What's new

Curtly Ambrose or Allan Donald - Who was the better bowler overall?

Ambrose. But Allan Donald was a great bowler as well, a truly great bowler ... much better than Akram, Waqar, Walsh, Pollock, etc.
 
Ambrose..But Donald is also an ATG bowler in all formats he played.

Unfortunately for Donald, his legacy is hurt by that 99 master-choke..
 
Donald

Ambrose didn't play enough in Asia and when he did he wasn't too flashy
 
Ambrose

He was unplayable at times. Also, was extremely hard to hit. Kept it very tight mostly. I still remember when Ambrose bowled, Pakistan score would read, 12/1 in first 10 overs.
 
I will take Ambrose between these two. Ambrose and McGrath were the two best bowlers of their generation.
 
The_Odd_One said:
Ambrose

He was unplayable at times. Also, was extremely hard to hit. Kept it very tight mostly. I still remember when Ambrose bowled, Pakistan score would read, 12/1 in first 10 overs.
Click to expand...

Pakistan's score still reads the same sometimes...

Which format are we talking about OP?
 
Donald was the better bowler. Quicker, more devastating and had a better overall record.
 
Chrish said:
Donald

Ambrose didn't play enough in Asia and when he did he wasn't too flashy
Click to expand...

Ambrose's record in Asia isn't too shabby - 6 Tests at an average of 22, and averaged 25 in Pakistan. However Donald having played only 3 more Tests than Ambrose has double the number of wickets (36 for AD v 18 for CA).

In ODIs, Ambrose played 47 in Asia and took 60 wickets at an average of 24. Donald took 50 wickets in 27 at an average of 19 which is phenomenal.

I'd say Ambrose wins out as Donald, as much I've fond childhood memories of his bowling, didn't have as good a record against the strongest team of that era which was Australia. Donald's record in Australia is his Achilles' heel.

Ambrose took 78 wickets in 14 Tests in Australia at an average of 19, whereas Donald averages 28 in Australia albeit playing half the Tests as Ambrose.

Donald's record would've been even better if South Africa were readmitted to international cricket earlier.
 
Ambrose by a nose because he did better against the Aussies. But Donald was seriously good with a brilliant strike rate. If he could have started his international career at 20 instead of 27 then goodness knows what he would have achieved - maybe 600 test wiclets.
 
Markhor said:
Ambrose's record in Asia isn't too shabby - 6 Tests at an average of 22, and averaged 25 in Pakistan. However Donald having played only 3 more Tests than Ambrose has double the number of wickets (36 for AD v 18 for CA).

In ODIs, Ambrose played 47 in Asia and took 60 wickets at an average of 24. Donald took 50 wickets in 27 at an average of 19 which is phenomenal.

I'd say Ambrose wins out as Donald, as much I've fond childhood memories of his bowling, didn't have as good a record against the strongest team of that era which was Australia. Donald's record in Australia is his Achilles' heel.

Ambrose took 78 wickets in 14 Tests in Australia at an average of 19, whereas Donald averages 28 in Australia albeit playing half the Tests as Ambrose.

Donald's record would've been even better if South Africa were readmitted to international cricket earlier.
Click to expand...

My bad I mixed up his record against India and pakistan with his record in asia. But still I stand by my original comment.

Ambi was a moody player and I have my doubts about him doing well on dead wickets in the same manner as Mcg, Steyn or Donald did

Ambrose doesn't have good record against India either
 
Last edited:
To be honest , very difficult to pin point here.

I would say in Test if I had to pick one , I would go with Donald , in OD I would go with Ambrose.

Donald had more wicket taking abilities , was quicker .
Ambrose was more accurate and expert in freezing scoring rates.
 
It's very close, but I'll take Donald for my Test team.

I think, Ambi was a bit over-rated for his imposing structure & he looked more threatening than he actually was (in the leagues of ATGs) for his height & approach. He was a fantastic "hit the deck" bowler with utmost accuracy, who had his best days in AUS, where wickets suits his style best. Besides, because of his accuracy, he was probably the best ever fast bowler on 4th innings, on under-prepared tracks. Though extremely economical always, I don't think he was that good on wickets which had even bounce or less grass & he was a poor striker with old ball. Ambi played most of his Tests in WI, UK & AUS; but he wasn't that menacing in Asia. Ambi's average is better for his economy, but Donald had a SR of <48, which probably bettered only by Waquar in contemporary cricket.

