DrWolverine
International Regular
Better test bowler
-
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.
Shane Warne vs Jasprit Bumrah
- Thread starter DrWolverine
- Start date
Thala_0710
International Debutant
Warne for now.
If Jassi keeps it up at a similar level for another 100 or so wickets, I'll go with him.
If Jassi keeps it up at a similar level for another 100 or so wickets, I'll go with him.
Thala_0710
International Debutant
If Bumrah had twice as many wickets, with a similar level in his bowling (avg, wpm etc), he would be greatest bowler of all time
He would probably be the greatest of the quicks. I rate Warne and Murali above the quicks though, which would make Warne an interesting question for me. And I don't think I would put him above Murali with half the career wickets.
DrWolverine
International Regular
Do you rate Shane Warne ahead of Marshall?
Yip.
DrWolverine
International Regular
Interesting 
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
iirc Marshall is a quick.
C’mon don’t be coy. Ask the question you want to askInteresting
Sliferxxxx
State Vice-Captain
No doubt.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
With regards to ranking Warne above McGrath.
Would Australia have been arguably the greatest team of all time with out McGrath?
That's an easy no.
Without Warne?
Much more likely.
Under that scenario, plus the fact that one was a specialist at taking out the top order.
How can the spinners be seen above any of the top 3 pacers? Could even make a case for the next two as well.
I'm fine with ranking Mcgrath ahead. It's two contrasting ways of viewing them, and I see both as valid.
Spinners away from home (and in Warne's case at home too) have a much tougher job. They are always going to have worse averages. But a spinner is very necessary, at least long term. And they bring other superior stats to to the table, like WPM and career wickets.
Warne is a long way ahead of basically every spinner. Plenty of quicks reasonably close to Mcgrath, even if you think he beats all of them.
akilana
State Captain
so marshall? people told me marshall didn't have longevity.
DrWolverine
International Regular
Malcolm Marshall’s full time career was less than a decade(1983-1991).
DrWolverine
International Regular
If Bumrah can finish his career with 300+ wickets and have an average of sub-21, he is one of the top picks for the best fast bowler in ever.
Numbers play a very important role in perception and if he ends with an average of even 19.99, he might end up as the GOAT bowler.
Thala_0710
International Debutant
Bumrah by that time would have played 12 years of test cricket and 90 tests. It wouldn't be much of an issue