Butterteeth
School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Gee its so nice to have my opinion so swiftly dismissed. I suppose this is a case of agree to disagree.Richard said:Whatever "presence" he might've had (along with extremely good bowling) in England, Australia, New Zealand and West Indies, he certainly had absolutely nothing in the subcontinent.
And without success in the subcontinent, no seamer can be regarded as a complete bowler.
Walsh was, by West Indian standards, only very good. It was only right at the end of his career that he was outstanding.
He took more wickets because he played more than most - simple as.
Had Marshall, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Ambrose, Bishop, Clarke, Gray, Croft, Daniel, et al played more they'd very likely have taken as many and more.
It's average and strike-rate that have meaning for bowlers - not number of wickets.
Donald had plenty of success against Australia, and everywhere else.
As for Donald - against Australia - 14 tests for 53 wickets at 31.07.
Moderate - as I said.