Brett Lee vs Dale Steyn vs Shane Bond?

[soso_killer]

Steyn has far greater strike rate, so economy rate makes hardly makes any difference in test cricket.


41.5>>>47.5

I feel sorry for Donald to be honest i wish he could have had at least 80 test matches. I dont think people appreciate him as well as they should. He was a complete bowler to Steyn IMHO, his record is very balanced. For example Steyn's record against left handers is not as impressive as his record against right handers. Also Donald has a higher percentage of wickets against to order batsmen than Steyn. He is 2nd only to Glenn McGrath in that regard, yes McGrath, not Hadlee and not Marshall.
By the way its not 47.5 its 47.0 to the dot.

 

[soso_killer]

*Top order batsmen

 

[SL_Fan]

Steyn easily.

 

[shah_1]

Steyn has to take 18 wickets to break the Donald wickets record and he has got another 10 matches to break it easily.

 

[pacesensation]

at his peak Shane Bond was better than both.

 

[Jo_Don]

at his peak Shane Bond was better than both.

At his peak, Mike Hussey was almost as good as Bradman. Peaks are irrelevant.

Sent from my XT910 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Robert]

Whats my criterion? I never said Lillee was not ATG i said i would pick Donald and Steyn in a blink ahead of him, and i still stand by that statement.
By the way Donald was not as bad in Australia as people would have you beleive. Here are the numbers:
MTCHS, WKTS, AVG, S.R, ECON, 5, 10.
7, 29, 28.44, 57.7, 2.95, 1, 0. Best of 6/59, BBM 9/133.
Here is Glenn McGrath in Australia vs SA
9, 28, 31.17, 80.3, 2.32, 0, 0. Best of 3/13, BBM 6/107.
I dont know about you but i know who was "ordinary" in Australia.
Bizzarly Donald never played against Australia in SA.

Consider also Wasim, who cannot be considered an ATG according to your criterion because he didn't do so well in England.

A bowler cannot be ATG unless he has excellent figures in Europe.

 

[soso_killer]

Consider also Wasim, who cannot be considered an ATG according to your criterion because he didn't do so well in England.

A bowler cannot be ATG unless he has excellent figures in Europe.

Lol, you must be trolling. You keep on quoting staff that i have not even said. I have used numbers to back my statements. Which is more than i can say for you.
What criterion are you talking about? I never had any criteria, however a player has to be consistent in different conditions.
Any great player is allowed to have his bogey team or country just 1 though. Even Messi has not scored against Chelsea in 8 meetings, but of course Messi is a great player.
So what criterion?

 

[Gilly]

You obviously weren't watching closely enough.

He didnt play many games in the sub continant but his record is still good there. He absolutely destroyed Indian battling line up on a road of a pitch in Zimbabwe with 6 for 19 in an ODI is one such instance.

Swing both ways at pace were his weapons not the pitch.

Bond's bowling average in Australia is 96.

 

[Random Aussie]

Lol, you must be trolling. You keep on quoting staff that i have not even said. I have used numbers to back my statements. Which is more than i can say for you.
What criterion are you talking about? I never had any criteria, however a player has to be consistent in different conditions.
Any great player is allowed to have his bogey team or country just 1 though. Even Messi has not scored against Chelsea in 8 meetings, but of course Messi is a great player.
So what criterion?

What now? That is just nonsense. Murali averaged 36 against Aus and 32 against India, therefore because he was rubbish against two teams, he is no great?

Waqar averaged 33 v Aus and 48 against India, so he aint no great either.

Wasim averaged around 30 against England and South Africa, so he must be just a chump too.

 

[Savak]

What now? That is just nonsense. Murali averaged 36 against Aus and 32 against India, therefore because he was rubbish against two teams, he is no great?

Waqar averaged 33 v Aus and 48 against India, so he aint no great either.

Wasim averaged around 30 against England and South Africa, so he must be just a chump too.

