Dale Steyn among the top three pacers of all time, says Waqar Younis

[kiwiviktor81]

Hard to compare Steyn to McGrath because they're different kinds of bowlers. Easier to compare Steyn to Akram. I think Steyn is as good as Akram. Perhaps doesn't quite have the arsenal of deliveries Wasim had but is probably more consistent.

 

[kyear2]

Huge call from Waqar! I'd have at least the following well ahead of him (no particular order):

1) Hadlee
2) Marshall
3) Ambrose
4) McGrath
5) Akram
6) Pollock
7) Lillee

Pollock?

Really?

 

[CricAddict]

McGrath/Donald/Akram higher than Steyn for me. Have never rated Steyn as highly as some of the others. I really like how he gives it his all in his deliveries. I can't explain it. It's just that he is lethal at times but his deliveries, when he is not as lethal don't come at the batsmen like Donald's. Donald was the aggressive, real deal for me. In the 90s, he had a strike rate of 47 or so. That's unbelievable. Waqar had it for a period of time but not sustained through the career. Donald has a bad record v Australia in Australia. Big deal. Steyn has a similarly poor record v Australia in Australia and an over all poor record v England which have been one of the stronger test teams of the last decade or so. Donald averages 16 in India in a period when India were very impressive at home.

You have said exactly what I wanted to say.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Steyn vs India has been better than Donald and McGrath ever were. He destroyed us 3-4 times in that 2008-2010 period when our top 6 was in godlike form. Donald and MCGrath did nothing quite as good.

 

[smash84]

its crazy that people are thinking that the likes of Hadlee, Lillee, Marshall, McG etc are "well ahead" of Steyn.

Steyn can do pretty much anything that these bowlers could do (well he doesn't bowl like a metronome). He can run through batting line ups pretty much anywhere in the world. He has the pace, he has the skill, he has those killer deliveries that can knock over the best of batsmen. Yeah he is definitely in contention with the best of the best and he isn't well behind anybody

 

[Chrish]

1.mcgrath
2.steyn, Lillie, Marshall
3.others

 

[honestbharani]

Loads of stats over watching crap when discussing Steyn here. Pretty obvious to anyone who has watched that he is amongst the best of the best bowlers.

 

[indiaholic]

Tbf to pratters, he didn't care to look at the match being played before criticising pitches. Don't see why he has to see Steyn bowl.

 

[Pratters]

BS. You just looked at Cricinfo's nation wise breakup didn't you?

Steyn has produced two series winning spells in Australia, at Melbourne 2008 and Perth 2012. Considering he's bowled on the flattest Australian pitches ever, that's a fine effort. And vs England, Steyn's series in 2012 was awesome. An average of 29 for that series looks merely ok, but he bowled brilliantly. He was constantly threatening, and was easily the best bowler on show in a series where Broad and Anderson got pummelled on their home turf. He was also excellent in the 09 series.

The reason his record vs England looks relatively bad is because it's skewed by his first series where he was raw and inaccurate. Ever wonder why Ambrose's record vs Pakistan is average? Because he played his debut series vs them when he was mediocre. Or why McGrath averages a mediocre by his standards 27 vs SA? That's right. First ever series he played was vs SA,where he only picked up 4 wickets in two matches. This leads to misleading conclusions about that player's overall performance vs a nation, like you're making here.

So does Donald's record in Australia. Bloke bowled well all through his career but is not rated as highly because of this. My point is exactly that though - that we have to look beyond stats. I am talking more about Donald than Steyn.

 

[Pratters]

I wish people rated Donald higher. He was amazing. However, I never find him being talked in the same breath as Wasim, Ambrose or McGrath.

 

[Stefan9]

McGrath/Donald/Akram higher than Steyn for me. Have never rated Steyn as highly as some of the others. I really like how he gives it his all in his deliveries. I can't explain it. It's just that he is lethal at times but his deliveries, when he is not as lethal don't come at the batsmen like Donald's. Donald was the aggressive, real deal for me. In the 90s, he had a strike rate of 47 or so. That's unbelievable. Waqar had it for a period of time but not sustained through the career. Donald has a bad record v Australia in Australia. Big deal. Steyn has a similarly poor record v Australia in Australia and an over all poor record v England which have been one of the stronger test teams of the last decade or so. Donald averages 16 in India in a period when India were very impressive at home.

Donald was not as smart or skillfull a bowler as Steyn. The reason why he came at the batsman at full pace all the time is because he had no other tricks in the bag. Steyn has all the tricks for swing,reverse swing to cutters,ect. Also the stats vs Aus are misleading Steyn played big parts in SA winning 2 series in Aus, Donald never did. Also Steyn record vs England looks bad because of his debut test series, his last 2 series has been much more like the Steyn we know.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I don't know how 30 wickets in 6 games @27 with a SR of 45 in Australia on flat McRoads is "poor".