Donald on other hand was extremely aggressive fast bowler, who in rhythm was probably the best sight in cricket along with a rampant WY & Dennis Lillee. He started his Test career at almost 26, when I think he wasn't his fastest - in 1990, a 23-24 years old Donald was matching WY pace by pace for Warwickshire. He had a perfect side on action for bowling fast for long hours - I don't think, there is any bowler in history who can beat Donald on average speed in a 23 overs day's work. Ambi was a mean metronome at pace & height, who'll bowl on business spot for whole day (he was like the fast version of Kumble - that's why his record on 4th innings is outstanding), but he didn't swing it much, neither had the reverse swing - he was a bowler for cracked WACA or Bridgetown wicket. Donald had a very good out swing & he off-cut it big on greenish tops. I like Ambi lot, but he'll not be in my Test side over WY or Donald.

In ODI it's not even a contest - Ambi wasn't that good ODI bowler, to be honest. His career stats are a bit inflated for the 3 WSC in AUS in his early days. Extremely economical always, but not the best bowler for ODI, as he struggled to give vital break-through, neither ran through sides. A bowler with 3.5 economy must be respected at highest level, but his SR of 42 & only 5 (or 4) 5fors in ODI suggests that he wasn't someone to win a match, bowling first - besides, he hardly played in South Asian ODI wickets, which in 90s were comfortably 50+ per score than else where. Donald's 1st ODI was at Calcutta & it was a debut to remember - one of the best ever displays of hostile fast bowling in an ODI, defending relatively a small total.
 
MMHS said:
It's very close, but I'll take Donald for my Test team.

I think, Ambi was a bit over-rated for his imposing structure & he looked more threatening than he actually was (in the leagues of ATGs) for his height & approach. He was a fantastic "hit the deck" bowler with utmost accuracy, who had his best days in AUS, where wickets suits his style best. Besides, because of his accuracy, he was probably the best ever fast bowler on 4th innings, on under-prepared tracks. Though extremely economical always, I don't think he was that good on wickets which had even bounce or less grass & he was a poor striker with old ball. Ambi played most of his Tests in WI, UK & AUS; but he wasn't that menacing in Asia. Ambi's average is better for his economy, but Donald had a SR of <48, which probably bettered only by Waquar in contemporary cricket.

Donald on other hand was extremely aggressive fast bowler, who in rhythm was probably the best sight in cricket along with a rampant WY & Dennis Lillee. He started his Test career at almost 26, when I think he wasn't his fastest - in 1990, a 23-24 years old Donald was matching WY pace by pace for Warwickshire. He had a perfect side on action for bowling fast for long hours - I don't think, there is any bowler in history who can beat Donald on average speed in a 23 overs day's work. Ambi was a mean metronome at pace & height, who'll bowl on business spot for whole day (he was like the fast version of Kumble - that's why his record on 4th innings is outstanding), but he didn't swing it much, neither had the reverse swing - he was a bowler for cracked WACA or Bridgetown wicket. Donald had a very good out swing & he off-cut it big on greenish tops. I like Ambi lot, but he'll not be in my Test side over WY or Donald.

In ODI it's not even a contest - Ambi wasn't that good ODI bowler, to be honest. His career stats are a bit inflated for the 3 WSC in AUS in his early days. Extremely economical always, but not the best bowler for ODI, as he struggled to give vital break-through, neither ran through sides. A bowler with 3.5 economy must be respected at highest level, but his SR of 42 & only 5 (or 4) 5fors in ODI suggests that he wasn't someone to win a match, bowling first - besides, he hardly played in South Asian ODI wickets, which in 90s were comfortably 50+ per score than else where. Donald's 1st ODI was at Calcutta & it was a debut to remember - one of the best ever displays of hostile fast bowling in an ODI, defending relatively a small total.
Click to expand...

Is there a video of Donald in 92?
 
Chrish said:
My bad I mixed up his record against India and pakistan with his record in asia. But still I stand by my original comment.

Ambi was a moody player and I have my doubts about him doing well on dead wickets in the same manner as Mcg, Steyn or Donald did

Ambrose doesn't have good record against India either
Click to expand...

It's not as though Ambrose didn't do well on dead tracks though. Asia isn't the only continent which produces flat tracks and we need to get past that stereotype.
 
