Which are the best performing batsman and bowler to tour each test country?

[wpdavid]

Murali in England in seriously impressive. 48 wickets in 6 games with 3 tenfers, one of those a 16-wicket haul.

How does he compare with Alderman?

This isn't intended to be a full answer, but Alderman would have been competing with better bowlers for his wickets, so wickets per game isn't the deciding issue. Average and strike rate may tell us rather more.

EDIT
Murali actually averaged 19 in England - same as Alderman iirc. Being honest, that surprised me.
Perhaps there's a case that Alderman posed a more consistent threat. Looking in detail at Murali's figures, in the three games where conditions were in his favour, he really cashed in with 37 wickets @ 12.6 Whereas his other three tests saw 11 wickets at 41.4, averaging over 50 in two of them. That's in one third of his tests in England, of course.
Alderman's averages in each of his 12 tests were14.4, 60.5, 21.6, 13.4, 21.9, 28.8, 15.1, 20.9, 20.3, 23.0, 14.4 and 13.7
Make of it what you will.

 

[subshakerz]

This isn't intended to be a full answer, but Alderman would have been competing with better bowlers for his wickets, so wickets per game isn't the deciding issue. Average and strike rate may tell us rather more.

EDIT
Murali actually averaged 19 in England - same as Alderman iirc. Being honest, that surprised me.
Perhaps there's a case that Alderman posed a more consistent threat. Looking in detail at Murali's figures, in the three games where conditions were in his favour, he really cashed in with 37 wickets @ 12.6 Whereas his other three tests saw 11 wickets at 41.4, averaging over 50 in two of them. That's in one third of his tests in England, of course.
Alderman's averages in each of his 12 tests were14.4, 60.5, 21.6, 13.4, 21.9, 28.8, 15.1, 20.9, 20.3, 23.0, 14.4 and 13.7
Make of it what you will.

Alderman better. Murali had a poor series in between in 2002.

 

[Godard]

Eng: V Richards. Dravid and Waugh are good contenders, but i am ruling out Waugh cause during his peak, he faced some of the worst Eng attacks ever. In case of Viv and Dravid, Viv never had a bad series there, his best series was bigger and against a better attack than Dravid’s, and had a excellent tour in 1980 where he faced peak Willis and Botham(on par with Broad and Anderson in 2011) tho not as good as Dravid 2011. Both had a decent tour(1991 and 1996), an ATG tour(1976 and 2011). Dravid had a great tour(2002) whereas Viv had an excellent one(1980), but whereas Dravid had a bad 2007 tour, Viv had a decent. So because I would rate Viv’s ATG tour above Dravid’s, it would be Viv for me, but still close.


Eng: Alderman. Better spread across venues and did it for more matches than Murali.


Aus: V Richards: Very marginal with Sachin and Viv, cause they followed a nearly identical career trajectory during series in Aus, but will go Viv, because his 1979/80 series was against a better attack on tougher pitches vs Tendy‘s 2007 series. Otherwise Tendy 2003= Viv 1984, Tendy 1999= Viv 1988(Viv averaged 10 more and scored much faster, but Tendulkar faced a clearly superior attack tho Warne was from his best), Tendulkar 1991/92= Viv 1975, Tendy 2011= Viv 1980/81.


Aus: Curtly Ambrose. WPM of 5.5, a decent number of matches, consistently great in all the tours, average under 20. Hadlee has even more insane figures, but the Aus sides Hadlee bowled really well to(especially 85/86, where he took 33 wickets in 3 matches) are clearly inferior in batting to the sides Ambrose bowled to(88/89 was a decent Aus side, and the 91/92(which was his best series) was properly good and 96/97 was the best team in the world(and he bowled well to them too)).



India: Lloyd. Dominance in all 3 tours, averaged what 75 for 1000 plus runs. Dominated one of the most deadly spin combos in history on their home tracks, and Kapil Dev and Co for good effect too. Dominated for more the double the number of matches that Younis did for(with similar stats), and Lloyd’s dominance is spread across 5 different tracks, while majority of Younis’s runs come from two tracks(which Lloyd played well).


