Not IMHO, Marshall is well ahead of Ambrose and as i opined above, Ambrose is closer to Holding than Marshall.1 or 2. The difference between him and Marshall is minimal.
MarshallMarshall first, and Ambrose second is pretty easy is to work-out.
The real puzzle is where to rank Andy Roberts? He was not as fast as most of the other greats, but he was the prototype of the modern West Indian fast bowlers (ie. mixed pin-point accuracy with intimidation) and therefore deserves a lot of credit. That is, in one way or another he showed them all how it was done. So tentatively;
1. Mashall
2. Ambrose
3. Roberts
4. Holding
5. Garner
etc
Really, cast a blanket from Marshall to Walsh?You could throw a blanket over the lot of them to be honest, but I'm curious why you rate Croft better than Hall.
Marshall, Ambrose, Garner & Holding are the ones you could fit under a (biggish) blanket.Really, cast a blanket from Marshall to Walsh?
Regarding the second point, Hall should be ahead of Croft, though Croft went through a little period in the late '70's where he was out performing Garner, Holding and Ronerts.
Marshall, Ambrose, Garner & Holding are the ones you could fit under a (biggish) blanket.