Ashley Mallet's 5 picks

[smash84]

haha......almost

 

[benchmark00]

Top 5 picks

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

 

[smash84]

 

[Jacknife]

He was playing for Surrey back then - in 1991 he was on TV a few times, just limited overs stuff, but on occasions he might has well have been bowling at me so clueless were some of the less skilled county batsmen - just taking that couple of years in isolation I simply don't believe there can ever have been a better pace bowler than Waqar

Agree with that, he was a absolute freak back then.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Benchmark WAG

 

[kyear2]

Greatly under rated bolwer. One of the very best ever.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Davidson had an amazing average, but also a strike rate of 62, which is high for any era, and while Wasim may have been one of the most talented fast bolwers ever, his production never mated his potential. Waqar to me was still the most feared and productive fast bolwer, he was too expensive but he took wickets, and more importantly, top order wickets which Wasim struggled to consistently do. As I said previously Trueman, Ambrose and Mcgrath would have been candidates for me, but once again it was his list and he could choose who he wanted, just surprised mainly by the Davidson pick.

Unless I remember incorrectly he also named Harvey as the best batsman he has seen, so it was skewed towards who he grew up watching. No disrespect to Neil Harvey intended.

What percentage of top order wickets did Wasim take? I know it's less than Waqar but by how much?

 

[kyear2]

I will have to look for the numbers again, but I do recall that from the top 10 or so bowlers that Wasim had by a some distance the lowest percentage of top order and the highest percentage of lower order batsmen, cant remember how far ahead of him Waqar was.

 

[kyear2]

Bowler

Total Wickets

Against 1-4 (%)

Against 5-8 (%)

Against 9-11 (%)



McGrath

563

50.1

32.3

17.6



Donald

330

49.7

31.5

18.8



Ambrose

405

47.4

33.3

19.3



Lillee

355

46.8

36.1

17.2



Imran

362

45.9

32.9

21.2



Marshall

376

44.4

38.0

17.6



Hadlee

419

44.4

36.3

19.3



Wasim

414

39.4

32.8

27.8



Murali

700

35.0

41.9

23.1



Warne

708

31.8

41.4

26.8

 

[uvelocity]

Benchmark WAG

overrated imo

 

[Dissector]

Based on that, I'm not sure he was ranking them from 1 to 5.

A fast-bowling attack of Marshall, Davidson, Akram and Lindwall would be incredible, IMO.

Two of those bowlers averaged less than 4 wickets per test which is a bit on the low side. Not saying they weren't all great bowlers but perhaps that attack would struggle to take 20 wickets consistently. I think an attack of Hadlee, Imran, McGrath and Ambrose is clearly better.

 

[kyear2]

WPM can be misleading if you are part of a great attack. Marshall and Mcgrath to me though just stand out above all other fast bowlers, eapecially when one looks at s/r, average, percentage of top vs lower order wks taken and above all they were winners and were succesfull every where.

 

[watson]

Two of those bowlers averaged less than 4 wickets per test which is a bit on the low side. Not saying they weren't all great bowlers but perhaps that attack would struggle to take 20 wickets consistently. I think an attack of Hadlee, Imran, McGrath and Ambrose is clearly better.

Not clearly better. You'd have to give a medal and a knighthood to any batsman skillful and lucky enough to score a century against EITHER set of bowlers.

 

[Burgey]

Two of those bowlers averaged less than 4 wickets per test which is a bit on the low side. Not saying they weren't all great bowlers but perhaps that attack would struggle to take 20 wickets consistently. I think an attack of Hadlee, Imran, McGrath and Ambrose is clearly better.

Hasn't Lillee got as good or higher wpm average than most anyone?

 

[Dissector]

Hasn't Lillee got as good or higher wpm average than most anyone?

Lillee had a high wpm, around the same as Hadlee at 5 but he isn't one of the four bowlers mentioned in the quote above. Not saying wpm is a conclusive stat but I would hesitate to classify someone with a wpm well below 4 as belonging to the very highest class of bowler.

 

[smash84]

yep....that is something that puzzles me about Miller

his average is awesome.....SR is pretty decent....but why is his wpm so low?

 

[kyear2]

He bowled in short, but effective bursts. Back then the new ball was every 55 overs and so he was kept fresh for new ball bursts and also while he played for Australia he was always part of a good balabced attack so the work load was always shared. Also lets not forget he was also an upper order batsman so that too may have affected the amount of overs he bowled.

 

[Debris]

He bowled in short, but effective bursts. Back then the new ball was every 55 overs and so he was kept fresh for new ball bursts and also while he played for Australia he was always part of a good balabced attack so the work load was always shared. Also lets not forget he was also an upper order batsman so that too may have affected the amount of overs he bowled.

And he probably couldn't be bothered to have a bowl if others were getting the job done. At least, that is his reputation.

 

[Teja.]

He was playing for Surrey back then - in 1991 he was on TV a few times, just limited overs stuff, but on occasions he might has well have been bowling at me so clueless were some of the less skilled county batsmen - just taking that couple of years in isolation I simply don't believe there can ever have been a better pace bowler than Waqar

I'll add to this that he was that good for a full five years from 1990-1994. Just immense.

 

[Jager]

He bowled in short, but effective bursts. Back then the new ball was every 55 overs and so he was kept fresh for new ball bursts and also while he played for Australia he was always part of a good balabced attack so the work load was always shared. Also lets not forget he was also an upper order batsman so that too may have affected the amount of overs he bowled.

That and the fact he had a damaged back from a wartime emergency landing. There were games where he didn't bowl and all and others where he only bowled a few overs - his batting was still good enough to get him in the side even if he couldn't bowl.