India: Steyn. Has slightly better stats than Marshall(better WPM, better average, better SR did well in both initial tours, third tour just bowled in one match, otherwise his stats would look even better). Also Steyn’s performance in 2007 tour and 2009 tour jointly is statistically equal to Marshall’s 1983 tour(Marshall had perhaps marginally more competition, but Steyn also competed with Ntini and Morkel), but the batting lineup Steyn faced was one of the greatest in history. On raw stats Walsh is better, but Steyn faced batting lineups eons ahead of the ones faced by Walsh(especially the one Walsh faced in his best tour). Walsh had little or no competition or both tours( no Marshall, no Bishop, no Ambrose). Plus unlike Marshall, Steyn didn’t have a bad series in India, just a one off bad match. So I would rate Steyn marginally ahead of Walsh.

SA: Kohli. Clearly ahead of his competition. Faced even tougher attacks than Tendulkar and Waugh, and in even worse conditions. Faced peak Steyn-Morkel-Philander in 2013 and nearly had a Tendulkar 2010 level series(268 in 2 matches vs 326 in 3 matches), and faced peak Philander-Rabada in 2017-18 with Morkel and Steyn(though not at their peak) thrown in for good measure on some horrific pitches and was heads and shoulders the best batsmen in the series. Doesn’t have a single bad series in SA(was decent, not bad the last time) unlike Tendulkar in 1992-93.

NZ: Wasim easily

WI: Waugh, slightly over Amarnath because of more consistent greatness and because of his hand in 94-95 win against peak Ambrose-Walsh. It is close because of Amarnath’s magnificent series in 82-83 against the quarter away from home.

WI: Imran. Has better WPM than McGrath, tho lower average(probably because he was outright leader of the attack). But bowled to a clearly better batting lineup overall than McGrath(especially in McGrath’s best series in 99).

SL: Lara

SL: Warne

Pak: Sangakkara. Yes he played his best series vs them in UAE(although was good in Pak also), playing Ajmal would have been tougher in UAE than in Pak, so instead he would get extra points for that.

Will take some time for the other countries.

 

[subshakerz]

Eng: V Richards. Dravid and Waugh are good contenders, but i am ruling out Waugh cause during his peak, he faced some of the worst Eng attacks ever. In case of Viv and Dravid, Viv never had a bad series there, his best series was bigger and against a better attack than Dravid’s, and had a excellent tour in 1980 where he faced peak Willis and Botham(on par with Broad and Anderson in 2011) tho not as good as Dravid 2011. Both had a decent tour(1991 and 1996), an ATG tour(1976 and 2011). Dravid had a great tour(2002) whereas Viv had an excellent one(1980), but whereas Dravid had a bad 2007 tour, Viv had a decent. So because I would rate Viv’s ATG tour above Dravid’s, it would be Viv for me, but still close.


Eng: Alderman. Better spread across venues and did it for more matches than Murali.



Aus: V Richards: Very marginal with Sachin and Viv, cause they followed a nearly identical career trajectory during series in Aus, but will go Viv, because his 1979/80 series was against a better attack on tougher pitches vs Tendy‘s 2007 series. Otherwise Tendy 2003= Viv 1984, Tendy 1999= Viv 1988(Viv averaged 10 more, Tendulkar faced a clearly superior attack), Tendulkar 1991/92= Viv 1975, Tendy 2011= Viv 1980/81.



Aus: Curtly Ambrose. WPM of 5.5, a decent number of matches, consistently great in all the tours, average under 20. Hadlee has even more insane figures, but the Aus sides Hadlee bowled really well to(especially 85/86, where he took 33 wickets in 3 matches) are clearly inferior in batting to the sides Ambrose bowled to(88/89 was a decent Aus side, and the 91/92(which was his best series) was properly good and 96/97 was the best team in the world(and he bowled well to them too)).



India: Lloyd. Dominance in all 3 tours, averaged what 75 for 1000 plus runs. Dominated one of the most deadly spin combos in history on their home tracks, and Kapil Dev and Co for good effect too. Dominated for more the double the number of matches that Younis did for(with similar stats), and Lloyd’s dominance is spread across 5 different tracks, while majority of Younis’s runs come from two tracks(which Lloyd played well).


India: Steyn. Has slightly better stats than Marshall(better WPM, better average, better SR did well in both initial tours, third tour just bowled in one match, otherwise his stats would look even better). Also Steyn’s performance in 2007 tour and 2009 tour jointly is statistically equal to Marshall’s 1983 tour(Marshall had perhaps marginally more competition, but Steyn also competed with Ntini and Morkel), but the batting lineup Steyn faced was one of the greatest in history. On raw stats Walsh is better, but Steyn faced batting lineups eons ahead of the ones faced by Walsh(especially the one Walsh faced in his best tour). Walsh had little or no competition or both tours( no Marshall, no Bishop, no Ambrose). Plus unlike Marshall, Steyn didn’t have a bad series in India, just a one off bad match. So I would rate Steyn marginally ahead of Walsh.

