kyear2
Cricketer Of The Year
Quite possibly and along with Imran and Wasim the best of the old ball fast bowlers, though for obviously different reasons.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Where does Ambrose stand amongst the great fast bowlers of west indies?
- Thread starter sumantra
- Start date
watson
Banned
I reckon that Garner's stat's were even better when he took the new ball. But I'll have to double-check my memory.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Best fast bowler I've ever seen. Among West Indians all time, just like everyone else, I'd place him at 2, behind Marshall.
There was just something awesome about watching him bowl... That ***y wrist jiggle before delivery and the fist pumping celebration were just embedded into my brain when I watched him bowl. Could tear through lineups violently on his day, and those days weren't that rare
Probably love him even more because he never seemed to do all that well against us, unlike McGrath, Donald and others in the 90s. It almost felt like was thinking "I could rip you guys apart, but I'm just not in the mood ". Seemed completely disinterested really
There was just something awesome about watching him bowl... That ***y wrist jiggle before delivery and the fist pumping celebration were just embedded into my brain when I watched him bowl. Could tear through lineups violently on his day, and those days weren't that rare
Probably love him even more because he never seemed to do all that well against us, unlike McGrath, Donald and others in the 90s. It almost felt like was thinking "I could rip you guys apart, but I'm just not in the mood ". Seemed completely disinterested really
Last edited:
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Curtly had a reputation as having the longest bat (and I actually mean bat here) in world cricket.
Countering the major opinion, I'd probably go for Ambrose here. Marshall was effective but not that deadly after he lost some speed post 1987, Ambrose had better efficiency than Marshall considering the fact that he started playing professional cricket late at 26 and just loses to Marshall by 0.05 in bowling averages.
Last edited:
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Rubbish. How is the age at which they started of any relevance whatsoever?
Imo, Marshall strike rate really wets him apart... Such an amazing strike rate with the lowest Average fir anyone with 300 plus wickets and the fact that he was brilliant against pretty much everyone anywhere he played puts him right at the top. And who can forget "Marshall law"? Best headline ever
Lol, calm your ******. Age does matter (ask Donald), Ambrose was menacing in 1989, he could have have had way more wickets at a better strike rate had he played 4 years earlier. Marshall retired by the time he was 33 and he had lost a good deal of sting, Ambrose still caused problems when he was 38. Longevity battle won by Amby.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Firstly, Best. Typo. Ever. I'm proud of that one
Coming to your argument...
Meh. Works both ways. Maybe if Ambrose had debuted as a raw 19 year old like Marshall did, he might not have been ready like many other great players. Probably could have taken a beating, who knows? I'd say he may have benefited from debuting slightly late when he'd already developed more than the average debutant fast bowler (like Philander today) And are you saying Ambrose didn't lose a bit of his sting at 38? He most definitely lost a bit if pace like all other bowlers but, great fast bowler that he is, he still got wickets just as effectively. It's not a negative at all , just shows their adaptability. One thing Ambrose definitely has over Marshall is that I think he bowled to much higher quality batting. Marshall tore up some quite dire batting lineups on his career... Of course he did will against the good ones too, but the overall quality was better in Ambrose ' s time
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
No love for Patterson "KFC Gold Card" Thompson?
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
.... nor, surprisingly, for Daren Powell
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Reached this blog when searching for "Marshall Law": Random Thoughts ... Random Musings ... Blog about Nothing: Marshall in the middle
kyear2
Cricketer Of The Year
Lovely article, nice perspective to see how Maco was seen by the other side.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah kyear has it nutted here, I reckon. With his tail up, Ambrose was all over you but was a less probing than McG if conditions weren't to his liking/he didn't feel like it.
In terms of the quicks, good lord we're talking about so many greats in a fairly short period of time. My personal take is that where you put them, Marshall aside, depended on conditions. Even then it's bloody close.
In terms of the quicks, good lord we're talking about so many greats in a fairly short period of time. My personal take is that where you put them, Marshall aside, depended on conditions. Even then it's bloody close.
This is very true.