These things will count against them. Thats why people analyze players inside and out. Yes everyone has his criteria of what constitutes all time greatness but if there is a pattern where a western player has excellent stats against western nations, western pitches (which btw are known to offer a much better balance b/w bat and ball compared to the subcontinent) but poor against Asian, subcontinent teams on Asian, Subcontinent pitches then a natural conclusion will be drawn that he was not effective in conditions which didnt support him.

The same thing will be counted against Richard Hadlee for e.g. I consider Mcgrath IMO to be better than Lillee for his all around superiority, i have seen Mcgrath get wickets and wreck havoc on dead wickets as well. Dont think Lillee was capable of the same and please now dont bring "Oh but Lillee had a back problem etc", if he was playing it means he considered himself mostly fit and able to deliver.

 

[Random Aussie]

The same thing will be counted against Richard Hadlee for e.g. I consider Mcgrath IMO to be better than Lillee for his all around superiority, i have seen Mcgrath get wickets and wreck havoc on dead wickets as well. Dont think Lillee was capable of the same and please now dont bring "Oh but Lillee had a back problem etc", if he was playing it means he considered himself mostly fit and able to deliver.

Your opinion is yours and you are entitled to it, on the measurement of players.

With regard to the bolded you have absolutely zero idea what you are talking about, you are simply insulting a great bowler with zero evidence simply to be provocative. You are completely making things up and posting them as if they are facts, which is what is annoying Robert and myself.

It is like me saying Waqar chickened out of the 1992 World Cup, he played series before and after the WC so he must have been scared to play in Oz right? Since he averaged 33 against us, that proves he was no good in Aus and chickened out. See I can play that game too.

 

[Savak]

Your opinion is yours and you are entitled to it, on the measurement of players.

With regard to the bolded you have absolutely zero idea what you are talking about, you are simply insulting a great bowler with zero evidence simply to be provocative. You are completely making things up and posting them as if they are facts, which is what is annoying Robert and myself.

It is like me saying Waqar chickened out of the 1992 World Cup, he played series before and after the WC so he must have been scared to play in Oz right? Since he averaged 33 against us, that proves he was no good in Aus and chickened out. See I can play that game too.

The fact Waqar did not have a great record in Australia will go against him, the kind of bowler he was he should have done much better against them given he played against them in his peak. Same would go for Inzi, his poor record against Aus and SA the two teams with the best bowling attack of his era will also go against him.

What is there to insult Lillee about? I am calling a spade a spade, he has no performance outside Australia in the subcontinent to speak off. In fact given the kinds of pitches in Asia, it would warrant the question had Lillee be playing at his peak today on these wickets, would he have delivered? Not based on his subcontinent record.

 

[soso_killer]

To be honest this dialog is getting dragged into staff i did not want to talk about.
My main point was that Donald is and was and will forever be better than Lillee, i dont know what the argument is about to be honest. The fact is we will never know how Lillee would have faired in the SUB, i dont want to debate about that now, i will use this SUB talk when i need it.

 

[Random Aussie]

What is there to insult Lillee about? I am calling a spade a spade, he has no performance outside Australia in the subcontinent to speak off. In fact given the kinds of pitches in Asia, it would warrant the question had Lillee be playing at his peak today on these wickets, would he have delivered? Not based on his subcontinent record.

You referred to the guy as chickening out of playing the subcontinent, with zero evidence to back that statement up. You can deflect all you want but thats what Robert and I object to.

Saying Lillee's s/c record goes against him is a fair comment, the other is not.

 

[Random Aussie]

To be honest this dialog is getting dragged into staff i did not want to talk about.
My main point was that Donald is and was and will forever be better than Lillee, i dont know what the argument is about to be honest. The fact is we will never know how Lillee would have faired in the SUB, i dont want to debate about that now, i will use this SUB talk when i need it.

Well see Donald didnt produce anything against the best of his era, went missing against us.

Lillee averaged under 20 in WSC against the best of the best. That would be my counter argument. Never quite understood why people rated Donald TBH.

