Philander is he better than Steyn?
 

The 2 best fast bowlers in the world are duelling for the number 1 position. For a long time Steyn has comfortably been the best fast bowler in the world, performing in nearly all conditions over many years.

When Vernon Philander came into the South African team I had no thought at that time that he had the potential to rival Steyn even though his first class numbers were impressive. His immediate success drew me to watching him, and since then I have made sure I kept track of him, and very quickly he has become my favourite bowler to watch, an artist with ball in hand.

The question I'm putting out to the forum is is Philander currently a better bowler than Steyn, having outbowled him in most of their series together? Or is Philander just a better bowler than Steyn in helpful conditions, but has yet to be fully tested around the world on the subcontinent etc?

His record is mind blowing and in my view we could be seeing a player who could become an all time great.

I called this early and said in response to someone questioning whether he was a flash in a pan after first couple of Tests that he was the real thing and was already one of the three or four best bowlers in the world before he even made his debut. I think they're on roughly the same level; Philander has the slight edge in helpful conditions with slightly greater accuracy and seam movement both ways that is incredibly difficult for batsmen to read, but Steyn has the extra pace, amazing shape on the outswinger and reverse in less helpful conditions. Both will end up as comfortably ATG; Steyn will have more wickets because started earlier but Philander will have a lower average because he came in to Tests at his absolute peak and only once he had mastered all aspects of bowling. Anyone who still thinks Philander will be "found out" in any conditions to be encountered on this earth must be smoking something powerful.

Didn't do too well in Aus. Averages 50

Hasn't faced any decent opposition yet. Overated imo.

Put him in the New Zealand team and then see how he does

Also, claiming he was one of the best bowlers in the world prior to his debut is also completely ridiculous.

No

I'd like to see him do well for a longer period, against a wider variety of opposition and in a wider variety of conditions before I'd rank him above Steyn.

You must really hate him. Why would you wish that on anyone?

I remember people saying similar things about Tim Southee tbh.

Does Southee have around 70 wickets at 17? Has anyone in the last 50 years taken their first 50 wickets at 17?

From 1980 to 1988 Imran played 44 matches, scored nearly 2000 runs at 40, took 216 wickets at 17.52. That's near enough Philander. He also has the third highest ICC rating after Barnes and Lohmann. Philander hasn't come close.

Philander has been excellent and if you want to prove yourself as a batsman no better place than RSA against Philander. However he has got nothing on Steyn. What Steyn has done in this batting friendly era, no one has been able to match yet. He is already an ATG in my books.

Philander has started out in his peak. There are so many other great players who could have been greater if they had started or played only during their peaks. Imran for one as highlighted above, Botham, Waqar, etc. The truth is Philander wasn't good enough before he was 27 to enter the RSA team .

But we can't rule out that it is just a big purple patch.

He's a very good bowler but he has feasted on a lot of 'tards at home. It's a bit early to say if he will be as good as Steyn IMO.