Richard Hadlee vs Curtly Ambrose

[smash84]

surprised to see my favourite sachin so low

More interesting is the names of Marshall's contemporaries who sit above him in that list

 

[subshakerz]

the latter point is too abstract for me to look into but the prior is true and I guess I limited my viewscope to just statistical flaws rather than looking into longevity.

It works together. Marshall did have a relative dip towards the end and seemed completely washed up in 92, admittedly in ODIs, so if he had to spend 2-3 years more as a solo actor or without three other quality pacers around him it definitely would have hurt his stats.

 

[subshakerz]

Dale Steyn could not swing the ball in with the new ball.
He probably didn't need to.

Both the bowlers' stock delivery was the outswinger.

To be frank Steyn had the greatest outswinging ball I have ever seen. His issue wasn't skillset it was consistency.

Dale Steyn and Fred Trueman are probably the most hittable among ATG pacemen, also similar bowlers of extreme pace and swing both way and mastery on cutters too, and probably the two most destructive fast bowlers of all time.

.it's not just that Steyn was hittable. He could bizzarely go missing for no reason and that really hurt SA at times.

 

[subshakerz]

Marshall retiring at 33 years is the best thing happened to his legacy. It prevented his numbers from declining and ruining his legacy.

Steyn, Donald, Marshall, Imran, Lillee etcwere bowlers who relied a lot on pace and once their speed declined they would no longer be effective.

Hadlee, McGrath, Ambrose, Akram, Garner etc did not rely so much on pace and that’s why they continued to effective even when they were older

Yeah this isn't completely true.

For example, Lillee after this back injury in 73 came back at reduced pace and was equally effective right until the end of his career. One reason I rate him ahead of Ambrose.

Imran came back from shin injury with reduced pace in 85 and was still as effective until 89, even using the legcutter now, when he was already mid 30s in age.

Akram in 98 lost his pace by diabetes in early 30s and was less effective for the rest of his career.

Steyns issue with his late career decline wasn't lack of pace since he was still bowling mid 130s like most of his career, his problen was his body breaking down around 2015 and he couldn't get rhythm. Donald had a similar issue.

 

[kyear2]

It does compared to Marshall who was a more generic pacer.

Legitimately speaking, what utter shite is this?

 

[subshakerz]

Legitimately speaking, what utter shite is this?

I clarified. Go check.

 

[subshakerz]

surprised to see my favourite sachin so low

Lara also low.

 

[kyear2]

Stop inflating Marshalls rep. He inherited the greatest team ever, 4 man attack was already there, WI already dominating. Marshall just kept the machine going.

I know you and others have a thing here when it comes to him, but he elevated the attack. How does the greatest bowler ever doesn't. When you look through the successive series, either Holding or Garner or both were missing, the matches or series he missed were lost or tied. He w as the most important member of the team, but it would kill you to acknowledge that.

 

[kyear2]

Generic as in part of the WI assembly line of the time, but of course their best.

That's just idiotic framing.

 

[subshakerz]

I know you and others have a thing here when it comes to him, but he elevated the attack. How does the greatest bowler ever doesn't. When you look through the successive series, either Holding or Garner or both were missing, the matches or series he missed were lost or tied. He w as the most important member of the team, but it would kill you to acknowledge that.

You are presenting him as being the main reason WI peaked but the fact is WI declined during his peak.

 

[subshakerz]

That's just idiotic framing.

Dont be foolish, I am comparing him emerging as one in a line of WI quality pacers to Hadlee who was the first ATG bowler NZ had who shouldered the entire load.

 

[shortpitched713]

That's incredible to have 6 Man of the Series awards

I wonder who are some of the other bowlers ahead of him on the list?

https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/most-player-of-the-series-awards-283469

Crazy how everyone like to beat on Chanderpaul like a red headed step mule. But he's the highest ranked non all-rounder specialist batman on the list. Decent for a selfish wall.

Also, note how bowlers dominate the top of that list. And yet people like to make equivalences between a bowler and a batsman over a finite timeframe.

 

[Johan]

Root has 6? gonna be 8 by the end of next Ashes so.

 

[Johan]

Crazy how everyone like to beat on Chanderpaul like a red headed step mule. But he's the highest ranked non all-rounder specialist batman on the list. Decent for a selfish wall.

Garbage list. lost all credibility and worth.

 

[kyear2]

Don't let the old fogeys here at CW sway you. McGrath/Steyn are every bit as good (and in McGrath case imo clearly better) than Hadlee/Marshall.

All have weaknesses/mitigating factors to their greatness (even Marshall, who definitely had the best pace bowling support).

McGrath did it for meaningfully more Tests than all the others, though (inb4 Jimmy Clouderson).

Steyn was a fabulous bowler. He is routed as defeating the dead pitch era, but he primarily thrived in the friendly confines of SA. He lacked elite control, and often a plan B and his away record outside of India leaves a bit to be desired.

Easily a top 5 pacer of all time and it's evolved to between he and Wasim for the final spot on my AT XI, but I don't think he's a GOAT candidate.

McGrath definitely is a candidate, clearly better exists only in your head, but many things do.

His relative (and everything is at this level) lack of success as in 5'fers in the SC and his again, relative struggles vs SA, doesn't allow you to credibly say "easily ahead".

And there's also doubt (not for me, but many others) as to who between him and Warne was the primary protagonist for that mighty Aussie team.

But I understand you're the newer is better guy, and the longer just adds to the orgasm for you.

 

[akilana]

It works together. Marshall did have a relative dip towards the end and seemed completely washed up in 92, admittedly in ODIs, so if he had to spend 2-3 years more as a solo actor or without three other quality pacers around him it definitely would have hurt his stats.

you're just guessing.. probably hoping. he would have ended up with 450 wickets with similar average.

 

[kyear2]

That's the mitigating factor, that he had the best bowling and specifically pace bowling support out of the top group, which served to make things easier for him, allowed him to be more fresh for his spells, and kept his average lower than it otherwise could have been.

What was his average when the others were missing?

How did he perform when neither Holding nor Garner were there?

How much less of the tail did he get a shot at? In truly helpful conditions he seldom got a second go at the opposition, while in tougher ones he still came back on and often was the one who made the difference.

I know it's easy to just repeat generic talking points, but it generally wasn't. Because Harper didn't play that much and Viv wasn't an oft used 5th option, they rotated rather quickly and there are many matches where he bowled unchanged from an end to finish the match, I mean 20 plus overs.

You can't manufacture his strike rate either, nor his value of wicket which is up there with McGrath, Ambrose and Davidson at the very top (if I recall correctly).

Who among the bowlers in the history of the game had his skill set, adaptability, well rounded record and resume?

 

[subshakerz]

he would have ended up with 450 wickets with similar average.

This is guessing and hoping

 

[akilana]

This is guessing and hoping

just to show everyone can play this game.

 

[kyear2]

Well Marshall is far from perfect but I don't think hes edified anymore than some on here do with a certain little Indian.

Yeah, the way Sachin is deified by the same person and held up as perfect, by pretending that his only "flaw" is a lack of dominant series, when his record against the very best if the 90's is just as flawed as Lara's and pales in comparison to Richards's, whole resurrecting his career with his second peak in the flattest of eras in the middle of a stacked line up.

The double standard is crazy.