The bowler of the 90s and 00s

[OverratedSanity]

Purely for the thrill of watching them bowl, I'd have gone for Donald and Waqar .

 

[smash84]

Purely for watching on skill it would be Wasim for me.

 

[kyear2]

Admittedly I only voted for Ambrose because I knew McGrath would dominate the poll anyway. He really was amazing. I don't think I've ever seen a bowler who was never ever mediocre. He was almost always a threat... Even guys like Ambrose had stretches where they'd look ineffective and would resort to containing and even be hit around a*bit. McGrath was just always good, no matter what the situation, no matter what the conditions.

That said, I really believe that the fact that Ambrose, Donald, etc. retired early in the 2000s helped his legacy a lot and kind of artificially inflates how good he was compared to them.

Still has a case for being the best quick ever, mind. And any top 10 of all time fast bowlers should imo begin with 1.Marshall 2.McGrath

Brilliant post from start to finish.

Ambrose was a bit defensive at times, especially at home, but he also had to sometimes too often contend with some roads we produced to protect that fragile batting line from the late '90's on. He was ridiculously accurate though, as was McGrath.

But yea. Marshall, McGrath, then the rest. They did manage to separate themselves from the pack IMHO. Steyn is charging though and Ambrose and Donald right there as well.

Ambrose and then Murali/Warne/McGrath.

Every time i watch footage of Ambrose, he scares the **** out of me. Maybe doesn't have numbers quite as good as McGrath, but anyone who rates McGrath as clearly better is kidding themselves.

McGrath was better, but wasn't a great gap by any measure.

 

[Jassy]

In terms of record Steyn is already in the top 5. Regardless of what happens I don't think that will change too much. On criteria like ''skill'' and ''completeness'' (as a bowler, not of his record) maybe there will always be a murmur or two about him vs lefties and or him not being able to bowl the inswinger and in a comparison with say Wasim Akram, he might be rated a little lower because of that. Not that I think Steyn isn't a complete bowler...greatest post McGrath for me..quite easily. He also scored more runs than Rohit Sharma in that series so that is a plus as well (and ofc that sledge!)

 

[cnerd123]

Hmm...I'm going for Murali and Warne. They (and Kumble) revived spin bowling again after decades of attacks built around wicket-taking fast bowlers and containing spinners, and it is going to be a very long time till another spinner as good as them emerges.

The 90s and 00s should be known as the decades of Spin. When's the last time the two best spinners of all time operate together in the same era?

 

[ImpatientLime]

Ambrose and Murali.

McGrath a close third. He was immense, but ever so slightly inferior to Curtly for mine. That nasty bounce that Curtly could get off a good length was just unplayable.

 

[watson]

As far as fast bowlers go it's tie between Ambrose and McGrath.

The only (minor) blemishes that standout are Ambrose's record against India, and McGrath's record against South Africa.

Ambrose V India
Tests = 9 (all in the WI)
Wickets = 15
Ave = 38
SR = 99

McGrath V South Africa
Tests = 17
Wickets = 57
Ave = 27
SR = 73

 

[Jassy]

Wouldn't really call 27 a blemish myself, 38 is definitely a blemish though.

EDIT : Just looked at McGrath's record after a long time. How ****** good is that? Such a champion. His worst average vs a team is 27 and his worst average in a country is 31..and once you club UAE/Pak together (as you really should) it becomes 22.8. Unreal record especially if you factor that longevity.

 

[bagapath]

When's the last time the two best spinners of all time operate together in the same era?

1930s. And they played for the same team as well. O'reilley-Grimmett combo must be the greatest spin combo ever to have actually taken the field until Warne and Murali faced off each other in the 90s and 00s.

 

[cnerd123]

I was waiting till someone brought that up

60 years still a long time. And to think these two (and Kumble/Bhajji/McGill) were following the eras of so many great quick bowlers, pretty revolutionary and unlikely.

 

[OverratedSanity]

McGrath a close third. He was immense, but ever so slightly inferior to Curtly for mine. That nasty bounce that Curtly could get off a good length was just unplayable.

McGrath's length and lift was really awkward too tbh.

 

[OverratedSanity]

McGrath's length and lift was really awkward too tbh.

