FaaipDeOiad said:
I know what you mean. He doesn't have the same kind of attractive rhythm as other bowlers, because of his front-on style. I don't enjoy watching him as much as someone like Holding with a more classical style.
Interesting that they are all from the same period. McGrath and Ambrose don't rate on the same level for you? Or Donald or Wasim, for that matter?
Wel they are from a twenty year period I would say. I have been watching for 40 years. The first ten I am leaving since I was too young and we saw much less of cricket due to no TV. So while I saw Hall, Griffith. I dont include them. Yes I could include Mckenzie.
I did not see Trueman.
Last ten years havent been great for fast bowling.
So that really leaves the period from 1975 to 1995 or so. In this there were lots of very good fast bowlers. i would say, after the second world war, this was the best period for fast bowling because both numbers and quality was very high. Lillee, Thomson, plenty of West Indians, Imran, Sarfaraz, Wasim and Waqar, Kapil, Botham Willis, Hadlee.
About Donald, yes, I missed him. Somehow, we tend to leave out the South Africans when we look at earlier periods, I think because we did not play them tilll very late. Yes he was very good. Very fast and very aggressive.
As for Wasim, I think he kept improving as a bowler. He was at his best , as a comlete bowler, in the later part of his career. He reaaly picked up a lot of tricks. But when he was younger, he was a tearaway bowler but nothing subtle. In that mode, Waqar was a better bowler.
I have always felt that MacGrath and bowlers of his type have been more successful because of the bad habits batsmen have picked up in the limited over game and carried them into the longer version. People like Gavaskar would not fall for this little bit of movement on and around the off stump and make mistakes. They would see it and have the patience to play it on merit for two days if required. To dislodge them you needed bowlers like Imran or Lillee who would surprise them with big movements in one direction and then the other. They had to be prised out by really unplayable deliveries and not just playing on their patience. it works today because the batsmen show less patience.
Gavaskar, Boycott etc wouldnt get out to MacGrath that easily. I am not saying he is not a very good bowler but he relies a lot on batsmen making mistakes the way spinners do where as the great fast bowlers that i have listed will bowl unplayable deliveries more frequently.
You should try to get some old films of Imran, Roberts and Holding bowling to see what I mean.
Waqar also used to do that in more recent times.
Again with Ambrose, I did not see enough. And like Marshall he was not "pretty" but I saw quite a bit of him in his last two years. He was phenomenally accurate in that period and very awkward height. He too seemed to become a better mover of the ball as he grew older.
You have to understand that Roberts and Holding did not bowl in a four man fast bowleing attack as it became later. So the batsman did get some respite from fast bowling and settled down. When West Indies started having a four bowler attack, i feel, individual bowlers had things easier. For the same reason, Imran and Hadlee were so great since they did not have great support at the other end.
Some people believe this is good for them since they will get more wickets, but thats not accurate, they will also come back to bowl at batsmen who are settled and playing more confidently.