath himself mentioned it has been an even contest between them.

We have had this debate before & its certainly no myth.

I'll have to check back those averages. But if you go series vs series they played againts in each forgotting about averages. McGrath won most contest:

1995 - McGrath won. He was the main reason why Lara didn't score a hundred in that series. Firstly when McGrath came around the wicket, Lara seemingly wasn't sure where his off-stump was & was consistent caught in the gully & slips alot.

Admittedly that shot past gully was a strenght of Lara & it can be argued that when Taylor, Waugh would set the fielder there, Lara would slash hard instead of patiently trying to see of McGrath. Theirfore Mcgrath turned that strenght of his into a weakness - just like how Stephen Fleming in VB Series 2002 used Shane Bond to use Martyn favourite cut shot as weakness againts him.



1996/97 - McGrath again easily.

1999 - Lara slightly. But the battle was very close although Lara scored all those runs. It wasn't a case of McGrath looking like he didn't know where to bowl to Lara. Like Murali did in the 2001 series WI vs SRI.

2000/01 - McGrath again. Although mcGrath didn't dismiss him after the first two test, Lara was better still struggled. The plan the Mcgrath developed to bowl to Lara, was utilized by the other bowlers.

2003/04 - That doesn't count. Since McGrath just came from injury post WC & was in the worst phase of his career. So this wasn't a situation of Lara @ his best vs McGrath @ his best.

2005 - Evenish. Although McGrath personally didn't dismiss him alot - and although he got 2 bad decisions in the first two tests. But like 2000/01 the other AUS bowlers kept him quiet until the brilliant dead rubber hundred, he was never dominant in that series.

 

[zaremba]

Ambrose was not exciting??? Did you actually see him bowling?

Yeah, quite. An incredible bowler to watch, and the whole "metronome" this is a complete distortion of the truth. Not that he wasn't amazingly accurate - he was - but he had a fire about him, and pace, and hostility, that made watching him a pretty bloody awesome experience. Not necessarily pleasant if he's playing against your team, but awesome all the same.

 

[aussie]

Ambrose became a metronome until the back end of his career. Probably from IND 97 - ENG 2000.

 

[Tom 1972]

Yeah, quite. An incredible bowler to watch, and the whole "metronome" this is a complete distortion of the truth. Not that he wasn't amazingly accurate - he was - but he had a fire about him, and pace, and hostility, that made watching him a pretty bloody awesome experience. Not necessarily pleasant if he's playing against your team, but awesome all the same.

Remember him Perth taking 7fer bugger all against us in the early 1990s. Hit the deck hard, sharp bounce (and Ian Bishop charging in from the other end).

 

[smash84]

Ambrose was not exciting??? Did you actually see him bowling?

Kallis, if you would bother to read my statement I said "Ambrose is not as exciting", not that he was "not exciting". There is a world of difference. Should have added IMO. And for the record, YES, I have seen Ambrose bowl.

Yeah, quite. An incredible bowler to watch, and the whole "metronome" this is a complete distortion of the truth. Not that he wasn't amazingly accurate - he was - but he had a fire about him, and pace, and hostility, that made watching him a pretty bloody awesome experience. Not necessarily pleasant if he's playing against your team, but awesome all the same.

And again he was not a metronome like a McGrath or a Hadlee but he did bowl that nagging off stump line in that corridor outside off stump quite a bit more than most other bowlers that I saw.

Ambrose became a metronome until the back end of his career. Probbaly from IND 97 - ENG 2000.

You might be right Aussie. I was able to follow Ambrose more closely from 1995 onwards so my assessment might not be very good for his overall career.

 

[Altaican]

Yeah, quite. An incredible bowler to watch, and the whole "metronome" this is a complete distortion of the truth. Not that he wasn't amazingly accurate - he was - but he had a fire about him, and pace, and hostility, that made watching him a pretty bloody awesome experience. Not necessarily pleasant if he's playing against your team, but awesome all the same.

Ambrose at his peak was one of the most hostile bowlers I have seen. He and Andy Roberts were two bowlers who just seemed to hate the very sight of a batsman. Unlike Marshall, they rarely, if ever, even smiled at the batsman. And one could invariably predict a lethal bouncer whenever (on the rare occasions) he was hit for a boundary.

His performance was stellar until his shoulder surgery in late 1994. From 1988 till mid 1994, the guy used to gobble up entire batting line-ups. Had several series where he averaged 5 WPM or better. He had only 2 bad series during this entire period (first was his debut series against Pakistan and second was home series against India in 88-89 when Marshall, Walsh and Bishop cleaned up the Indian team). Other than these couple of series, he took 207 wickets in 40 matches. He had a very good series even in the sub-continent (Pakistan) during this time.

While I do remember Gavaskar tonking a peak-Marshall all around the ground in 83-84 series in India, I can't recall a single series where someone got on top of Ambrose at his peak. Honestly, I never liked him during his peak, and often followed his matches just with the hope that some batsman would rise up to the challenge of smashing him around and putting him in his place . But Gilchrist made his Test debut only in 1999 by which Ambrose was long past his peak .

After his shoulder surgery in mid 1994, although he was always very economical, and did have occasional great performance (like at the MCG/Perth in 1995-96 series against Australia), somehow he lost the ability to run through a batting line-up consistently. He was still very good in bowling-friendly conditions, but lost the sting in other conditions. Not surprisingly he took 186 wickets in around 45-50 matches during this time.

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah, quite. An incredible bowler to watch, and the whole "metronome" this is a complete distortion of the truth. Not that he wasn't amazingly accurate - he was - but he had a fire about him, and pace, and hostility, that made watching him a pretty bloody awesome experience. Not necessarily pleasant if he's playing against your team, but awesome all the same.

This sums up my thoughts exactly.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I am not sure Ambrose was as exciting. He was somewhat of a metronome. Like a McGrath.

Geoff Lawson found Ambrose pretty exciting to face.

As for either being a 'metronome', they're two of the best fast bowlers to have ever played. I think you'll find most very good bowlers will have spent a lot of time bowling in and around off-stump for a majority of their careers.