Future of fast-bowling?

[RedwoodOriginal]

As we all know there are 4 fast-bowlers in the world at present that can be considered as the best in the world for their consistency across formats, apart from the fact that they are the strike-bowers and spearheads of their country's respective bowling attacks. These four are ofcourse: Jofra Archer, Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah and Kagiso Rabada. They are all approximately the same age aswell which means they might stop being as effective at around the same time aswell. So I was randomly wondering which bowlers will take their place when their time has gone? Ofcourse this is an arbitrary question and the next big fast-bowler might be someone we haven't even seen play yet but for the sake of argument I included bowlers we have seen play international cricket and are upto the age of 23.

Pakistan: Shaheen Afridi, Naseem Shah, Mohammad Hasnain

Australia: Jhye Richardson

South Africa: Lutho Simpala

West Indies: Oshane Thomas, Alzarri Joseph

India: Khaleel Ahmed

England: Saqib Mahmood

Sri Lanka: Lahiru Kumara


Personally speaking, Shaheen, Naseem and Oshane are the only bowlers who look like they could be on top of world cricket a few years from now based on what they have done so far. Shaheen is by far the most complete out of all these bowlers who is also playing all formats and could soon be mentioned in the same breath as Cummins, Bumrah, Rabada and Archer if he delivers consistently.

Out of the unproven ones; Jhye Richardson and Simpala definitely have something about them. But the others all struggle with either lack of pace, lack of control or both. However, they have been backed regularly by their respective countries which means the selectors clearly see something in them.

What do you guys think? Am I missing anyone? and do any of these bowlers excite you, or make you giddy for the future?

 

[Mamoon]

Hasnain is average and far from the future of fast bowling. He has a better chance of being the next Sami.

Shaheen is certainly the real deal. He could be as good as Starc.

 

[anikrc1]

Hasnain is average and far from the future of fast bowling. He has a better chance of being the next Sami.

Shaheen is certainly the real deal. He could be as good as Starc.

Shaheen should become better than starc in test. Has shown much better control. But i think naseem has true atg potential. I can't rememeber any fast bowler other than steyn and wasim who bowls at his speed has as good an outswing.

 

[shamaan]

Hasnain is average and far from the future of fast bowling. He has a better chance of being the next Sami.

Shaheen is certainly the real deal. He could be as good as Starc.

Husnain will be good in t20s and odis Shaheen and naseem are the real deals and can play all formats

 

[Ab Fan]

What about the Kiwi bloke Jamieson?

 

[shamaan]

Shaheen should become better than starc in test. Has shown much better control. But i think naseem has true atg potential. I can't rememeber any fast bowler other than steyn and wasim who bowls at his speed has as good an outswing.

Shaheen can be equivalent to wasim forget starc. Naseem if he stays fit and injury free he will be same league as waqar.

But I think both will be on par with each other toe to toe

 

[shamaan]

As we all know there are 4 fast-bowlers in the world at present that can be considered as the best in the world for their consistency across formats, apart from the fact that they are the strike-bowers and spearheads of their country's respective bowling attacks. These four are ofcourse: Jofra Archer, Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah and Kagiso Rabada. They are all approximately the same age aswell which means they might stop being as effective at around the same time aswell. So I was randomly wondering which bowlers will take their place when their time has gone? Ofcourse this is an arbitrary question and the next big fast-bowler might be someone we haven't even seen play yet but for the sake of argument I included bowlers we have seen play international cricket and are upto the age of 23.

Pakistan: Shaheen Afridi, Naseem Shah, Mohammad Hasnain

Australia: Jhye Richardson

South Africa: Lutho Simpala

West Indies: Oshane Thomas, Alzarri Joseph

India: Khaleel Ahmed

England: Saqib Mahmood

Sri Lanka: Lahiru Kumara


Personally speaking, Shaheen, Naseem and Oshane are the only bowlers who look like they could be on top of world cricket a few years from now based on what they have done so far. Shaheen is by far the most complete out of all these bowlers who is also playing all formats and could soon be mentioned in the same breath as Cummins, Bumrah, Rabada and Archer if he delivers consistently.

Out of the unproven ones; Jhye Richardson and Simpala definitely have something about them. But the others all struggle with either lack of pace, lack of control or both. However, they have been backed regularly by their respective countries which means the selectors clearly see something in them.

