Which team currently has the best fast bowling attack?

[Burgey]

I would say having 4 legitimate bowling options almost always outweighs having 3.

England used to pick four seam bowling options a lot in the 90s but it funnily never seemed to outweigh an attack of McGrath, Gillespie and N E One-Else.

If SA has Steyn in the McGrath role and Philander in the Gillespie role with Rabada or Morkel as the third, then it's a better pace attack across all conditions than England's. Mostly because Steyn is the great bowler of his generation and Philander gives very little away.

In the 80s Australia would always try, at least once per series, often twice, to pick four quicks against the Windies. It didn't work, because they had better bowlers. Same applies here. Just because you throw Stokes in to send down some bowling machine-like seam stuff (and I'm a fan of his fwiw) doesn't make an attack with him in it better cos 4 always > 3.

 

[Adders]

Pace bowlers only last 2 years
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I reckon that looks about right. Pretty close between SA and Eng.

The Aussies for me are hard to judge right now, purely because it's hard to give Starc a proper rating in red ball cricket. If recent performances are anything to go by the bloke is going to be a phenomenal test bowler and IMO he's got all the tools to be an ATG........but it's too early to be ranking him higher than Broad or Anderson even if in a year or so he might be comfortably.

 

[Burgey]

I reckon that looks about right. Pretty close between SA and Eng.

The Aussies for me are hard to judge right now, purely because it's hard to give Starc a proper rating in red ball cricket. If recent performances are anything to go by the bloke is going to be a phenomenal test bowler and IMO he's got all the tools to be an ATG........but it's too early to be ranking him higher than Broad or Anderson even if in a year or so he might be comfortably.

Agree with this re Starc. Can't tell if he's going to stay on the park for a meaningful enough period to fulfill his crazy potential. Hazelwood is solid in most conditions and doesn't give a lot away even if he's not taking wickets. It's pretty unclear who the third quick is going to be these days - could be Siddle, Bird, Patto or various others I can't think of ATM but they're usually injured tbh.

 

[StephenZA]

In the last 2 years
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo


Pace bowlers only last 2 years
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I`m actually surprised SA are top of that list, what with Philander and Steyn basically being out of the Indian and English series and SA having its worst year in a long time 2015. Shows our second string are not bad either (heck we played Viljoen who I don`t rate at all). Also indicates how much our batting sucked when we lost Kallis and Smith.....

 

[Zinzan]

Clearly SA, but if Australia could get all theirs fit and firing it could be different. A 4-prong attack of Starc, Pattinson, Cummings & Hazelwood all rearing to go ...


My top 4 rankings

SA>Aust>England>Pakistan.... (NZ push Pakistan close because of Wagner).

 

[TheJediBrah]

In the last 2 years
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo


Pace bowlers only last 2 years
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I wonder if people take conditions into account with this as well. As many seem more than happy to discount Australia's recent batsmen's stats as they supposedly play too much on roads, logic dictates the opposite is true for Australian bowlers. Never really see it mentioned though.

 

[fredfertang]

This is CW so there should be an irrelevant final option - could a mod add India to the poll?

 

[Prince EWS]

South Africa definitely have the best fast bowlers; I can't really see a good argument against that. Whether you look at each team's best three or each team's best four I think they're clearly even if not massively ahead.

The best fast bowling attack is perhaps a more interesting question because Australia and England both have an extra fast bowler in their top seven which South Africa don't, but I think I'd still roll with SA.

 

[morgieb]

This is CW so there should be an irrelevant final option - could a mod add India to the poll?

Pakistan fit the bill imo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

People are underestimating how much having a genuine ATG quick in the attack changes things. One bowler like that just lifts the whole bowling attack an extra level.

SA for me. Obviously provided they have Steyn fit.

 

[Slifer]

awta. See nz from the 80s when they had sir Richard.

 

[GotSpin]

Obviously SA with Steyn.

Australia hard to judge because there's a continual rotation of injured bowlers.

 

[Zinzan]

Obviously SA with Steyn.

Australia hard to judge because there's a continual rotation of injured bowlers.

Bloody handy ones though...bastards.

 

[Adders]

Clearly SA, but if Australia could get all theirs fit and firing it could be different. A 4-prong attack of Starc, Pattinson, Cummings & Hazelwood all rearing to go ...


My top 4 rankings

SA>Aust>England>Pakistan.... (NZ push Pakistan close because of Wagner).

Sorry, but I fail to see how you can rank Australias fast bowling attack ahead of Englands when you are talking hypothetically.......hell the 4 bowlers you've named have never taken the field together and god knows when Pattinson and Cummings last played test cricket.

I wont argue that they do have the potential there to field an attack that "could" be awesome, put putting them ahead of a proven outfit is a nonsense imo. And the thing is it seems like years we've been saying this about the Aussies....."if they're all fit and firing" etc...........well when they are, then lets rate them.

 

[morgieb]

Sorry, but I fail to see how you can rank Australias fast bowling attack ahead of Englands when you are talking hypothetically.......hell the 4 bowlers you've named have never taken the field together and god knows when Pattinson and Cummings last played test cricket.

I wont argue that they do have the potential there to field an attack that "could" be awesome, put putting them ahead of a proven outfit is a nonsense imo. And the thing is it seems like years we've been saying this about the Aussies....."if they're all fit and firing" etc...........well when they are, then lets rate them.

Patto has actually played this year.

 

[Zinzan]

Sorry, but I fail to see how you can rank Australias fast bowling attack ahead of Englands when you are talking hypothetically.......hell the 4 bowlers you've named have never taken the field together and god knows when Pattinson and Cummings last played test cricket.

I wont argue that they do have the potential there to field an attack that "could" be awesome, put putting them ahead of a proven outfit is a nonsense imo. And the thing is it seems like years we've been saying this about the Aussies....."if they're all fit and firing" etc...........well when they are, then lets rate them.

Last saw Pattinson against NZ earlier this year, not sure if he's injured again. Australia and England are close, but I do rate Australia ahead as they don't lose much even if 1 or 2 are injured. I'm sure my perception is also influenced by seeing NZ and England attacks appear very even in that 2 test drawn series in England last year, only to see Australia's seem considerably better than ours in the home and away series afterwards (admittedly NZ didn't bowl as well after Boult's injury in Eng).

Australia still outdid ours even with injuries and the mid series retirement of Johnson. Australia really don't lose that much from injuries, there's not that much between their top 5 or so pacers.

 

[Adders]

Patto has actually played this year.

Yeah, I forgot he played against the Kiwis. Is he injured again or didn't make the squad for SL??

 

[GotSpin]

Sorry, but I fail to see how you can rank Australias fast bowling attack ahead of Englands when you are talking hypothetically.......hell the 4 bowlers you've named have never taken the field together and god knows when Pattinson and Cummings last played test cricket.

I wont argue that they do have the potential there to field an attack that "could" be awesome, put putting them ahead of a proven outfit is a nonsense imo. And the thing is it seems like years we've been saying this about the Aussies....."if they're all fit and firing" etc...........well when they are, then lets rate them.

Johnson and Harris retired and we barely missed a beat.

 

[morgieb]

Yeah, I forgot he played against the Kiwis. Is he injured again or didn't make the squad for SL??

Yeah injured again. Not sure if he'll be match fit by the South Africa series.

 

[Zinzan]

Johnson and Harris retired and we barely missed a beat.

Yeah this...saying nothing of the fact England pacers couldn't get their side home against Pakistan in their own conditions, whereas I'll be extremely surprised if Australian pacers aren't a huge factor in ensuring a series win vs. Pakistan at home in the upcoming series. Time will tell...