Rate these almost-great fast bowlers

[Flem274*]

a dukes ball in England doesn't automatically turn a 125 trundler into a qaulity bowler

it does tho. ryder took county poles, southee's on the honours board and the english attack exists. even archer has settled into cute little mediums.

 

[Tom Flint]

Ok mate

 

[SteveNZ]

I certainly don't think he would be as highly regarded if he wasn't a kiwi. He was an excellent bowler, especially at ODI level (where he managed to string together a decent career) but part of the reason he's so highly regarded is that he's clearly the best since Hadlee.

I just don't get this logic. Who wouldn't be highly regarded if they averaged 22 from anywhere in the world? Ryan Harris averaged 23 and he is an out and out gun...and Bond was slightly better. Bond was a beast. He bowled 150 but had a great slower ball, bowled big in-duckers but could also bowl a leg cutter. The only reason he's not an ATG is his back. Not his nationality.

 

[SteveNZ]

I made the effort to look for you, and southees average in England actually jumps to 34 whereas boults average comes down to 23.
'Evidence' that just because you are using a dukes ball in England doesn't automatically turn a 125 trundler into a qaulity bowler

Southee's Test career is based around periods of fluctuating motivation that has nothing to do with where he was touring at the time.

Flem is a dirty troll but the Dukes ball certainly can turn boys into men at the bowling crease. It's a ****ing wonderful piece of equipment.

 

[Tom Flint]

There are plenty of other good quick bowlers who have a much worse record in England than they do at home with a kookaburra

 

[Migara]

Bishop and Harris are excellent comparisons. Statistically similar but are a bit lost amongst the other bowlers their country had fielded. Bond was a lighthouse in the storm of kiwi mediocrity. I'm not denying he was a great bowler but I do think his legacy is enhanced by all the other kiwi bowlers of his day being rather ordinary.

If Bond had have played alongside Hadlee and Boult, would he have been ranked in the top 30 bowlers of all time on here? I'd say probably not.

Then Kiwis would have been #1 side.

 

[Migara]

That's the part of his personality, I watch his youtube channel sometimes and he is a naturally impulsive, thinks with his heart rather than head kind of a person.

Imran would have handled him much better

 

[stephen]

I just don't get this logic. Who wouldn't be highly regarded if they averaged 22 from anywhere in the world? Ryan Harris averaged 23 and he is an out and out gun...and Bond was slightly better. Bond was a beast. He bowled 150 but had a great slower ball, bowled big in-duckers but could also bowl a leg cutter. The only reason he's not an ATG is his back. Not his nationality.

The exact same thing can be said about Bruce Reid but he's barely a footnote these days.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Anderson is a far better bowler than any version of Ishant and it's ridiculous how ~600 wickets are being written off as "Dukes ball and clouds" but I suspect there's a lot of semi-trolling going on in here. I don't even like Anderson much FFS.

Of course Anderson is much better than Ishant but that's not exactly a big hurdle

 

[Flametree]

Your talking rubbish and you know it. The only criticism of Anderson is his early career performances which let him down, this a time when he was a completely different type of bowler. From 2010 to now he has been brilliant, I don't know what his average has been it that time but I'm sure it will be a lot lower than it is if you included before 2010.
Longevity, fitness, stamina, workrate, attitude are all qualities that a great fast bowler needs to have such a great career like anderson, mcgrath steyn ect but without those you may have very talented bowlers who have a good 18 months or so but not quite the career they could have.

436 wickets at 24.1 since 2010.

 

[harsh.ag]

The bigger criticism of Anderson is that even since 2010 he has averaged 30 bowling away from home (150 wickets @29.76) and >30 in all countries other than West Indies.

 

[Line and Length]

Tall poppy syndrome!

 

[stephen]

The thing is, Anderson is probably that most skillful bowler around when it comes to sideways movement and accuracy. The problem is that he doesn't have that pace or bounce to create enough opportunities against the best batsmen in conditions which don't suit swing bowling. That means in the cast majority of the world he's consistent and keeps it tight but he doesn't get the big hauls like someone like Steyn, who is very similar but 15kph quicker.

 

[Mike5181]

A lot of people rate Bond very highly. Mostly due to watching him in ODIs. He's definitely the second best NZ quick, with Boult, Southee and Wagner being a step down. I think a huge part of his popularity is that he is a kiwi. If he had the career he did for Australia or Pakistan I think he'd be largely forgotten.

It's kind of a weird point. Someone forgetting doesn't mean it didn't happen. Like I could forget Nathan Bracken, but that doesn't change the fact he was a really good ODI bowler. And he's someone that didn't have a test career of note. In addition to being a killer ODI player, who destroyed the greatest side ever assembled multiple times, Bond did.

 

[vcs]

Harris only played 9 more tests and took just 26 more wickets than Bond.

 

[vcs]

2007-2013 would have been the era of Steyn vs.Bond if the latter's back hadn't been made out of glass.

 

[morgieb]

2007-2013 would have been the era of Steyn vs.Bond if the latter's back hadn't been made out of glass.

Bond is a lot older than you think.

 

[vcs]

Ah yeah. Still would have been nice if he'd got to 50 Tests.

 

[stephen]

I think the other thing for me that leaves question marks over Bond as a test bowler was that in his era there were a number of ODI bowlers who were very good at the format while being less good at test cricket. Swing bowlers in particular had a much harder time swinging the red ball in that era than the white.

Yes, Bond ran through Australia on multiple occasions with the white ball and did very well in his limited test matches but he struck me as a bowler who was very similar to Brett Lee, albeit fractionally better at ODI level. Brett Lee in tests had an excellent start to his career but fell away pretty quickly. Who is to say that the same wouldn't have happened to Bond?

Now that's all hypothetical and the same, if not more applies to other bowlers I love (like Harris), but there's a reason most bowlers who have a limited career like Bond are not rated highly compared to those who had full careers. Bond just seems to get more of a free pass than others because he was a kiwi who looked brilliant the few times we got to see him.

 

[SteveNZ]

I think the other thing for me that leaves question marks over Bond as a test bowler was that in his era there were a number of ODI bowlers who were very good at the format while being less good at test cricket. Swing bowlers in particular had a much harder time swinging the red ball in that era than the white.

Yes, Bond ran through Australia on multiple occasions with the white ball and did very well in his limited test matches but he struck me as a bowler who was very similar to Brett Lee, albeit fractionally better at ODI level. Brett Lee in tests had an excellent start to his career but fell away pretty quickly. Who is to say that the same wouldn't have happened to Bond?

Now that's all hypothetical and the same, if not more applies to other bowlers I love (like Harris), but there's a reason most bowlers who have a limited career like Bond are not rated highly compared to those who had full careers. Bond just seems to get more of a free pass than others because he was a kiwi who looked brilliant the few times we got to see him.

Bond was a much more skilled bowler than Brett Lee. And I love both. Bond had much better control, and his inswinger to RHers was dangerous. He could also straighten it when required. But you're absolutely right, Lee stayed on the park more. So history maybe rightly judges him to be better because he got to have more influence.

I actually see where you're coming from now in terms of him being a Kiwi. Because we never produced any other 150km/ph bowlers who produced anything at Test level, he does have a higher aura about him. And Bruce Reid/Ryan Harris were clearly outstanding as well, but maybe get lost a bit in a longer line of great fast bowlers who also had longevity.