SA: Kohli. Clearly ahead of his competition. Faced even tougher attacks than Tendulkar and Waugh, and in even worse conditions. Faced peak Steyn-Morkel-Philander in 2013 and nearly had a Tendulkar 2010 level series(268 in 2 matches vs 326 in 3 matches), and faced peak Philander-Rabada in 2017-18 with Morkel and Steyn(though not at their peak) thrown in for good measure on some horrific pitches and was heads and shoulders the best batsmen in the series. Doesn’t have a single bad series in SA(was decent, not bad the last time) unlike Tendulkar in 1992-93.

NZ: Wasim easily

WI: Waugh, slightly over Amarnath because of more consistent greatness and because of his hand in 94-95 win against peak Ambrose-Walsh. It is close because of Amarnath’s magnificent series in 82-83 against the quarter away from home.

WI: Imran. Has better WPM than McGrath, tho lower average(probably because he was outright leader of the attack). But bowled to a clearly better batting lineup overall than McGrath(especially in McGrath’s best series in 99).

SL: Lara

SL: Warne

Pak: Sangakkara. Yes he played his best series vs them in UAE(although was good in Pak also), playing Ajmal would have been tougher in UAE than in Pak, so instead he would get extra points for that.

Will take some time for the other countries.

Agree with most except:

India: Walsh may not have faced the same batting lineups but he was more consistently excellent. Steyn was hammered in his off games.

Aus: Hadlee actually had an excellent series against a strong lineup in 80, ATG series in 84/85 and another excellent series in the late 80s. His numbers are out of this world.

SL: Prefer Sehwag as he succeeded in two series vs Lara in one.

 

[Godard]

Agree with most except:

India: Walsh may not have faced the same batting lineups but he was more consistently excellent. Steyn was hammered in his off games.

Aus: Hadlee actually had an excellent series against a strong lineup in 80, ATG series in 84/85 and another excellent series in the late 80s. His numbers are out of this world.

SL: Prefer Sehwag as he succeeded in two series vs Lara in one.

Agree with Walsh, but Ambrose faced some of the best Aus batting lineups. Hadlee’s best series which really lifts his numbers was against a really bad Aus lineup bar Border. Ambrose had a similar series as Hadlee 1981 vs a far superior batting lineup in 1991. He had a slightly better series than Hadlee 1987 vs Aus 1988/89 vs a a slightly better lineup. Ambrose 1996 wasnt near HADLEE 1985, but was very good and he faced far superior batting. So maybe a tie, or just Ambrose for me. Lara over Sehwag, because he faced peak Murali, whereas Murali was past his peak vs Sehwag in 2008/9 and really past it in 2010/11.

 

[subshakerz]

Agree with Walsh, but Ambrose faced some of the best Aus batting lineups. Hadlee’s best series which really lifts his numbers was against a really bad Aus lineup bar Border. Ambrose had a similar series as Hadlee 1981 vs a far superior batting lineup in 1991. He had a slightly better series than Hadlee 1987 vs Aus 1988/89 vs a a slightly better lineup. Ambrose 1996 wasnt near HADLEE 1985, but was very good and he faced far superior batting. So maybe a tie, or just Ambrose for me. Lara over Sehwag, because he faced peak Murali, whereas Murali was past his peak vs Sehwag in 2008/9 and really past it in 2010/11.

In 80, Hadlee faced a lineup of Chappell, Hughes, Border and Walters which I think counts for a lot.

However, Hadlee failed in 73/74 which tips the scales in favor of Ambrose.

 

[Migara]

Averaged over 100 in Sri Lanka (65 in Asia), but only 33 in NZ. Was born in the wrong part of the world.

He had a serious problem against Vaas.

 

[Godard]

In 80, Hadlee faced a lineup of Chappell, Hughes, Border and Walters which I think counts for a lot.

However, Hadlee failed in 73/74 which tips the scales in favor of Ambrose.

Yes that, and plus Ambrose bowled to even better batting in 91/92(his best series) and 96/97(very good too), both Waughs, Border, Martyn, Mark Taylor, Langer(a rookie then tho). Plus Ambrose faced good competition from Walsh/Bishop on all tours and even Marshall on the first tour(26 wickets from 5 vs a very good lineup too). The first two tours which saw Ambrose claim 59 wickets from 10 matches(slightly behind Hadlee’s WPM overall) were vs batting lineups better than Aus 1980 and Aus 1996 was another level entirely. Overall 78 from 14( vs Hadlee’s 77 from 12) despite all the competition, which HADLEE never faced shows how good Ambrose was.