 

[Jo_Don]

Well see Donald didnt produce anything against the best of his era, went missing against us.

Lillee averaged under 20 in WSC against the best of the best. That would be my counter argument. Never quite understood why people rated Donald TBH.

Not sure if I agree with that criteria. What would have made McGrath, Warne and Marshall great, given that they played for the best team of their eras?

 

[A-1]

Not many rate Donald on PP, I personally felt he was a great bowler def. one of the best.

On topic:
in Test, Dale "magnificent" Steyn
In ODI's : Shane bond

 

[Random Aussie]

Not sure if I agree with that criteria. What would have made McGrath, Warne and Marshall great, given that they played for the best team of their eras?

Its not an objective criteria. I am saying I dont rate Donald very highly because he didnt do anything of note against us, when it mattered, when series were on the line, when the number 1 ranking was on the line etc etc.

 

[James]

Donald and Lillee criminally underrated by some.

I still stick with Lee, he is in a league of his own with Akhtar, better than steyn due to pace which takes a lot of skill even if steyn takes more wickets.

 

[soso_killer]

Well see Donald didnt produce anything against the best of his era, went missing against us.

Lillee averaged under 20 in WSC against the best of the best. That would be my counter argument. Never quite understood why people rated Donald TBH.

what? Are you kidding me? Did you look at the numbers above that i gave you? By your criterion then McGrath was not a great bowler as he was pathetic against the best opponent of his generation which was South Africa. Ranked number 2 throught. I can play that game too.

 

[soso_killer]

Its not an objective criteria. I am saying I dont rate Donald very highly because he didnt do anything of note against us, when it mattered, when series were on the line, when the number 1 ranking was on the line etc etc.

well i suppose i never really rated McGrath, because the best team that could handle pace and swing was SA. If Donald's AVG of 28 and S.R of 57.7 was "ordinary", i suppose McGrath's 32 @80 was pathetic then right? Then i am sure you dont rate McGrath based on your criterion.
And for the gazilino time Donald never played Australia in SA, i'm his numbers would have been greater. To AVG 28 @57 away from home against the best team of your era is pretty decent IMHO. (i will try and do a stat to see how the best bowlers bowled against the best teams of their era away from home, that would give a good indication of were Donald is)

 

[Hasan123]

Steyn gun.

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

Dale Steyn is ATG. Brett was not that great in tests.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Steyn is possibly the best pace bowler in last 2 decades, Lee and Bond are nowhere near close

 

[Justcrazy]

Lee and Bond are ahead of Styen in shorter format.

In Test , styen is the best.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

I'd take a fully fit bond over the other 2 in all formats

Tests :

Bond
Steyn
Lee

ODIs :

Bond
Lee
Steyn

 

[The_Odd_One]

I will take Steyn in tests and Lee in ODIs. Bond was potentially better than them but he did not play enough to surpass Steyn and Lee.

 

[Ab Fan]

Tests:

Steyn
Bond
Lee(Lee was just a good test bowler)

ODIS:

Lee(ATG)
Bond
Steyn(Steyn is just a good ODI bowler)


Overall,Steyn is well ahead and Bond had great potential but couldn't fulfill it due to injury issues.

 

[ExpressPacer]

Steyn is one of the greatest bowlers to have played the game and I would say he is a pretty good ODI bowler too but Lee was an ATG ODI bowler. Haven't seen too much of Bond to say too much. Wasn't really interested in NZ matches back in the day.

 

[volcyz]

Shane Bond was on another level when fit.

 

[Pollack]

Shane Bond was better than all of them. How much I hope he had normal and long career without injuries.He was a freak bowler.

 

[street cricketer]

Lee was the best in ODIs and Steyn in test cricket.

 

[Justcrazy]

Donald is very underatted on this forum

 

[Ashraful_Rox]

All time Aussie greats lost 3 matches to Kiwis, thanks to Bond. Bond in the shorter format is ahead of Steyn and Lee.