• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Rank the leading wicket takers of the past 50 years

Migara

International Captain
1. Murali / Hadlee
2. Walsh
3. Warne
4. Trueman
5. Lillee
6. Dev
7. Gibbs
8. Botham
 

ankitj

International Coach
Murali
Hadlee
Warne
Trueman
Lillee
Walsh
Botham
Dev
Gibbs
 
Last edited:

trundler

Hall of Fame Member
Trueman over Walsh is pretty clear cut though. Trueman was the best fast bowler in the world for a long time by *some* distance. Ridiculous strike rate especially for that era. Walsh isn't in the argument, Trueman is.
 

harsh.ag

Hall of Fame Member
Trueman is overrated tbh

Played 47 of his 67 games in England. Away to the two strong opponents of his time, Aus and Windies, he averaged 27 and 32 respectively, taking 29 and 30 wickets in 8 games each at both places. Never played in Asia. Great performances in England but also got to bully India and Pakistan and New Zealand.

Walsh, on the other hand, has a great record in every country except Australia. Sub 25 average everywhere else. Remarkable in Asia too. 43 wickets @18 in India and 33 wickets @22 in Pakistan.

No issues with Walsh > Trueman
 

trundler

Hall of Fame Member
Nah. The West Indies roads he played on were incredibly dreary and draw central. The fact that he didn't tour match has to do with not getting on with the selectors. That's about as much as Steyn averaged in Australia too btw. This is classic rating by checklist btw.

Even then Trueman was a true match winner and ran through lineups ridiculously often. Difference in averages and strike rate is huge.
 

harsh.ag

Hall of Fame Member
Nah. The West Indies roads he played on were incredibly dreary and draw central. The fact that he didn't tour match has to do with not getting on with the selectors. That's about as much as Steyn averaged in Australia too btw. This is classic rating by checklist btw.

Even then Trueman was a true match winner and ran through lineups ridiculously often. Difference in averages and strike rate is huge.
Do rate Trueman. Just pointing out his resume has holes. That he didn't tour because of issues with selectors is on him for the most part. The checklist exists for a reason.

Walsh ran through plenty of lineups too. 22 5-fers. Not like he lacked competition either.
 

ankitj

International Coach
For most part Trueman had lot of competition for wickets too. Statham, Tyson and Laker had reasonable overlap with him. Yet picked 4+ wickets a match, something Miller and Lindwall didn't manage in the era.
 

trundler

Hall of Fame Member
Do rate Trueman. Just pointing out his resume has holes. That he didn't tour because of issues with selectors is on him for the most part. The checklist exists for a reason.

Walsh ran through plenty of lineups too. 22 5-fers. Not like he lacked competition either.
Hey, you can't blame him for being a Yorkshireman. :ph34r:

Don't agree with the second bit. 8 tests is 2 tours essentially. A quick look at howstat reveals that 4 of those matches were draws. One of those tours came in 1954, which was very early in his career. So those numbers don't have any context at all. They're just 8 matches. One bad tour and one respectable tour. Not saying the first series shouldn't count ftr, just that average in x country can be misleading because of samplesizelol. A real hole is Warne in India.

A bowler with Trueman's strike power is very rare. Only Steyn, Waqar and Marshall are comparable in that respect really.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
A bowler with Trueman's strike power is very rare. Only Steyn, Waqar and Marshall are comparable in that respect really.
bit strong but yeah there doesn't seem to have been many bowlers you could turn to and be fairly sure you'd get a wicket in the 1945-1970s times, when batting scoring rates were about one run an hour
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah.. I guess started watching cricket that I can remember well only around the 1991 tri series in Australia and the RSA re-entry series etc. Everything before that, I only watched live at the stadium as television was not so big then and we did not get away games live or anything. I guess I have seen Marshall too during those 1991 and 1992 series but I do not recall much of him, except my uncles and grown up cousins telling me how awesome he was.


It was the time when Patrick Patterson was a thing too. They were more worried when young Sachin was facing PP than MM. :laugh:
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Also remember an ODI around that period when Bruce Reid walked out to bat and they put his stats out and I was like 6 or 7 years old but I could read, and my uncles and cousins have put enough cricket knowledge in me that I understood what batting averages were and high scores were, and his stats read something like average 2.something and highest score of 10 or 11. I burst out laughing coz the 6 year old me had recently scored a 50 in our terrace game and obviously, I thought it meant I was a better batsman than that guy.
 

Top