 

[honestbharani]

The answer is #pratterslogic, OS...

 

[cnerd123]

BS. You just looked at Cricinfo's nation wise breakup didn't you?

Steyn has produced two series winning spells in Australia, at Melbourne 2008 and Perth 2012. Considering he's bowled on the flattest Australian pitches ever, that's a fine effort. And vs England, Steyn's series in 2012 was awesome. An average of 29 for that series looks merely ok, but he bowled brilliantly. He was constantly threatening, and was easily the best bowler on show in a series where Broad and Anderson got pummelled on their home turf. He was also excellent in the 09 series.

The reason his record vs England looks relatively bad is because it's skewed by his first series where he was raw and inaccurate. Ever wonder why Ambrose's record vs Pakistan is average? Because he played his debut series vs them when he was mediocre. Or why McGrath averages a mediocre by his standards 27 vs SA? That's right. First ever series he played was vs SA,where he only picked up 4 wickets in two matches. This leads to misleading conclusions about that player's overall performance vs a nation, like you're making here.

rekt

 

[Pratters]

I don't know how 30 wickets in 6 games @27 with a SR of 45 in Australia on flat McRoads is "poor".

Oh god. Both Donald and Steyn have 29, 30 wickets in Australia at 28.5 and 28 respectively. However, Donald is usually brushed aside while Steyn is not for his record in Australia. My point is that cannot brush aside Donald or Steyn with that. Donald has been repeatedly talked less about because of his record in Australia. The second series he played there was at the end of his career, just like you mentioned about Steyn in England. So I am not sure why you are repeatedly trying to tell me Steyn was amazing in Australia.

 

[Pratters]

Donald was not as smart or skillfull a bowler as Steyn. The reason why he came at the batsman at full pace all the time is because he had no other tricks in the bag. Steyn has all the tricks for swing,reverse swing to cutters,ect.

Taking 330 wickets at an average of 22 and a strike rate of 47 is amazing. A bowler can be more crafty, another can be less so. Donald was an out and out pace bowler and it worked for him. His balls going away from the batsmen were as good as any.

 

[The Sean]

Taking 330 wickets at an average of 330 at a strike rate of 47 is amazing.

Those stats are wrong. His strike rate was actually 330.

 

[Stefan9]

Oh god. Both Donald and Steyn have 29, 30 wickets in Australia at 28.5 and 28 respectively. However, Donald is usually brushed aside while Steyn is not for his record in Australia. My point is that cannot brush aside Donald or Steyn with that. Donald has been repeatedly talked less about because of his record in Australia. The second series he played there was at the end of his career, just like you mentioned about Steyn in England. So I am not sure why you are repeatedly trying to tell me Steyn was amazing in Australia.

The difference is Steyn bowled SA to series wins twice in Aus. When it was needed Steyn stood up for his team Donald for all his greatness never seized the moment to the extent Steyn did. That's why the big difference between the 2.

Taking 330 wickets at an average of 22 and a strike rate of 47 is amazing. A bowler can be more crafty, another can be less so. Donald was an out and out pace bowler and it worked for him. His balls going away from the batsmen were as good as any.

Decent record but not as good as Steyn. Also when Donald played international cricket the pitches had more grass on them.

 

[Debris]

BS. You just looked at Cricinfo's nation wise breakup didn't you?

Steyn has produced two series winning spells in Australia, at Melbourne 2008 and Perth 2012. Considering he's bowled on the flattest Australian pitches ever, that's a fine effort. And vs England, Steyn's series in 2012 was awesome. An average of 29 for that series looks merely ok, but he bowled brilliantly. He was constantly threatening, and was easily the best bowler on show in a series where Broad and Anderson got pummelled on their home turf. He was also excellent in the 09 series.

The reason his record vs England looks relatively bad is because it's skewed by his first series where he was raw and inaccurate. Ever wonder why Ambrose's record vs Pakistan is average? Because he played his debut series vs them when he was mediocre. Or why McGrath averages a mediocre by his standards 27 vs SA? That's right. First ever series he played was vs SA,where he only picked up 4 wickets in two matches. This leads to misleading conclusions about that player's overall performance vs a nation, like you're making here.

And then he returned to SA and bowled some absolute ****e which cost SA the return series against Australia. His best is so good but then he will deal up rubbish like that. He fits into the same category as Waqar and Johnson for me. How much you like them depends on how much you like to gamble.

 

[smash84]

And then he returned to SA and bowled some absolute ****e which cost SA the return series against Australia. His best is so good but then he will deal up rubbish like that. He fits into the same category as Waqar and Johnson for me. How much you like them depends on how much you like to gamble.

Waqar and Johnson are definitely different categories.