 

[Migara]

Alderman better. Murali had a poor series in between in 2002.

He was back from a shoulder surgery. Still produced that ball to Butcher.

 

[Godard]

He was back from a shoulder surgery. Still produced that ball to Butcher.

Alderman has a better spread of grounds and did it for double the matches Murali did(WPM of 7 vs 8), despite facing better competition.

 

[Godard]

He was back from a shoulder surgery. Still produced that ball to Butcher.

But yes, that ball to Butcher was quite out of this world.

 

[subshakerz]

Yes that, and plus Ambrose bowled to even better batting in 91/92(his best series) and 96/97(very good too), both Waughs, Border, Martyn, Mark Taylor, Langer(a rookie then tho). Plus Ambrose faced good competition from Walsh/Bishop on all tours and even Marshall on the first tour(26 wickets from 5 vs a very good lineup too). The first two tours which saw Ambrose claim 59 wickets from 10 matches(slightly behind Hadlee’s WPM overall) were vs batting lineups better than Aus 1980 and Aus 1996 was another level entirely. Overall 78 from 14( vs Hadlee’s 77 from 12) despite all the competition, which HADLEE never faced shows how good Ambrose was.

Ambrose actually performed poorly in the first two games before making a comeback. His series in the early nineties was an ATG one.

 

[Godard]

Ambrose actually performed poorly in the first two games before making a comeback. His series in the early nineties was an ATG one.

Yes but the overall performance was very good, not ATG I agree. But first series was legitimately great, and second series was ATG equal to Hadlee 1985, considering the gulf in the quality of Aus 1985(Border only) and Aus 1991(Taylor, S Waugh, M Waugh, Border, Martyn, young Langer).

 

[Godard]

Ambrose actually performed poorly in the first two games before making a comeback. His series in the early nineties was an ATG one.

I had meant that the Aus batting lineup 1996 was another level compared to any Aus lineup Hadlee bowled to(Hayden, Taylor, Both Waughs, Bevan, and even a young Ponting). But on second thoughts, while the team overall was better, the Aus 1992 side had better batting, a level ahead than any Aus batting lineup Hadlee bowled, while the 96 batting was slightly better or equal to Aus 1980 batting.

 

[Godard]

I would actually rate Ambrose 1991/2 marginally greater than Hadlee 1985, consiseeing the former bowled to a phenomenal side, while the latter was bowling to a club level batting attack bar AB. Also Ambrose was facing much greater competition.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yes but the overall performance was very good, not ATG I agree. But first series was legitimately great, and second series was ATG equal to Hadlee 1985, considering the gulf in the quality of Aus 1985(Border only) and Aus 1991(Taylor, S Waugh, M Waugh, Border, Martyn, young Langer).

That's not a great looking lineup tbh. Steve Waugh in the sucky part of his career, Martyn/Langer before their recall.

 

[subshakerz]

I would actually rate Ambrose 1991/2 marginally greater than Hadlee 1985, consiseeing the former bowled to a phenomenal side, while the latter was bowling to a club level batting attack bar AB. Also Ambrose was facing much greater competition.

Nope. Hadlee took fifers in 5/6 innings. Weaker lineup yes but that level of wicket-taking is insane.

 

[Godard]

Even if i agree Hadlee had the best tour there, Overall, Ambrose is better since he generally bowled to better Aus batting tho, and was able to maintain a WPM of more than 5.5 WPM(Hadlee is slightly below 6.5) despite facing very good competition on all his tours, and did well on all tours.

 

[subshakerz]

Overall tho, Ambrose is better since he generally bowled to better Aus batting tho, and was able to maintain a WPM of more than 5.5 WPM(Hadlee is slightly below 6.5) despite facing very good competition on all his tours.

Who is the best bowler in SA?

Bumrah? Cummins? Mitch Johnson?

 

[Godard]

Who is the best bowler in SA?

Bumrah? Cummins? Mitch Johnson?

Out of the above, Johnson for me, tho Cummins is close. Johnson had two great series, and one poor(only played two matches tho). Cummins had a really good, tho brief start and one great series. But Johnson had a even better series vs a better batting lineup in 2013/14 and a similarly great series vs a better batting lineup in SA 2007/8.