What do you guys think? Am I missing anyone? and do any of these bowlers excite you, or make you giddy for the future?

Husnain shouldn't be in the same sentence as naseem and shaheen the latter 2 are born to be great barring injuries

 

[Titan24]

Good list.

Shaheen, Naseem and Azari Joespeh are looking pretty good if they remain fit for long periods.

Hasnian is wavered and needs to work on his accuracy and get that outswing which he has been working on going with consistency to be somewhat effective in ODIs and eventually tests. Oshane Thomos also needs a lot more discipline in his bowling as at the moment he is all over the place especially on his off days. Khaleel’s lengths are off as well more often than not but definitely something to work with.

I dont think Archer has done enough especially in tests to be mentioned with Cummins or Rabada. I rate him highly and he obviously has the skills but at the moment still new to international cricket.

 

[Mamoon]

Husnain will be good in t20s and odis Shaheen and naseem are the real deals and can play all formats

Naseem is a bit overhyped because of his fake age. In truth, he is roughly the same age as Shaheen but comfortably behind him in terms of development.

 

[Hasan123]

The future of fast bowling looks so good. Those excuses of weak attacks isn't going to be enough now.

 

[HappyWarsFan]

LOL, how did someone mediocre like Jofra Archer make it to this list of world class bowlers? He's nothing next to the likes of rabada, Cummins etc. Jofra has done mediocre in tests and he only bowls quick for like a spell then starts trundling at 130 km/hr.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Hasnain is average and far from the future of fast bowling. He has a better chance of being the next Sami.

Shaheen is certainly the real deal. He could be as good as Starc.

To be fair, most of these bowlers are average right now. Hasnain is young and inexperienced. If he develops control he could be a real threat.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

What about the Kiwi bloke Jamieson?

He's 25. Not as young as the others.

 

[NishanKonar]

As we all know there are 4 fast-bowlers in the world at present that can be considered as the best in the world for their consistency across formats, apart from the fact that they are the strike-bowers and spearheads of their country's respective bowling attacks. These four are ofcourse: Jofra Archer, Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah and Kagiso Rabada. They are all approximately the same age aswell which means they might stop being as effective at around the same time aswell. So I was randomly wondering which bowlers will take their place when their time has gone? Ofcourse this is an arbitrary question and the next big fast-bowler might be someone we haven't even seen play yet but for the sake of argument I included bowlers we have seen play international cricket and are upto the age of 23.

Pakistan: Shaheen Afridi, Naseem Shah, Mohammad Hasnain

Australia: Jhye Richardson

South Africa: Lutho Simpala

West Indies: Oshane Thomas, Alzarri Joseph

India: Khaleel Ahmed

England: Saqib Mahmood

Sri Lanka: Lahiru Kumara


Personally speaking, Shaheen, Naseem and Oshane are the only bowlers who look like they could be on top of world cricket a few years from now based on what they have done so far. Shaheen is by far the most complete out of all these bowlers who is also playing all formats and could soon be mentioned in the same breath as Cummins, Bumrah, Rabada and Archer if he delivers consistently.

Out of the unproven ones; Jhye Richardson and Simpala definitely have something about them. But the others all struggle with either lack of pace, lack of control or both. However, they have been backed regularly by their respective countries which means the selectors clearly see something in them.

What do you guys think? Am I missing anyone? and do any of these bowlers excite you, or make you giddy for the future?

Khaleel Ahmed is really mediocre. Do not foresee a test future for him

Naseem Shah - probably wud do well in T20 & ODI but too short for test cricket

Hasnain - saw him in PSL. Do not really have smooth action to be consistent pace bowler

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Good list.

Shaheen, Naseem and Azari Joespeh are looking pretty good if they remain fit for long periods.

Hasnian is wavered and needs to work on his accuracy and get that outswing which he has been working on going with consistency to be somewhat effective in ODIs and eventually tests. Oshane Thomos also needs a lot more discipline in his bowling as at the moment he is all over the place especially on his off days. Khaleel’s lengths are off as well more often than not but definitely something to work with.

I dont think Archer has done enough especially in tests to be mentioned with Cummins or Rabada. I rate him highly and he obviously has the skills but at the moment still new to international cricket.

