Ambrose v Murali v Steyn (rank in order)

[BazBall21]

Excuse me but why do people keep going on and on over this Subcon bs? Thats all of three countries. And only two wouldve been available during Ambrose's career. Fwiw, in his limited time there Ambrose did just fine. What about England, Australia, NZ, WI, RSA, etc? And especially Australia. Quite a handful of pace bowlers have done well in Asia: Marshall, Steyn, Donald, Hadlee, Walsh, etc but very very few have done great down under; the true graveyard for non Aussie fast bowlers and spinners fwiw. And Ambrose dominated there. About the only(non Aussie) bowlers I can think of who did fine there are Hadlee, Akram and Bumrah. That's it. Ambrose was outstanding home and away. Steyn too but not to the extent as Sir Curtly and Murali yeah no comment.

It isn't BS. Ambrose outside Asia is God. Definitely ahead of steyn in Australia. But on classical slow low Asian pitches, Ambrose isn't the most accomplished.

 

[Slifer]

It isn't BS. Ambrose outside Asia is God. Definitely ahead of steyn in Australia. But on classical slow low Asian pitches, Ambrose isn't the most accomplished.

He's more accomplished in Asia than Steyn is in England or Australia over a similar sample size.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Ambrose has done better in Asia than Steyn has in Australia

I don't know about that. Steyn averaged 28 in Australia on some of the roadiest roads in test history and bowled two pivotal series winning spells. Ambrose's only successful series in Asia was one where every pace bowler was putting up Sydney barnes numbers.

 

[BazBall21]

I don't know about that. Steyn averaged 28 in Australia on some of the roadiest roads in test history and bowled two pivotal series winning spells. Ambrose's only successful series in Asia was one where every pace bowler putting up Sydney barnes numbers.

Yeah I've always been Ambrose over Steyn but am increasingly skeptical about Ambrose in Asia

 

[Slifer]

I don't know about that. Steyn averaged 28 in Australia on some of the roadiest roads in test history and bowled two pivotal series winning spells. Ambrose's only successful series in Asia was one where every pace bowler putting up Sydney barnes numbers.

And Ambrose murdered Australia in 1992-93 in a series WI had no business winning. And had he not missed the 4th test in 96-97, he may well have repeated against an atg team.

Either way, Asia isn't the end almost and be all and Ambrose has done outstandingly wherever he's traveled; even more so than Dale. Anybody thinks Walsh is in Ambrose's league simply because he was outstanding in Asia?? Didn't think so.

 

[Slifer]

Yeah I've always been Ambrose over Steyn but am increasingly skeptical about Ambrose in Asia

Ambrose imo, could've gone at 25-28 in Asia striking at 60 or so given more opportunities. Then again, Steyn could've very well done the same in England but we'll never know given his numbers.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No one's arguing ambrose wasn't better than Steyn in Australia. I was responding to this :

He's more accomplished in Asia than Steyn is in England or Australia over a similar sample size.

 

[Slifer]

No one's arguing ambrose wasn't better than Steyn in Australia. I was responding to this :

Honestly, I'm just bored lol. Nothing wrong with rating Steyn over Amby.

 

[BazBall21]

Yeah Ambrose in Australia is God

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Yeah Ambrose in Australia is God

 

[shortpitched713]

Guys, stop arguing Steyn vs Ambrose! There's already a thread to play that mental checkers game.

Start playing 3d chess, and argue on Murali vs Steyn or Ambrose, etc...

 

[subshakerz]

Thats not what you said. You said Murali and Warne would be completely neutralised against an ATG lineup unless its a turner, which is frankly ridiculous.

It isn't. Against a lineup of heavy hitters, spinners are more condition dependent.

 

[subshakerz]

Excuse me but why do people keep going on and on over this Subcon bs? Thats all of three countries. And only two wouldve been available during Ambrose's career. Fwiw, in his limited time there Ambrose did just fine. What about England, Australia, NZ, WI, RSA, etc? And especially Australia. Quite a handful of pace bowlers have done well in Asia: Marshall, Steyn, Donald, Hadlee, Walsh, etc but very very few have done great down under; the true graveyard for non Aussie fast bowlers and spinners fwiw. And Ambrose dominated there. About the only(non Aussie) bowlers I can think of who did fine there are Hadlee, Akram and Bumrah. That's it. Ambrose was outstanding home and away. Steyn too but not to the extent as Sir Curtly and Murali yeah no comment.

Marshall, Garner and Holding did well in Australia. Imran if you exclude the 1990 series in which he played as a bat mainly took 41 wickets in 8 tests at 27 in Australia which is pretty good.

I wouldn't call Australia a graveyard for pacers by any stretch, at least before 2000.

SC is just a different test of bowling skills but both performing in both is important.

 

[Slifer]

Marshall, Garner and Holding did well in Australia. Imran if you exclude the 1990 series in which he played as a bat mainly took 41 wickets in 8 tests at 27 in Australia which is pretty good.

I wouldn't call Australia a graveyard for pacers by any stretch, at least before 2000.

