• 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.

The bowler of the 90s and 00s

Choose TWO bowlers of your choice as the best of 90s and 00s


  • Total voters
    71

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Admittedly I've only seen Kumble and MacGill from this list, but I find this statement hard to believe.
Don't see what Grimmett has over these guys. His record against the only good side, England, was quite average,

Gupte and Chandra above him for me. Mailey very close too. Only Mushtaq may be out of place on that list.
 

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Don't see what Grimmett has over these guys. His record against the only good side, England, was quite average,

Gupte and Chandra above him for me. Mailey very close too. Only Mushtaq may be out of place on that list.
This. His record doesn't quite hold up on closer inspection.
 

ImpatientLime

International Regular
Apart from the two I named (not sure Barnes was really a spinner), none of them are in the same zipcode as Warne - and they also played on uncovered pitches to boot. The same for the bowlers you've mentioned for Murali.

When it comes to spin bowlers being comparable to ATG pacers, the list is very, very short. The amount of tests would really only matter if I was talking about the aggregate amount of wickets. Their averages/SRs are so superior the debate is a non-starter. It'd be like comparing a pacer of the quality of Kallis to Donald.
Laker isn't in the same league as O'Reilly and Grimmett?

I'm sorry but that is complete and utter nonsense.

There is a strong argument to say that he is superior to both.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Laker isn't in the same league as O'Reilly and Grimmett?

I'm sorry but that is complete and utter nonsense.

There is a strong argument to say that he is superior to both.
Laker's poor away record and reliance on uncovered wickets suggests not. I'm not married to that opinion on Grimmett, in that respect I deferred to people who know better and who rated him so highly. But O'Reilly? Don't think so. Even looking at their stats though, they generally took more wickets in less matches (10 or 20 less matches) and were pretty consistent home or away. They were able to take on more of a load and take a sizeable chunk more than Laker in wpms. Laker averages 4 wpm, which for an ATG spinner is a way behind the tier we're talking about. Warne/Murali were taking as many wickets per match as the ATG pacers and also with a very healthy average/sr.

However you want to frame the debate - if you want to remove those two as legitimate examples - there's no way Laker or the other aforementioned bowlers are in the Murali/Warne category; which further underlines how rare or special they are and how difficult it is to replace them.
 
Last edited:

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
What poor away record?
It's relative of course. Decent for the average spinner but not so great for an ATG spinner.

But his home and away record underlines the impression that he was more capable on stickies than otherwise.

Home: avg 18, sr 55
Away: avg 29, sr 80

None of the other bowlers have a record that contrasts like that.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is one of the most interesting polls I've seen on here in a long time - I'm really, really surprised that only two of us have nominated Waqar - I can only assume that longevity is valued much more than a transient destructive genius
Aussie contingent may not rate him as highly because he was certainly nothing flash when he toured here, and back then we didn't get a lot of away/ neutral series.
 

watson

Banned
It's relative of course. Decent for the average spinner but not so great for an ATG spinner.

But his home and away record underlines the impression that he was more capable on stickies than otherwise.

Home: avg 18, sr 55
Away: avg 29, sr 80

None of the other bowlers have a record that contrasts like that.
I was very surprised to learn that Laker played only 4 Tests in Australia. However, the stats are good - 15 wickets at 21.

Anyway, it appears that it was his 8 Tests in the West Indies that effected his Away figures the most. That is, 8 Tests, 32 wickets at 32 runs each. Still not bad though considering who he would have bowled to (3 Ws). Also, West Indian pitches were featherbeds during 1950s, so overall an excellent effort.

In terms of skill and greatness: Laker = Murali (more or less)
 
Last edited:

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
I was very surprised to learn that Laker played only 4 Tests in Australia. However, the stats are good - 15 wickets at 21.

Anyway, it appears that it was his 8 Tests in the West Indies that effected his Away figures the most. That is, 8 Tests, 32 wickets at 32 runs each. Still not bad though considering who he would have bowled to (3 Ws). Also, West Indian pitches were featherbeds during 1950s, so overall an excellent effort.

In terms of skill and greatness: Laker = Murali (more or less)
It's not just WIndies. There is S.Africa too (avg 29, sr 106). Which means he has a poor record in 2/3 countries away from home - Australia being the only country he did well in.

Laker is nowhere close to Murali as far as I see it. Akin to comparing a batsman of Damien Martyn's class to someone like Sir Gary Sobers.
 
Last edited:

Migara

International Coach
I was very surprised to learn that Laker played only 4 Tests in Australia. However, the stats are good - 15 wickets at 21.

