Curtly ambrose vs dale styen

[govinda indian fan]

All time no 4 pacer vs no 5

 

[Johan]

Steyn in Asia, Curtly outside Asia.

 

[duckettstars123]

Steyn was a swing bowler, like Bumrah or Anderson, whereas Ambrose spammed hard length balls like a Cummins or McGrath. It's like comparing Dravid to Viv Richards.

 

[Johan]

Steyn was a swing bowler, like Bumrah or Anderson, whereas Ambrose spammed hard length balls like a Cummins or McGrath. It's like comparing Dravid to Viv Richards.

....I hope you realise we even compare spinners to pacers here, let alone different type of pacers.

 

[duckettstars123]

Pacers are all very different in strengths and weaknesses
Likes of Steyn and Bumrah can bowl floaty full deliveries that defeat batsmen whereas likes of Ambrose used to really intimidate opponents without swing but bounce.

 

[DrWolverine]

 

[sayon basak]

Steyn was a swing bowler, like Bumrah or Anderson, whereas Ambrose spammed hard length balls like a Cummins or McGrath. It's like comparing Dravid to Viv Richards.

Welcome to CricketWeb, hope you have a great time here.

 

[subshakerz]

Done before.

Steyn more devastating, proven in Asia, Ambrose much tighter and ATG in Australia.

However end of the day, even if deduct points for being expensive, Steyn will end up getting more wickets than Ambrose who is relatively less penetrative than the rest of the top tier.

Ambrose one of the more slightly overrated bowlers in CW.

 

[duckettstars123]

Steyn bowled fuller and this is why he was more penetrative. However his reliance on full lengths made him less exciting to watch for me.

 

[subshakerz]

Steyn bowled fuller and this is why he was more penetrative. However his reliance on full lengths made him less exciting to watch for me.

Interesting. I think it made him more exciting.

End of the day, Ambrose was not penetrative enough. He was blocked away too often.

 

[duckettstars123]

I just find Ambrose or McGrath's hard lengths more satisfying. It rushes batsmen, gives away nothing to the batsmen and it is a real victory when you then get the edge off shoulder of bat.

 

[shortpitched713]

I just find Ambrose or McGrath's hard lengths more satisfying.

 

[subshakerz]

I just find Ambrose or McGrath's hard lengths more satisfying. It rushes batsmen, gives away nothing to the batsmen and it is a real victory when you then get the edge off shoulder of bat.

McGrath was more likely to adjust his line and length though when he was probing whereas Ambrose was often waiting for the bat to lose patience, especially later career half.

 

[kyear2]

Flip of a coin, but again too diametrically opposite bowlers.

But would fit so brilliantly together.

 

[Coronis]

This is always a close one. On one hand you have Steyn, one of the most aggressive and attacking bowlers ever, and then Ambrose, one of the more intimidating and consistent bowlers ever. I think I take Steyn here just, despite him being more liable to leak runs, just because of his dominance in his batting friendly era. Not Curtly’s fault he didn’t play then and had guys like Wasim and Donald overlapping, but yeah, its close.

 

[Johan]

I think I will go Ambrose, I don't think I've ever seen anyone better than Ambrose when it came to bowling against great players of fast bowling, not even McGrath.

 

[kyear2]

This is always a close one. On one hand you have Steyn, one of the most aggressive and attacking bowlers ever, and then Ambrose, one of the more intimidating and consistent bowlers ever. I think I take Steyn here just, despite him being more liable to leak runs, just because of his dominance in his batting friendly era. Not Curtly’s fault he didn’t play then and had guys like Wasim and Donald overlapping, but yeah, its close.

Valid points all.

My only slight counter was his consistency of dominance, especially away from home in said era.

But no issue with him being rated above Sir. Curtly.

It's really is close between the two of them.