SC is just a different test of bowling skills but both performing in both is important.

Waqar, Donald, Pollock, Walsh etc had poor records down under relative to how they did in Asia. Either way, I know for a fact that you would never rate Walsh over Curtly and Walsh was amazing in Asia and both played in the same team. As a matter of fact, except for Australia Walsh was outstanding everywhere. But no one ranks him above Curtly because passed every away challenge presented to him. His atrocious series in Pakistan in '97 was an aberration afaic, and imo isn't reflection of how he'd do not just in Asia but on unhelpful wickets. I'll give you an example 6th test Wisden series, England scores 450 and 200-4, WI themselves make nearly 700 runs. Ambrose takes 7 wkts and concedes 131 runs . Obviously, there were other times he went missing but those were few and far between.

I did a deeper dive and over the course of his career, Ambrose played in 29 different tests grounds all over the world. Of those only 4 did he struggle ie average 30. The ones he succeededed on, all couldn't have been green tops.

 

[subshakerz]

Waqar, Donald, Pollock, Walsh etc had poor records down under relative to how they did in Asia. Either way, I know for a fact that you would never rate Walsh over Curtly and Walsh was amazing in Asia and both played in the same team. As a matter of fact, except for Australia Walsh was outstanding everywhere. But no one ranks him above Curtly because passed every away challenge presented to him. His atrocious series in Pakistan in '97 was an aberration afaic, and imo isn't reflection of how he'd do not just in Asia but on unhelpful wickets. I'll give you an example 6th test Wisden series, England scores 450 and 200-4, WI themselves make nearly 700 runs. Ambrose takes 7 wkts and concedes 131 runs . Obviously, there were other times he went missing but those were few and far between.

I did a deeper dive and over the course of his career, Ambrose played in 29 different tests grounds all over the world. Of those only 4 did he struggle ie average 30. The ones he succeededed on, all couldn't have been green tops.

Good points. I don't say either Australia or SC is disposable so I wouldn't rate Ambrose below Walsh. In fact, Australia may be slightly more important to establish one's bonafides.

We don't know if Ambrose's 97 series was an aberration since he didn't play enough in SC.

My impression is that on slower, low bounce SC wickets, Ambrose would be a corridor bowler, not expensive but not as effective. Or he could still be a wickettaker. Don't know. In fact, it is hard to rate Ambrose since his career was in halfs. 94 onwards he wasn't the same dangerous bowler.

 

[Bolo.]

Waqar, Donald, Pollock, Walsh etc had poor records down under relative to how they did in Asia. Either way, I know for a fact that you would never rate Walsh over Curtly and Walsh was amazing in Asia and both played in the same team. As a matter of fact, except for Australia Walsh was outstanding everywhere. But no one ranks him above Curtly because passed every away challenge presented to him. His atrocious series in Pakistan in '97 was an aberration afaic, and imo isn't reflection of how he'd do not just in Asia but on unhelpful wickets. I'll give you an example 6th test Wisden series, England scores 450 and 200-4, WI themselves make nearly 700 runs. Ambrose takes 7 wkts and concedes 131 runs . Obviously, there were other times he went missing but those were few and far between.

I did a deeper dive and over the course of his career, Ambrose played in 29 different tests grounds all over the world. Of those only 4 did he struggle ie average 30. The ones he succeededed on, all couldn't have been green tops.

You are bolding a line about the 90s. Donald and Pollock did ridiculously well in Aus in the 90s before going **** up in the 2000s. Waqar was probably the quick least suited to bowling in Aus ever. Walsh, IDK. Just sucked for some reason. You definitely would expect some quality quicks to fail against quality bats though.

 

[subshakerz]

You are bolding a line about the 90s. Donald and Pollock did ridiculously well in Aus in the 90s before going **** up in the 2000s. Waqar was probably the quick least suited to bowling in Aus ever. Walsh, IDK. Just sucked for some reason. You definitely would expect some quality quicks to fail against quality bats though.

Bishop also did well in Australia in the 90s.

Yes so the idea is that worldclass fast bowler before the 2000s was expected to succeed in Australian conditions. Ambrose and Hadlee did better than all of them.

 

[Coronis]

It isn't. Against a lineup of heavy hitters, spinners are more condition dependent.

In general, perhaps. When it comes to Warne and Murali, no not really.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Steyn first. Terrific matchwinner across all conditions.

Between Ambrose and Murali it is tough. However, it is hard to ignore Murali's failures against the best bats of his time. Ambrose, on the other hand, was the best pacer of a pace-heavy era and was never really conquered the way Murali was.

In the end, if I am a captain picking a team for all conditions, I would prefer an Ambrose who can set the pace and control. I can't imagine Murali commanding the respect of an ATG batting lineup the way Ambrose steaming in would.

When did this happen? I recall you were staunchly Ambrose > Steyn

 

[subshakerz]

When did this happen? I recall you were staunchly Ambrose > Steyn

In the Ambrose vs Steyn thread, I changed my opinion after realising that Ambrose isn't really proven as much as in the SC.