Anyway, it appears that it was his 8 Tests in the West Indies that effected his Away figures the most. That is, 8 Tests, 32 wickets at 32 runs each. Still not bad though considering who he would have bowled to (3 Ws). Also, West Indian pitches were featherbeds during 1950s, so overall an excellent effort.

In terms of skill and greatness: Laker = Murali (more or less)
Means Laker = Warne (more or less)
 

Coronis

Hall of Fame Member
It's not just WIndies. There is S.Africa too (avg 29, sr 106). Which means he has a poor record in 2/3 countries away from home - Australia being the only country he did well in.

Laker is nowhere close to Murali as far as I see it. Akin to comparing a batsman of Damien Martyn's class to someone like Sir Gary Sobers.
Slight exaggeration. Expected of course.
 

Migara

International Coach
An excellent point - one reason being the fact that before them there hadn't been a really high class spinner for 20 years
Nah, Qadir was playing before these two. Would throw in DS de Silva of late 70s as well. These two easily better than any other spinner playing today. There were a host of Indian spinners as well who had decent records before M & W.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's not just WIndies. There is S.Africa too (avg 29, sr 106). Which means he has a poor record in 2/3 countries away from home - Australia being the only country he did well in.

Laker is nowhere close to Murali as far as I see it. Akin to comparing a batsman of Damien Martyn's class to someone like Sir Gary Sobers.
Wouldn't go that far, but yeah, Murali undoubtedly greater.
 

watson

Banned
Skill and greatness is not all about raw numbers.

Given Laker's technical brilliance there is absolutely no reason to suppose that he would achieve the same results as Murali given the equivalent amount of overs against equivalent calibre of batsman.

Why Laker, Prasanna remain better off-spinners than Murali, Bhajji

......Why is Laker on top of the pile for us? Not for his immortal 19 for 90 against Australia at Manchester in 1956, which feat anyway would rank as the most remarkable in the entire history of Test cricket. He was for us indisputably the first ever off-spinner of great impact and the most complete off-spinner. The Wisden Illustrated History of Cricket, 1989, by Vic Marks (English off spinner incidentally), says, “Laker possessed all the necessary qualities – a classical action, superb control of flight and spin, and the ability to assess swiftly his opponent’s strengths and weaknesses….” Apparently batsmen could hear the ball fizzing on its way to them and many found the ball was not really there when they went to drive it. We have this memorable story about Laker: After finishing off Australia at Manchester (the 19 wickets) Laker quietly drove off home. On his way, he stopped at a pub for a pint of ale. A group of people at the pub were watching the Test match highlights, saw Laker on the bar stool and remarked that the chap looks like Laker. Laker, enigmatic as ever, quietly continued quaffing on his ale!

Laker, incredibly had taken all 10 wickets earlier that season for Surrey against the Australians on a not particularly spiteful wicket — a fact that many do not remember. So his subsequent performance in the Manchester Test was not a flash in the pan. Five years earlier in a Test trial at Bradford, he had the unbelievable figures of 8 wickets for 2 runs against the Rest of England. In spite of all these figures and the fact that from 1948 he was the best off-spinner in the country over the next decade, Laker was overlooked for both the 1951 tour and the 54-55 trips to Australia. Simply because he was always viewed distrustfully by the establishment! So whimsical selection policies everywhere seems to be a part of cricket history.

Laker’s shoes were impossible to fill for the Englishmen who followed him. Titmus and Allen no doubt had their own golden moments. Titmus was such a chirpy loquacious character, that one of his teammates memorably said, that he probably took catches in mid-sentence! But these bowlers had clean classical actions as does Graeme Swann today. Swann has never bowled the Doosra, but he has a wicked well-disguised straighter one and complete control of his spin, flight and pace. He is right up there among the greatest for us although the recent Tests against Sri Lanka and South Africa in 2012 are forgettable for him.

Why Laker, Prasanna remain better off-spinners than Murali, Bhajji - Firstpost
 
Last edited:

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
"He was for us indisputably the first ever off-spinner of great impact and the most complete off-spinner. The Wisden Illustrated History of Cricket, 1989, by Vic Marks (English off spinner incidentally), says, “Laker possessed all the necessary qualities – a classical action, superb control of flight and spin, and the ability to assess swiftly his opponent’s strengths and weaknesses…."

Murali was the first ever and probably only wrist spinning off spinner. Apart from a classical action, Murali has all those things you mentioned and more. Apart from Hadlee , no team relied as much on one man to produce a match winning performance as Murali. Any way you look at it, Murali > Laker in skill and greatness. By a significant distance.

Hope this doesn't ago turn into a discussion on his action but I'm not hopefu.
 

Top