Shaheen seems to be the fittest among the three. Alzari has gotten injured twice with the second one being a major injury, and I imagine staying fit will not be easy for Naseem either with that pace. But let's see. Many bowlers drop their pace to quell injuries which is why pace is always a double-edged sword for the guys with express pace. Personally, Oshane just seems like a better prospect than Alzari to me.

Neither has Bumrah for that matter. But we all know that these four are the best fast-bowlers in world cricket at the moment, with Shaheen on the edge of being part of the group. Archer was overbowled which is why he did poorly in New Zealand and got injured soon after but the guy literally won his team the World Cup in his first year in international cricket. It's a given that he will do well in Tests if his workload is managed properly.

 

[Forum363]

Naseem is a bit overhyped because of his fake age. In truth, he is roughly the same age as Shaheen but comfortably behind him in terms of development.

Shaheen is clearly a prodigy and prolific for his age. He’s also had longer in International cricket.

So the fact that Naseem isn’t as good as him doesn’t mean he won’t be superb in the future. Despite not having Shaheen‘s height, he has a beautiful action and good control. He’s already had some success too in his few international chances.

For example, Jofra was years away from debut even at Naseem’s real age.

 

[Forum363]

As we all know there are 4 fast-bowlers in the world at present that can be considered as the best in the world for their consistency across formats, apart from the fact that they are the strike-bowers and spearheads of their country's respective bowling attacks. These four are ofcourse: Jofra Archer, Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah and Kagiso Rabada. They are all approximately the same age aswell which means they might stop being as effective at around the same time aswell. So I was randomly wondering which bowlers will take their place when their time has gone? Ofcourse this is an arbitrary question and the next big fast-bowler might be someone we haven't even seen play yet but for the sake of argument I included bowlers we have seen play international cricket and are upto the age of 23.

Pakistan: Shaheen Afridi, Naseem Shah, Mohammad Hasnain

Australia: Jhye Richardson

South Africa: Lutho Simpala

West Indies: Oshane Thomas, Alzarri Joseph

India: Khaleel Ahmed

England: Saqib Mahmood

Sri Lanka: Lahiru Kumara


Personally speaking, Shaheen, Naseem and Oshane are the only bowlers who look like they could be on top of world cricket a few years from now based on what they have done so far. Shaheen is by far the most complete out of all these bowlers who is also playing all formats and could soon be mentioned in the same breath as Cummins, Bumrah, Rabada and Archer if he delivers consistently.

Out of the unproven ones; Jhye Richardson and Simpala definitely have something about them. But the others all struggle with either lack of pace, lack of control or both. However, they have been backed regularly by their respective countries which means the selectors clearly see something in them.

What do you guys think? Am I missing anyone? and do any of these bowlers excite you, or make you giddy for the future?

I’m sorry but it’s ridiculous that you’ve put Jofra together with Rabada, Cummins and Bumrah. I thought perhaps I had missed something but he’s barely played 20 games.

Consistency across formats? So doing decently in a handful of games meets that criteria?

Rabada is younger than him and has 200 wickets in Tests alone.

Cummins is on his way to ATG level in Tests if he can remain fit, while Bumrah is one of the leading limited over bowlers of this generation at his young age.

If anything, Shaheen is ahead of him despite being like 6 years younger.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Khaleel Ahmed is really mediocre. Do not foresee a test future for him

Naseem Shah - probably wud do well in T20 & ODI but too short for test cricket

Hasnain - saw him in PSL. Do not really have smooth action to be consistent pace bowler

If there was such a thing as "too short for test cricket" Dale Steyn who is 5'8 would not be the greatest fast-bowler of this generation. I could name you a number of other "too short for test cricket" fast-bowlers but I think you should conduct some research on your own because nothing beats self-education.

 

[Forum363]

Shaheen seems to be the fittest among the three. Alzari has gotten injured twice with the second one being a major injury, and I imagine staying fit will not be easy for Naseem either with that pace. But let's see. Many bowlers drop their pace to quell injuries which is why pace is always a double-edged sword for the guys with express pace. Personally, Oshane just seems like a better prospect than Alzari to me.

Neither has Bumrah for that matter. But we all know that these four are the best fast-bowlers in world cricket at the moment, with Shaheen on the edge of being part of the group. Archer was overbowled which is why he did poorly in New Zealand and got injured soon after but the guy literally won his team the World Cup in his first year in international cricket. It's a given that he will do well in Tests if his workload is managed properly.

