Steyn. Ambrose. Imran.

[DrWolverine]

Because they usually make the top 10.

Lillee barely played so I did not include him.

 

[sayon basak]

Because they usually make the top 10.

Lillee barely played so I did not include him.

That was not the point. I meant >25 Avg wouldn't be problematic for similar era bowlers. So, Slifer's request is logical.

 

[kyear2]

Steyn then Ambrose then Imran for me.

Basically this

 

[kyear2]

Kinda unfair to bowlers who had more competition for wickets no? Also, request you posts the stats for series where the bowlers averaged 25 or under.

Cricket isn't purely about having great series but consistent performances over the career.

Also yeah, averages conspicuously absent.

 

[kyear2]

Ambrose then Steyn then Imran for me

That's fair as well.

What I love about Ambrose and Steyn are how diametrically opposite they are in style and method, yet so comparable overall.

 

[kyear2]

Steyn just eclipses the other two with regards to strike rate and destructive capability. His draw back being that he could be taken to the woodshed more often than a bowler of his capabilities should, and he sometimes lacked a plan B.

He and Ambrose though were the best bowler in the world for significant periods of time and Ambrose in his pomp was just as capable of destructive spells and could always be counted on to keep it quiet and apply pressure to the opposition.

My critique of Imran is all known and no need to repeat, don't think he's quite in the same tier as the other two.

 

[DrWolverine]

That was not the point. I meant >25 Avg wouldn't be problematic for similar era bowlers. So, Slifer's request is logical.

Fair

 

[DrWolverine]

Steyn just eclipses the other two with regards to strike rate and destructive capability.

The most destructive fast bowler I have seen.

Like you said his biggest drawback was he could leak a lot of runs in matches where he didn’t click.

Someone like Ambrose excelled at this - Even on his bad days or later stages of his career where he could not take wickets, he kept applying pressure.

 

[Johan]

Ambrose (5)
Steyn (6)
Imran (7)

literally next to each other.

 

[subshakerz]

That's fair as well.

What I love about Ambrose and Steyn are how diametrically opposite they are in style and method, yet so comparable overall.

Steyn to me is fairly easily over Ambrose now.

 

[subshakerz]

The most destructive fast bowler I have seen.

Like you said his biggest drawback was he could leak a lot of runs in matches where he didn’t click.

Someone like Ambrose excelled at this - Even on his bad days or later stages of his career where he could not take wickets, he kept applying pressure.

Yes. But I think by late career Ambrose was manageable and not really creative with his bowling. He was basically just holding up one end often.

 

[kyear2]

The most destructive fast bowler I have seen.

Like you said his biggest drawback was he could leak a lot of runs in matches where he didn’t click.

Someone like Ambrose excelled at this - Even on his bad days or later stages of his career where he could not take wickets, he kept applying pressure.

Yup, was always valuable.