• 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.

You call that a battle?! This is a battle! Angus Fraser v Darren Gough

Who was the better bowler?


  • Total voters
    27

UncleTheOne

U19 Captain
i think most will agree the pick of the 90s english bowlers.

so a super agent approaches your team and offers the best versions of gough and fraser, you can only take one, who be it?
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Who was the better bowler? hmm, tough one

Gough was the better servant to English cricket and along with his quick bowling he brought energy and a bit of batting. Probably the only quality quick much above medium pace that England produced since Willis.

However, in terms of who was the better bowler Id have to go with Fraser. Even before injury he was never fast but he hit the bat hard and had some 'nip'. A great splice bowler that had guys coming forward and the ball getting big on them. Never gave anything away and came hard all the time. A really difficult opponent.
 

FBU

International 12th Man
I'll go for Gough. Fraser was before my time.
Strike rate Gough 51.60 compared to Fraser 61.40.
 

Isaac C

Cricket Spectator
Who was the better bowler? hmm, tough one

Gough was the better servant to English cricket and along with his quick bowling he brought energy and a bit of batting. Probably the only quality quick much above medium pace that England produced since Willis.

However, in terms of who was the better bowler Id have to go with Fraser. Even before injury he was never fast but he hit the bat hard and had some 'nip'. A great splice bowler that had guys coming forward and the ball getting big on them. Never gave anything away and came hard all the time. A really difficult opponent.
I agree it is a difficult one to choose. For me though Fraser is just slightly ahead. He was a real work horse bowler and fairly big injuries denied him being one of the world's best bowlers and taking over 300 wickets. Instead he managed 177. Gough was the better death bowler in the ODI's and was also a better bowler on an overcast day when the ball would swing.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
I misread the first post when giving my vote to Darren Gough - if an agent offers me the best of either, I would select Angus Fraser. Darren Gough did not reach massive heights of brilliance with his bowling, he was more of a consistent performer. Fraser's performances against the West Indies still stick in my mind, despite me being 7 during the 1998 series and 3 during the 1994 series.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Fraser, unquestionably for mine - in Tests. Not by that much, but a clear mark there.

Both, of course, could have done so much more and were very probably only denied by injuries. The careers of both will always leave me with a feeling of great disappointment - as, I dare say, did those of Paul Reiffel, Damien Fleming and maybe even Jason Gillespie for the same reasons in Australian circles.

Fraser had one crucial thing that Gough never did - height. True, Gough could bowl both seam and swing (and swing with new and old ball - the first such bowler from this country to do so) whereas Fraser (especially after his injury) usually relied on there being seam in the surface to make him dangerous. But added to his height Fraser was much more accurate. If Gough were to get a ball that neither swung conventionally or reverse, he had neither the height nor accuracy (the former not helping the latter of course - taller bowlers have much greater margin-for-error in length than shorter ones) to be much more than fair cannon-fodder. Fraser was always at the batsman even if he didn't always offer to get them out - and of course, this meant that when there was something in the pitch for him he got far more wickets than Gough did because he hit the right areas so much more.

In ODIs, meanwhile, both were in their own ways quite brilliant, and the perfect pairing any captain could ask for. Fraser (and Caddick again immediately after his retirement) rarely failed to be good for 10 tight overs off the reel and very possibly an early wicket or two; Gough (until 2001/02 and his own problems starting) usually gave you 4 or 5 with a very high chance of early wickets, and then came back at the death and was often almost impossible to get away with his reverse-inswing and pinpoint Yorker length. Give either the other's job and they'd probably both go awfully - but you couldn't wish for much more if you gave them the right roles. So impossible to say one was better.
 

Top