Jofra contributed but it’s a stretch to say he won his team the World Cup lol.

In Tests he has shown bursts of potential but bowling short seems to be his main weapon. Teams will eventually figure that out and there are many spells where he’s looked completely toothless.

Let’s see if he can develop his game.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I’m sorry but it’s ridiculous that you’ve put Jofra together with Rabada, Cummins and Bumrah. I thought perhaps I had missed something but he’s barely played 20 games.

Consistency across formats? So doing decently in a handful of games meets that criteria?

Rabada is younger than him and has 200 wickets in Tests alone.

Cummins is on his way to ATG level in Tests if he can remain fit, while Bumrah is one of the leading limited over bowlers of this generation at his young age.

If anything, Shaheen is ahead of him despite being like 6 years younger.

So what? Bumrah has played 14 Tests which is also nothing. Only Rabada has played a significant amount of test matches out of these 4 but that doesn't change the fact that they are all match-winning bowlers who can win any match for their side in any format.

And Archer has achieved more in 14 ODIs than most bowlers do in their entire careers. He deserves to be mentioned in the breath as the other three.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Jofra contributed but it’s a stretch to say he won his team the World Cup lol.

In Tests he has shown bursts of potential but bowling short seems to be his main weapon. Teams will eventually figure that out and there are many spells where he’s looked completely toothless.

Let’s see if he can develop his game.

How is it a stretch? He was their leading wicket-taker at the World Cup and the third highest overall. In the final he bowled a match-winning final over. He achieved all this in his first year of international cricket.

 

[Mamoon]

Shaheen is clearly a prodigy and prolific for his age. He’s also had longer in International cricket.

So the fact that Naseem isn’t as good as him doesn’t mean he won’t be superb in the future. Despite not having Shaheen‘s height, he has a beautiful action and good control. He’s already had some success too in his few international chances.

For example, Jofra was years away from debut even at Naseem’s real age.

Can’t compare careers like that. Naseem would be years away from debut in multiple countries too.

He has been fast-tracked because our bowling is poor and the likes of Amir, Hasan and Wahab have gone off the rails for multiple reasons. If Naseem was in India, Australia or even England, he would not be in the reckoning for international selection at this point.

Archer’s career trajectory has been quite unique as well.

He was ignored by West Indies for the U-19 World Cup in 2014 when he was around Naseem’s age. That blunder meant that Caribbean cricket were deprived of their most gifted bowler of the generation.

Had West Indies selected him he could have made his international debut by 2014-15, but he had to move to the UK and his first-class debut was delayed until 2016-17.

Naseem looks decent for a 19-20 year old but let’s see what happens in the future. I personally don’t have faith in Pakistani players so I won’t be surprised if he fizzles out.

 

[Mamoon]

Archer has played very little international cricket so far but you could tell right from his debut that he is already one of the top bowlers in the world and a genuine world beater.

As a result, I have no issues with grouping him with the likes of Cummins, Rabada, Bumrah, Starc etc. He is clearly in that class and only injuries can prevent him from having a stellar career.

With some players you don’t have to wait for a sample size. You just know that they are bloody good, and Archer is one such player.

Yes he failed in New Zealand but every great bowler has a bad series every now and then.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

How is it a stretch? He was their leading wicket-taker at the World Cup and the third highest overall. In the final he bowled a match-winningfinal over. He achieved all this in his first year of international cricket.

Match tying, technically. He’s not as great of a death bowler as he’s made out to be, 14 runs is plenty to defend and he just barely scraped through. Couldn’t control himself from bowling a wide either.

Statistically he did great, so on paper you can quote things like being the third highest wicket taker of the world cup. But skill-wise he is still a work in progress. Like you said, first year in international cricket. Just not enough to be mentioned in the same breath as Rabada and Bumrah.

In Tests, he had a decent outing in the Ashes but nothing spectacular. His headlines were for concussing Steve Smith, not for getting Steve Smith out.

 

[Ab Fan]

Jofra Archer averages 27 in test cricket and not 20 currently, don't see him achieving greatness in test cricket. He has done nothing of note away from home, will end up with 29-30 test average.

Cummins, Rabada and Bumrah are in different league.

 

[NishanKonar]

Archer has played very little international cricket so far but you could tell right from his debut that he is already one of the top bowlers in the world and a genuine world beater.