Curtly. He won test series on his own against Australia and England. Never lost a battle to Michael Atherton either.
 
I'm aghast at people downplaying Ambrose's efforts against the best team of his generation and overstating Donald's impact against mediocre Asian opposition at the same time. Australia were stronger than the West Indies since the turn of the decade, 90-91 and 92-93 were series that WI should have lost on paper and it was due to Ambrose and capable support from Bishop and Walsh that WI retained their unbeaten record. Saying that Ambrose couldn't cut it on flat wickets is also utter nonsense while elevating Donald's performance on dodgy Indian tracks in 1996 and 2000.
 
Donald was unlucky that he made his debut at 25. If only he was born 6-7 years later..

But I rate Ambrose a better bowler. People forget that West Indies had quite a few slow and low tracks even in the 90s whereas the South African pitches were generally seam-friendly in 90s.
 
Bump!

I put McGrath at 1 and Akram at 2. Who was better between Ambrose, Donald, Waqar, Pollock and Walsh?
 
Ted123 said:
Bump!

I put McGrath at 1 and Akram at 2. Who was better between Ambrose, Donald, Waqar, Pollock and Walsh?
Click to expand...

Top 2 I agree.

Then between Donald and Ambrose is tough call. I might go with Donald. Amby didnt do well against one of the two best batsmen of his era and the other one was in his own team only.

Next is Waqar followed by Pollock and then Walsh. Walsh was an average odi bowler but was great test bowler with incredible longevity.
 
Very hard to choose. This is one choice I don't want to make.

Ambrose was mean and the awkward bounce from good length used to get most of the batsmen. It was only a matter of time before they nick one to the slips. He bowl at one spot all day and give away very little. If Batsmen have to score, they will have to take the chance of nicking to the slips.

Donald was fast and intimidating. His short pitched stuff was lethal. He is not as accurate as Ambrose and does not wait for the batsman to make mistakes. He makes things happen unlike Ambrose or McGrath who tested the patience of batsmen. Donald ruffles and disturbs the concentration of the batsmen by bowling into their rib cage or at their head.

I pick Donald. The only reason I pick Donald is due to his fielding. He was quick in the outfield and his throw was accurate. Ambrose was kind of a liability in the field.
 
Ambrose upped his game against the gun Aus team and not sure if many posters are giving enough credit for that.
 
Buffet said:
Ambrose upped his game against the gun Aus team and not sure if many posters are giving enough credit for that.
Click to expand...

How would you rank McGrath, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Waqar, Pollock and Walsh overall?
 
Ab Fan said:
How would you rank McGrath, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald, Waqar, Pollock and Walsh overall?
Click to expand...

Over all becomes hard due to formats, but it's easy to do so in individual format.

McGrath > Ambrose > Wasim = Donald > Waqar > Pollock > Walsh [ In test ]

Wasim > McGrath > Pollock > Ambrose > Donald > Waqar > Walsh [ In ODI ]

It's hard to put this kind of order for combined format because it will depend on how much weight you want to give to each format and even for me that weight changes based on when I am putting that order.
 
Donald missed his peak years as a fast bowler due to the ban.. He still did brilliantly BT Ambrose wins this one.
 
Ambrose was the nastier version of Mcgrath.Donald was great but was great for a short time,ambrose was great even after his pace was gone.If you ask me to name the 3 greatest fast bowlers ever it will be
1.Marshall
2.Akram
3.Ambrose
4.Mcgrath
5.Steyn/Lillee/Hadlee



On his first tour of west indies Tendulkar confessed to having discomfort to ambrose's awkward bounce and horrid length.
 
In tests
Curtly was best bowler of his era.
Curtly>mcgrath >donald>wasim in tests.
Curtly is only below marshall in all time best test bowlers list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
20
Views
1K
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
A
Who was a better Test spinner Yasir Shah or Saeed Ajmal?
Replies
16
Views
426
Mamoon
Mamoon
T
James Anderson versus Andy Roberts: Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
71
Views
2K
sindhiboy
S
S
Allan Donald vs Wasim Akram : Who’s the better Test bowler?
Replies
70
Views
4K
atreus
atreus
sweep_shot
  • Poll Poll
Arjuna Ranatunga vs Imran Khan - Who was the better captain?
Replies
23
Views
824
Nikhil_cric
N
Back
Top