Choose one : Donald, Steyn & Holding vs O'Reilly, Murali & Warne

[subshakerz]

Simple reason for pacers: Day 1, 1st innings.

It's not close to which type of bowlers are more effective in setting up games.

 

[ataraxia]

Simple reason for spinners: Day 5, 4th innings.

 

[kyear2]

Simple reason for spinners: Day 5, 4th innings.

Day 5 may not exist if the pavers dominate day one though three.

 

[subshakerz]

There is a level of delusion to think Murali and Warne with a bright red cherry of Day 1 on with overcast conditions or bright sunny morning on a damp or hard surface are going to be anywhere near as effective as a pacer.

And if you want to counter that they are more effective on 5th day surface, thats only for specific conditions. And by then most games are already decided.

 

[subshakerz]

Simple reason for spinners: Day 5, 4th innings.

Unless it's a spinning surface, I would still favor the pacers then.

 

[kyear2]

There's also the fact that Warne has been taken apart by even good players of spin. Murali too was obviusly much more effective on his custom made home pitches. O'Reilly was in the attack when a world record was broken.

Holding is one of the GOATs when it comes to bowling on unresponsive wickets, Steyn was excellent in India

I don't see any positives for the spin trio in this comparison. I trust Steyn and Donald mor with the old ball more than the spinners with the new one.

 

[ataraxia]

Day 5 may not exist if the pavers dominate day one though three.

Well the pacers won't dominate days one through three if one of the attacks is only spinners lmao

 

[kyear2]

Well the pacers won't dominate days one through three if one of the attacks is entirely consistent of spinners lmao

We would agree to disagree.

 

[ataraxia]

Unless it's a spinning surface, I would still favor the pacers then.

Let's face it: more surfaces are spinning surfaces on day 5 than are pace-friendly surfaces on day 1.

 

[reyrey]

The pacers are going to overwhelming bowl out teams more quickly compared to situations when the spinners go all day, which itself means the spinners arent that penetrative.

The 3 pacers without bowling support won't be very penetrative for long.

Bowling teams out is hard in Tests cricket. The average innings score is something like 300. Even if you go with 200, your bowlers will need to bowl on average around 400 balls, so 67 overs.

Good luck getting 67 overs from the 3 fast men on minimal rest between spells. Twice!

 

[ataraxia]

The more I think about this question, the less I think it's even close.

The key point here is that if it's a close game, Donald/Steyn/Holding are going to be dead by the second new ball, let alone the second innings. If it's not a close game because the pacers mop things up quickly then all else equal there's no reason why the spinners wouldn't run riot anyway.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Interesting poll result since the spinners are rated higher than the fast bowlers individually on CW

 

[CricAddict]

The pacers can win if there is a workhorse there like a Akram, Walsh or a Kapil. All these 3 pacers are quick who can get exhausted quickly. And once the venom is gone, there are easy runs to be taken. But the spinners can be at the batsmen all the day with the same quality. Top 3 spinners of all time definitely win 3 who are not the top 3 pacers of all time and not workhorses too.

 

[ataraxia]

Which would be best on different types of wickets?

Spicy, pace-dominant: pacers
Flat, pace-dominant: close (good luck to the health of pacers bowling 30 overs on day one)
Spicy, neutral: close, but pacers
Flat, neutral: spinners
Spicy, spin-dominant: spinners
Flat, spin-dominant: spinners

Pace-dominant wickets in the general sense of the term are slightly more common in test cricket than spin-dominant wickets. But it doesn't resolve this discrepancy.

More pacers are picked than spinners, generally, because spinners can bowl more than pacers. That reasoning is nullified if instead of 4 or 5 bowlers being picked, you've only got 3 spots.

 

[subshakerz]

Let's face it: more surfaces are spinning surfaces on day 5 than are pace-friendly surfaces on day 1.

Don't think it's that true but pacers are still very effective on an uneven scuffed day 5 surface than spinners on day 1.

 

[subshakerz]

Pace-dominant wickets in the general sense of the term are slightly more common in test cricket than spin-dominant wickets. But it doesn't resolve this discrepancy.

Great so we agree there are more pace friendly wickets.

Even spin friendly wickets are mostly not going to favor spinners on day 1.

There isn't any doubt that spinners are not close to the worldclass level that pacers are on day 1.

 

[subshakerz]

The pacers can win if there is a workhorse there like a Akram, Walsh or a Kapil. All these 3 pacers are quick who can get exhausted quickly. And once the venom is gone, there are easy runs to be taken. But the spinners can be at the batsmen all the day with the same quality. Top 3 spinners of all time definitely win 3 who are not the top 3 pacers of all time and not workhorses too.

The odds of a batting lineup just outright outlasting and exhausting Donald, Steyn and Holding are extremely slim.

And if the pitch and conditions allow that then that lineup will by no means be overwhelmed by spinners unless it's a spicy turner.

 

[DrWolverine]

The pacers may get tired

That’s the only reason I can think for picking the spinners over the fast bowlers

 

[subshakerz]

The more I think about this question, the less I think it's even close.

The key point here is that if it's a close game, Donald/Steyn/Holding are going to be dead by the second new ball, let alone the second innings. If it's not a close game because the pacers mop things up quickly then all else equal there's no reason why the spinners wouldn't run riot anyway.

Please live in reality.

Donald/Steyn/Holding are slicing through almost any lineup you can bring. And it's three bowlers who can rotate.

Otherwise why aren't Steyn and Donald dropping dead in their own careers?

And it's such a jump in logic to say that whenever pacers mop up spinners will do so also automatically.

There is only a few narrow scenarios where spinners are more effective. Pacers dominate.

 

[Coronis]

There's also the fact that Warne has been taken apart by even good players of spin. Murali too was obviusly much more effective on his custom made home pitches. O'Reilly was in the attack when a world record was broken.

Holding is one of the GOATs when it comes to bowling on unresponsive wickets, Steyn was excellent in India

I don't see any positives for the spin trio in this comparison. I trust Steyn and Donald mor with the old ball more than the spinners with the new one.

I find it funny these two statements in the same post