As a result, I have no issues with grouping him with the likes of Cummins, Rabada, Bumrah, Starc etc. He is clearly in that class and only injuries can prevent him from having a stellar career.

With some players you don’t have to wait for a sample size. You just know that they are bloody good, and Archer is one such player.

Yes he failed in New Zealand but every great bowler has a bad series every now and then.

Jofra Archer's USP is pace & bounce but he lacks fitness to maintain that pace over longer periods of time. He bowled pretty quick in his debut test but then bowled abt 85 mph in the next test. That top when he is only 25 yrs old

If he does not improve his fitness & stamina - his test career will not be so succesful

 

[King_Kohli]

Khaleel Ahmed
)

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Archer has played very little international cricket so far but you could tell right from his debut that he is already one of the top bowlers in the world and a genuine world beater.

As a result, I have no issues with grouping him with the likes of Cummins, Rabada, Bumrah, Starc etc. He is clearly in that class and only injuries can prevent him from having a stellar career.

With some players you don’t have to wait for a sample size. You just know that they are bloody good, and Archer is one such player.

Yes he failed in New Zealand but every great bowler has a bad series every now and then.

Exactly. And based on the kind of workload he had all year he was bound to fail in New Zealand. No fast-bowler in the world can play that regularly and be successful. Especially when you have that kind of pace.

 

[Forum363]

So what? Bumrah has played 14 Tests which is also nothing. Only Rabada has played a significant amount of test matches out of these 4 but that doesn't change the fact that they are all match-winning bowlers who can win any match for their side in any format.

And Archer has achieved more in 14 ODIs than most bowlers do in their entire careers. He deserves to be mentioned in the breath as the other three.

Bumrah has over a 160 wickets in Limited overs cricket and has proven himself over a few years.

So again - ridiculous to compare Jofra with Bumrah. He has barely played a season of international cricket.

As for - ‘he has done more in 14 ODIs than most bowlers do in their entire careers’ .. just because he had a good World Cup? That’s like saying Hasan Ali after the champions trophy had done more than most bowlers do in their career, he’s on the level of Starc Rabada etc... And look what happened to him after that.

Rabada, Cummins and Bumrah have played international cricket for years and have proven themselves in at least one format with terrific consistent performances.

Although slightly older Ferguson is about as experienced in International cricket as Jofra and he out performed him in the World Cup.

 

[Forum363]

How is it a stretch? He was their leading wicket-taker at the World Cup and the third highest overall. In the final he bowled a match-winning final over. He achieved all this in his first year of international cricket.

What about Root and Bairstow who scored 500+ runs? What about Roy who made England look like a different team when he returned to the top of the order? What about Butler who struck at the highest strike rate in the tournament? What about Morgan with his brilliant strike rate and captaincy?

Or would you say they all won England the World Cup in which case I guess you’re right, every single player did. Many performed better than Jofra.

The only player who single handedly achieved superhuman feats to bringing England the World Cup was Ben Stokes.

(I’m not saying Jofra wasn’t brilliant, particularly for his first year.. just that it’s a stretch to say he won England the World Cup).

 

[Forum363]

Can’t compare careers like that. Naseem would be years away from debut in multiple countries too.

He has been fast-tracked because our bowling is poor and the likes of Amir, Hasan and Wahab have gone off the rails for multiple reasons. If Naseem was in India, Australia or even England, he would not be in the reckoning for international selection at this point.

Archer’s career trajectory has been quite unique as well.

He was ignored by West Indies for the U-19 World Cup in 2014 when he was around Naseem’s age. That blunder meant that Caribbean cricket were deprived of their most gifted bowler of the generation.

Had West Indies selected him he could have made his international debut by 2014-15, but he had to move to the UK and his first-class debut was delayed until 2016-17.

Naseem looks decent for a 19-20 year old but let’s see what happens in the future. I personally don’t have faith in Pakistani players so I won’t be surprised if he fizzles out.

The point isn’t whether Naseem is good enough to play for other International teams. It’s that due to whatever circumstances, he’s playing international cricket at a much younger age than Jofra did.

Had Jofra played when he was 19 for the West Indies, he certainly would not have been anywhere near as polished and skilled as he is now. And some people may have written him off as a result.