In hindsight, not as awkward as this post sounds.

 

[ImpatientLime]

I think that if McGrath hadn't stood on that ball at Edgbaston in 2005 we'd have won that test, and probably that series.

I think that series showed how important McGrath was to Australia. The two tests that England won were the two that McGrath missed thru injury. And in spite of how immense Warne was in that series, it wasn't enough.

It was great for world cricket for England to win that series, but the series really showed how McGrath was the difference between Australia and the other teams of his time.

Hmmmmm, however in the other two tests he played in that series, Australia were comprehensively outplayed at OT and only survived by the skin of their teeth due to one of the all time great rearguard knocks by Ponting. Then at the Oval McGrath and his fellow bowlers were smacked out of the game by a rampant Pietersen.

Would he of made a difference? Of course. Would he of made the difference? I'm not so sure.

 

[simonlee48]

Purely for watching on skill it would be Wasim for me.

By some margin. Was joy to watch. Dude had me tuned in entire 90s to watch many Pakistani matches.

 

[smash84]

By some margin. Was joy to watch. Dude had me tuned in entire 90s to watch many Pakistani matches.

Yeah. I do think that one of the reason that wasim is so highly rated by pundits and peers alike was his skill with the ball. It didn't always translate into wickets because so many times he just seemed to conjure deliveries that would be too good for the batsman to get anywhere near. it didn't translate into wickets but it was great theatre, which is what I suppose many yearn for in international sports.

 

[harsh.ag]

1930s. And they played for the same team as well. O'reilley-Grimmett combo must be the greatest spin combo ever to have actually taken the field until Warne and Murali faced off each other in the 90s and 00s.

O'Reilly - Grimmett the best spin combo to take the field for the same team? Or do Warne - MacGill run them down? Laker - Lock in their too. I would say:

1) O'Reilly-Grimmett
2) Laker-Lock
3) Prasanna-Chandra-Bedi
4) Warne-MacGill
5) Kumble-Harbhajan
6) Saqlain-Mushtaq (Ahmed)
7) Gupte-Mankad
8) Ramadhin-Valentine

Barnes-Rhodes played 24 games together, but Rhodes was acting in a primarily batting role at that point, and took just 33 wickets in those 24 games. Not stellar by any stretch of the imagination

Barnes-Blythe played just 4 games together, but were awesome in that!

 

[simonlee48]

Yeah. I do think that one of the reason that wasim is so highly rated by pundits and peers alike was his skill with the ball. It didn't always translate into wickets because so many times he just seemed to conjure deliveries that would be too good for the batsman to get anywhere near. it didn't translate into wickets but it was great theatre, which is what I suppose many yearn for in international sports.

Yah, I don't recall any other bowler putting so many unplayable deliveries of different styles. Most great bowlers have 1-2 variety of unplayable deliveries.

 

[viriya]

O'Reilly - Grimmett the best spin combo to take the field for the same team? Or do Warne - MacGill run them down? Laker - Lock in their too. I would say:

1) O'Reilly-Grimmett
2) Laker-Lock
3) Prasanna-Chandra-Bedi
4) Warne-MacGill
5) Kumble-Harbhajan
6) Saqlain-Mushtaq (Ahmed)
7) Gupte-Mankad
8) Ramadhin-Valentine

Barnes-Rhodes played 24 games together, but Rhodes was acting in a primarily batting role at that point, and took just 33 wickets in those 24 games. Not stellar by any stretch of the imagination

Barnes-Blythe played just 4 games together, but were awesome in that!

I think it's O'Reilly-Grimmett then Kumble-Harbhajan (before Bhajji started bowling trash)... I wouldn't consider Barnes to be a spin bowler..

 

[harsh.ag]

I think it's O'Reilly-Grimmett then Kumble-Harbhajan (before Bhajji started bowling trash)... I wouldn't consider Barnes to be a spin bowler..

If you consider O'Reilly to be a spin bowler, then you should consider Barnes as one too Most contemporary accounts point to this.

 

[viriya]

If you consider O'Reilly to be a spin bowler, then you should consider Barnes as one too Most contemporary accounts point to this.

afaik O'Reilly was a leg-spinner and Barnes bowled "medium-pace-all-sorts"?