Best Bowling-line up that played togather

[Beleg]

and Bycott's mom.

 

[Arjun]

Pollock, De Villiers, Kallis, Donald, Klusener, Cronje?

 

[marc71178]

A bit samey...

 

[chris.hinton]

A bit samey...

Yep

 

[Richard]

A bit samey...

Which makes no difference if you're bowling good deliveries.

 

[Richard]

Pollock, De Villiers, Kallis, Donald, Klusener, Cronje?

Only trouble with that is that Fanie was past his peak by the time Donald and Pollock came together.
The attack South Africa brought to England in 1998 wasn't bad, either: Donald, Pollock, Kallis, Klusener, Cronje, Adams (and Elworthy as back-up).

 

[marc71178]

Which makes no difference if you're bowling good deliveries.

There's no spinner in that attack - how many great attacks have there been without one?

 

[Arjun]

West Indian all-pace attacks could single-handedly bowl teams out. They never picked spinners just to keep them in their team.

 

[garage flower]

Just a pet peeve, but that bowling lineup never played together. Marshall made his debut in Roberts' final series, and they never appeared side by side in a test lineup. For the best Windies lineup you'd be better off looking at Holding, Garner, Croft, Roberts from before Marshall's time.

A peeve to cross of your list mate.

I'm not going to claim this was Windies' greatest attack of the era, but I did mention the following series on a similar thread looking at all-time great attacks or teams:

West Indies v India 82/83

In the first test, appearing side by side, Roberts and Marshall took 9/100 and 5/91 respectively. I accept that neither were at their respective peaks, but they were the star bowlers over the course of the series, eclipsing Holding and Garner. Roberts took 24 wkts @ 22.7, while Mako claimed 21 @ 23.57.

EDIT: Roberts went on to tour India with Marshall and Holding, though he only played a couple of tests (with moderate success). In '84 Garner returned to obliterate a weak looking Australia in tandem with Marshall & Holding (Wayne Daniel the preferred 4th bowler, Harper providing the spin option). With Richardson having replaced Gomes to bolster a batting line-up that also included Haynes, Greenidge, Richards, Lloyd and Dujon, this must have been a team to reckon with.

 

[Richard]

There's no spinner in that attack - how many great attacks have there been without one?

Pollock, Procter, Goddard, Barlow, Trimborn, Chevalier; Holding, Garner, Daniel, Roberts, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh.
Mixtures of those lot (obviously they never all played together) had success without a spinner; in the case of the latter, for more than a decade.
Variety is not a requirement for a good attack, the ability to bowl wicket-taking deliveries and with consistent accucacy is.

 

[marc71178]

Which renders that SA attack as far from the best line-up.

 

[Richard]

It does indeed - that was merely extremely good.
But not for the reason that it has no specialist spinner.

 

[C_C]

#1 : Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft
#2 : Imran, Wasim,Waqar and Qadir
#3 : Marshall, Bishop,Ambrose and Walsh
#4 : Lindwall,Miller,O'Reiley and Johnston
#5 : Wasim,Waqar,Saqlain and Akhtar

 

[vandemataram]

I would say,

Rana, Razzak,Sami and Kaneria

 

[Arjun]

Sodhi, Salvi, Patel and whomever else Arjun thinks should lead India to victory against Pakistan

Maybe RP Singh, Gagandeep, Kumble, Powar and Sehwag, but what a pity....they NEVER played together!

 

[Arjun]

For India, the best may be Kapil, Binny, Madan Lal, Amarnath and the spinner- at least they won a World Cup, or the famous spin quartet.

 

[Zinzan]

err the current aussie bowling attack is better than the one with b.lee.

Predictable reply by you TEC....yawn yawn

 

[Jono]

Which renders that SA attack as far from the best line-up.

You didn't say that though, your reason was a spinner.

I am a great fan of spin bowling, but I got extremely irritated with my captain a few years back when he left out a quality pacer in my team for a spinner just to have one in the team. It wasn't required at all. The spinner was no world beater, and this pacer was a much better bowler, whether they bowl a different style isn't really relevant.

This idea of pedestrian attacks with no pace, or no variety, or no 'whatever' is obviously proven wrong very often. WI of the 80s, and the Aussies of today are showing that.

 

[vic_orthdox]

i agree that in principle, it doesnt matter how many pace bowlers you have. however, first of all - variety helps, and that includes having a spinner. and in the case of having all pace bowlers, you need different type of pace bowlers - something that i think this current aus pace attack has and what i'm told that the wi pace attack of the 70s and 80s had - and not necessarily something that south african attack had.

 

[Jono]

I'd still take 4 McGraths over an attack, like say the current Indian line-up. Yes if they all happened to have a bad day it would be a problem as there is no variety, and on spin friendly conditions clearly they wouldn't be dominant (thus when you may think about bringing in a spinner), but to have one just for a variety is silly. MOST good bowling line-ups do have spinners because these spinners are great talents, rather than just being in the team for the sake of having a spinner.