You were comparing Naseem with Shaheen because they’re a similar age but I was stating that just because Shaheen is a prodigy at 19 - it doesn’t mean that someone else who’s behind him at the current age will not be as good- and the example of Jofra being that he certainly wasn’t as good as Shaheen is now when he was 19. But he’s World class (potential wise) now. Naseem could be as well in a couple of years.

Your lack of faith in Pakistani youngsters is a separate point still.

 

[Forum363]

Exactly. And based on the kind of workload he had all year he was bound to fail in New Zealand. No fast-bowler in the world can play that regularly and be successful. Especially when you have that kind of pace.

Well he did well to play the entire World Cup and then 4 ashes test.

But the last ashes match finished September 15, he didn’t play any tour games and the first New Zealand Test started November 21. Is more than 2 months rest not enough? Or could his heavy workload in the summer still be used as an excuse for his failure in New Zealand more than 2 months later?

Ofcourse he was training and doing nets etc but 2 months between International games is enough time for rest. If you’re still attributing your rubbish performance to fatigue then you will struggle to have a good career.

 

[therealAB]

Shaheen should become better than starc in test. Has shown much better control. But i think naseem has true atg potential. I can't rememeber any fast bowler other than steyn and wasim who bowls at his speed has as good an outswing.

Marshall, Donald, Lillee, Bond, Jones etc

There have been lots. Shorter strike bowlers tend to get injured lots though

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Bumrah has over a 160 wickets in Limited overs cricket and has proven himself over a few years.

So again - ridiculous to compare Jofra with Bumrah. He has barely played a season of international cricket.

As for - ‘he has done more in 14 ODIs than most bowlers do in their entire careers’ .. just because he had a good World Cup? That’s like saying Hasan Ali after the champions trophy had done more than most bowlers do in their career, he’s on the level of Starc Rabada etc... And look what happened to him after that.

Rabada, Cummins and Bumrah have played international cricket for years and have proven themselves in at least one format with terrific consistent performances.

Although slightly older Ferguson is about as experienced in International cricket as Jofra and he out performed him in the World Cup.

Archers wickets proved instrumental in England lifting the WC. How many ICC trophies has Bumrah won for India? Because frankly nobody remembers the meaningless 5 match or 3 match ODI series which India are very good at winning.

No it's not the same because there is a BIG difference between the World Cup and the Champions Trophy.

Archer single-handedly had the biggest influence for England with the ball. And England likely would not have lifted the World Cup if it wasn't for his 20 wickets. It's really as simple as that.

As for Archer's ability. He doesn't need to play X number of matches to prove a point that has already been made. I don't think there are many bowlers who can lay claim to leading their team to a WC win with the ball in their first year of international cricket. But Archer definitely can.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Well he did well to play the entire World Cup and then 4 ashes test.

But the last ashes match finished September 15, he didn’t play any tour games and the first New Zealand Test started November 21. Is more than 2 months rest not enough? Or could his heavy workload in the summer still be used as an excuse for his failure in New Zealand more than 2 months later?

Ofcourse he was training and doing nets etc but 2 months between International games is enough time for rest. If you’re still attributing your rubbish performance to fatigue then you will struggle to have a good career.

I don't think you understand the amount of wear and tear fast-bowlers go through. It's easy for you to sit behind a computer and say "oh that's enough time for him to get fit and play again" but that's not exactly how it works it real life. Bowling that much, and at that pace takes a lot out of fast-bowlers. It puts load on their muscles and increases risk of injury. Archer was playing continuously all year. He was playing after the New Zealand series as well and hence it wasn't a surprise that his pace had dropped and he got injured soon after.

Fast-bowlers need prolonged periods of rest. Every team has to prioritize and Root himself admitted that they had been playing Archer far too much. One of the reasons Bumrah has been successful is because India have managed his workload generally well and despite that he picked up an injury.

 

[Arsal_AK]

Archer has played very little international cricket so far but you could tell right from his debut that he is already one of the top bowlers in the world and a genuine world beater.

As a result, I have no issues with grouping him with the likes of Cummins, Rabada, Bumrah, Starc etc. He is clearly in that class and only injuries can prevent him from having a stellar career.

With some players you don’t have to wait for a sample size. You just know that they are bloody good, and Archer is one such player.

Yes he failed in New Zealand but every great bowler has a bad series every now and then.

