vic_orthdox said:
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.
The South African attack had all sorts:
Donald, wide of the crease, spearing the ball in one ball, darting it away the next, with a vicious Bouncer. And at a much, much higher pace than the rest.
Pollock, as close to the stumps as you can get, not as quick as Donald, but rarely moving from his one spot, and nipping it both ways when the pitch helped. And with a deadly quicker-ball Bouncer which, due to being so close to the stumps, many batsmen find impossible to Hook comfortably.
Kallis, with his both-ways swing, capable of bowling that "come-and-get-me" line and length when neccessary, but also capable of banging it in.
Klusener, with his almost stupifyingly wide angle of delivery, sometimes bowling all-sorts, sometimes bowling unplayable away-swingers, but the next fastest after Donald.
De Villiers, well, I don't really know what he bowled, I never saw him.
McMillan, never really saw him bowl, either.
Cronje, the impossibly underrated bowler - if ever you needed an end tied-down, there was a good chance he was your man. And he could swing the ball, too. He was also about 7 or 8 mph slower than Kallis and Pollock, in the mid-70s.
Then, if you really wanted variety, you always had Frog-In-A-Blender waiting in the wings.