Those who've watched live cricket throughout 1990's, how good was Donald?

[subshakerz]

The guy could seriously bowl, but there were some little things that gave an insight into why he wasn't as universally feared as an Ambrose. When he got his tail up, he'd be a pretty frightening prospect, and was an equal of anyone in the world. There seemed to be the feeling that if you weathered the storm, then he wasn't as "relentless" as others. Even things like not wanting to take the new ball in ODIs helped to prick away at the alpha fast bowlehatr psyche that the best seem to all have.

Yeah, Donald was a fearsome prospect to face, but once you took him head on or weathered the storm, he didnt seem to have much of a plan B. At least that was the case when he faced Atherton in that tussle, when he faced Azhar Mahmood on a few occasions, and when he faced Australia.

Having said that, he really should be rated higher, excellent record in the subcontinent and overall sans Australia.

 

[SeamUp]

Tbh I don't want to compare all the best of that era, its just safe to say that McGrath, Donald, Waqar, Wasim and Ambrose were the pure standouts and were all amazing fast bowlers to watch. You could differentiate them by the way they went about getting wickets but they all did the same thing and got wickets for little runs and put the opposition on the back-foot.

S.Pollock and Gillespie were probably next up behind those 5. These 2 weren't bad either!

 

[subshakerz]

Tbh I don't want to compare all the best of that era, its just safe to say that McGrath, Donald, Waqar, Wasim and Ambrose were the pure standouts and were all amazing fast bowlers to watch. You could differentiate them by the way they went about getting wickets but they all did the same thing and got wickets for little runs and put the opposition on the back-foot.

S.Pollock and Gillespie were probably next up behind those 5. These 2 weren't bad either!

Dont forget Walsh, around Pollock level as well. The 90s was truly a golden age for fast bowlers, moreso than the 70s and 80s.

 

[Migara]

Nah, really nah.

Two better than average and one great. Are you talking about Meyrick Pringle

Even if you mean Pollock, it's one great bowler, One very good bowler, and two just above average. I've no idea how DeVilliers got so highly ranked around here, dozens like him, IMHO.

PS (Fanie) de Villiers: Test 18 matches, 85 wickets at 24.3, 83 ODIs, 95 wickets at 27.8, RPO 3.57

That is bowling of a bloody impressive swing bowler. And he did bowl Aussies to defeat single handedly in late 1990w.

 

[SeamUp]

PS (Fanie) de Villiers: Test 18 matches, 85 wickets at 24.3, 83 ODIs, 95 wickets at 27.8, RPO 3.57

That is bowling of a bloody impressive swing bowler. And he did bowl Aussies to defeat single handedly in late 1990w.

Got to agree. An he did hardly any of that in his pomp. One of the most impressive swing bowlers at decent pace in the last 20 years. He used to out-think so many batsman by using the angle of the crease. Also had a superb yorker.

Watching some old ESPN footage recently of our tours to England and Australia (brought back memories) and he really was a clever clever bowler who bowled some unplayable balls.

Earlier though you mentioned Pringle, wasn't a big backer of Pringle as a test bowler but decent in ODI cricket when he swung the ball away but Brett Schultz was the real deal and you chaps saw that on our tour of SRL in '93 was it?

 

[SeamUp]

Great footage of Brett Schultz by Robelinda

*RARE* BRETT SCHULTZ - AMAZING SOUTH AFRICAN LEFT ARM FAST BOWLER - YouTube

 

[smash84]

Donald was pretty quick and pretty hostile and could really get to the batsmen most of the time

 

[Migara]

but Brett Schultz was the real deal and you chaps saw that on our tour of SRL in '93 was it?

Huh, he was scary, and was a yard quicker than Donald too. Lankan batsmen other than de Silva, Ranatunga and Jayasuriya were ****ting in their pants against him. Easily out bowled Donald that series. Even then, de Silva treated both Donald and Schultz with utter disdain when bowled short.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

He was very good and destroyed virtually every team on his day. Shame he missed about 5 years at the start of his career, could have got 500 wickets given he was always so fit.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

He was better than Daffy, that's for sure.

 

[benchmark00]

 

[Jono]

Incredible

 

[NasserFan207]

Brilliant bowler. Definitely an ATG. I probably rank him higher than others mostly for aesthetic purposes though, so exciting to watch.

 

[weldone]

In 1990s alone? Donald was pretty special. I have witnessed most of the important test cricket in the 90s and to me Ambrose was perhaps the standout fast bowler of the decade. Just a shade below him I shall put Donald, Wasim, McGrath and Walsh - there wasn't much among these 4 when you consider 90s alone. However, the other 3 showed better longevity and were equally impeccable in other decades - therefore I rate them slightly above Donald overall. Slightly behind these 5, there were Waqar and Pollock - who were pretty special as well. Really, what an epic decade it was for pace bowling!

 

[grecian]

PS (Fanie) de Villiers: Test 18 matches, 85 wickets at 24.3, 83 ODIs, 95 wickets at 27.8, RPO 3.57

That is bowling of a bloody impressive swing bowler. And he did bowl Aussies to defeat single handedly in late 1990w.

Yep, I knew his figures, I have cricinfo bookmarked too. They're very nice figures, but to suggest that he was part of one of the greatest pace-bowling quartets of all-time with McMillan, just seems fanciful.

He did bowl well in one match in that OZ series. Yet we're not going to give ATG status, or even in an ATG line-up to people who did that once, unless you want to include Dean Headley and Andy Caddick in those lists.

 

[Rasimione]

The best bowling action i have seen. Used pace and intimidation as a weapon. But like SeamUP has said, Brett Schultz was the real deal. Fate dealt us a cruel blow.

 

[stephen]

He was always extremely good, but never seemed to inspire the same fear as Ambrose did. Ambrose you always feared could just totally destroy your entire team, but Donald seemed more like the guy who could jag a few early wickets and maybe put you on the backfoot, but not win the game outright with an inspired spell.

 

[ankitj]

He was always extremely good, but never seemed to inspire the same fear as Ambrose did. Ambrose you always feared could just totally destroy your entire team, but Donald seemed more like the guy who could jag a few early wickets and maybe put you on the backfoot, but not win the game outright with an inspired spell.

Depends actually on which team you support. Ambrose had some great performances against Australia which might be influencing your view here. On the other hand because I support India, I remember Donald making me more nervous than Ambrose. On India's 96/97 tour to South Africa, Donald seemed capable of picking wicket with every ball. Most Indian batsmen looked like club cricketer against him It just seemed a matter of time before he would get them out, and he did mostly.

 

[GotSpin]

This inswinger he produced to (Vaughan or Atherton?) - the first wicket of the clip below. IIRC was the first over of the first test at Jo-burg around 1999 or 2000

Alan Donald destroying Englismen - YouTube

Thats just an unfair delivery

 

[Arachnodouche]

@ankit, I think Ambrose hardly played against India, and never in India at all. Believe me, we would've been pissing ourselves with him charging in against Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia

Looking at Donald's action, it's unreal how immaculate it looks even to the untrained eye. There was never any doubt as a kid even that his was the best action going around. And of course my generation remembers that first ball of the '92 WC in Oz.