On flat tracks give me Morkel. With some swing or seam, give me Bob.
Although that may reflect who else was in the attack. I'd guess that Morkel played most of his test career with Steyn, whereas Willis only had to share the limelight for about 4 years with Botham in his pomp.
True enough & there was Big Vern for the latter part of it too.
Also had some of the limelight taken when bowling with Rabada recently, who has not been doing to bad.
One of whom is nowhere near as good as the other 2?
Well he's a clear 3rd but about 90 matches, 300 wickets and very few five wicket hauls seems to be the criteria.
The king of 3rd seamers is no doubt Garner.
I meant archetypal rather than best, but sure.
If you're talking about a 3rd seamer, that wasn't Willis' role at all. He normally opened the bowling.
That's pretty fair. He peaked slightly too late to be signed up for WSC, and was never seen as being in the same class as the Aus/WI quicks from that era.
Other than Lillee, which Australian quicks of his era were considered to be of a higher class than Bob Willis? Obviously Thomson at his best was more lethal, but this was purely due to his incredible pace which he only maintained for a brief period. Willis probably had a wider range of skills, was more effective for longer, and ended up with significantly better stats. Honestly cannot think of any other Australian quicks of that era who could be considered in Willis' class, leave alone ahead.
You're probably right. I was thinking about Lillee and peak Thomson. Walker was very good but obviously a different type of bowler to Willis. Ditto Alderman; arguably out-bowled Willis throughout the 1981 series as a whole though. Pascoe probably not as good as Willis. Hogg was very, very good actually. Lawson there or thereabouts. Have I forgotten anyone?
