• 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.

Holding. Garner. Donald.

Holding. Garner. Donald.

  • Total voters
    25
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
For a fast bowler of Allan Donald’s style who relied a lot on pace, it’s not.
Click to expand...
another pacer who relied on pace would be Akhtar, who used to average 40 after 13 games, or Holding, who used to average 61 after 5 games, take those out and their numbers fall by multiple points. Steyn was another and he used to average 35 after 9 games. There's a skill curve for every Cricketer where they figure out their line and length and first few years being bad is very common, you'd find some guys who were monsters off the bat like Trueman and Lillee or Bumrah in recent times but being excellent from part 1 was not the status quo was back then.
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Captain
Michael Holding is very underrated imo.

He had great tours in diverse conditions(India, Australia, England and WestIndies).


Aus : 3 Tests. 24 wickets. Avg of 14.
Eng : 4 Tests. 28 wickets. Avg of 12.
WI : 4 Tests. 19 wickets. Avg of 19.
Ind : 6 Tests. 30 wickets. Avg of 22.

Many bowlers have great overall records but not sure how many had such great tours like Holding.
 
Last edited:
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
What's your argument for Trueman being better than Donald?

Willing to be persuaded.
Click to expand...
I debated Trueman extensively with Subz but I think his away record is overhated, he had one bad series in 1954 whoch was plagued with off field drama, some extremely flat Windies wickets and ATG batting. He was straight up injured in Australia in 1958-59 and wouldn't have played a single game had England not gotten packed up 0-2 after 2 games, did well considering he wasn't at 100% and how badly everything went.

his 60s away tours are valid, and he takes 41 wickets in two flat serieses in Australia and Windies, in 18 innings, averages 26, 7 games were draws and 3 games had a result and Trueman won 2 of those games for England. I just don't have an issue with his away record the same way Coronis and Luffy do, Yes I'd prefer if he had some ATG serieses away but it's completely respectable to me, he was dealt a hard deal in the 60s and did well.

A big factor for me is performance against the best batting unit, and Donald always seemed to just fade when facing Australia, mentally or physically. On the other end, Trueman seemed to get better when facing the elites from Windies, his achievements in 1957/1960/1963 are amazing, he won a series in Windies directly even though the wickets were flat. that's a pretty important criteria to me, performing against the best side.

I also think Lillee and Trueman were pioneers for modern pace bowling, very impactful, and I think they both handled their lack of pace a lot better than Donald and are perfect examples on how to deal with it.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
DrWolverine said:
For a fast bowler of Allan Donald’s style who relied a lot on pace, it’s not.
Click to expand...
He wasn't worldclass immediately when he started in cricket and peaked a bit later. So assuming he had 2-3 more years of adjustment period his stats would have been affected. Plus he played mostly at home.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johan said:
I also think Lillee and Trueman were pioneers for modern pace bowling, very impactful, and I think they both handled their lack of pace a lot better than Donald and are perfect examples on how to deal with it.
Click to expand...
This is an underestimated factor on this site and why I rank Lillee ahead of Ambrose.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
sayon basak said:
Or maybe a generally underrated player?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a double standard though.

Donald was no different in that regard to guys like Imran and Hadlee, who weren't rated that highly especially in their own era. Not purely as bowlers.

And anyone who denies that isn't being honest.

Hadlee though I've been trying to figure out the exact why behind that.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
sayon basak said:
Actually, his performance in any other country except Australia is pretty good imo. Even in Australia, he wasn't really that bad. He did have a problem vs Australia, but saying that he's not underrated would be incorrect.
Click to expand...
Yeah, dude was a monster and definitely underrated.
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Captain
kyear2 said:
Hadlee though I've been trying to figure out the exact why behind that.
Click to expand...
People remember results.
As great as Hadlee was, NZ hardly won.

He wasn’t box office like Maco.
He wasn’t express pace like Holding.
He wasn’t a genius with ball like Akram.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
All Rounders generally get underrated in their primary category, Even the Great Garfield Sobers was not seen as the greatest batsman of his time until the very end of his career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top