This is ridiculous. You think that of Archer, I think that for Naseem. Sometimes you just know and seeing Naseem bowl you certainly do. In certain aspects he is even better than Shaheen. There is nothing is your argument that doesn't apply to other cases too. Forget Naseem, we can talk like that about any other upcoming fast bowler who has some skill and potential.

If Naseem hasn't played enough, will fizzle out, the same can be said for Archer at this point. Archer is a terrific bowler but grouping him with the likes of Cummins and Rabada is premature.

 

[Arsal_AK]

The point isn’t whether Naseem is good enough to play for other International teams. It’s that due to whatever circumstances, he’s playing international cricket at a much younger age than Jofra did.

Had Jofra played when he was 19 for the West Indies, he certainly would not have been anywhere near as polished and skilled as he is now. And some people may have written him off as a result.

You were comparing Naseem with Shaheen because they’re a similar age but I was stating that just because Shaheen is a prodigy at 19 - it doesn’t mean that someone else who’s behind him at the current age will not be as good- and the example of Jofra being that he certainly wasn’t as good as Shaheen is now when he was 19. But he’s World class (potential wise) now. Naseem could be as well in a couple of years.

Your lack of faith in Pakistani youngsters is a separate point still.

Well put and it's not like Naseem isn't a prodigy as well. He has been talked about for years and has been head and shoulders above competition throughout his development. He is kind of like Babar in that regard. A tours, tournaments, U16 and then an amazing debut FC season too, solid throughout.

The guy is 18 and at that age what he can do is amazing.

 

[pratapj5]

How on Earth can you not select trent boult. I think he deserves a place instead of Archer. Boult is probably the fittest amongst all the 4 bowlers mentioned above. He swings the ball both ways which none of the above bowlers can do plus bowls at high speed with accuracy. So you have
1. Swing 2. Pace 3. Accuracy
Moreover he has performed in big matches at crucial stages like world cup knock outs which again has not been done yet by the other bowlers.
Trent boult has performed in different situations, different stages of a game, different conditions and in all the 3 formats.
Apart from Rabada and Boult no bowler in the world currently has performed in all the 3 formats for a long period of time.
If you look in a way
1. Bumrah has performed in limited overs format
but still has not played a lot of test matches and
not in different conditions yet. His real test in test
format will be when he has played a couple of
more tests as the opposition will come prepared
against him and will know how to deal him And
he will have to earn his wickets then which is not
the case now.

2. Pat Cummins has been amazing in test format
and is the best currently in test cricket. But he is
yet to prove himself in limited overs cricket
completely.

3. Archer has just burst on at the international level
and is yet to prove himself in limited overs cricket
let alone test format for the very fact that he has
played a handful of matches at this level and his
real test will be in his 2nd or 3rd season when
everyone will have a plan against him.

So you see only Boult and Rabada have proved themselves in all the 3 formats for a long period of time.
So best bowlers currently on the basis of performance in all the formats and duration of performance and performance in crucnch moments are only 3 that is BOULT , RABADA , STARC.

 

[Ab Fan]

How on Earth can you not select trent boult. I think he deserves a place instead of Archer. Boult is probably the fittest amongst all the 4 bowlers mentioned above. He swings the ball both ways which none of the above bowlers can do plus bowls at high speed with accuracy. So you have
1. Swing 2. Pace 3. Accuracy
Moreover he has performed in big matches at crucial stages like world cup knock outs which again has not been done yet by the other bowlers.
Trent boult has performed in different situations, different stages of a game, different conditions and in all the 3 formats.
Apart from Rabada and Boult no bowler in the world currently has performed in all the 3 formats for a long period of time.
If you look in a way
1. Bumrah has performed in limited overs format
but still has not played a lot of test matches and
not in different conditions yet. His real test in test
format will be when he has played a couple of
more tests as the opposition will come prepared
against him and will know how to deal him And
he will have to earn his wickets then which is not
the case now.

2. Pat Cummins has been amazing in test format
and is the best currently in test cricket. But he is
yet to prove himself in limited overs cricket
completely.

3. Archer has just burst on at the international level
and is yet to prove himself in limited overs cricket
let alone test format for the very fact that he has
played a handful of matches at this level and his
real test will be in his 2nd or 3rd season when
everyone will have a plan against him.

So you see only Boult and Rabada have proved themselves in all the 3 formats for a long period of time.
So best bowlers currently on the basis of performance in all the formats and duration of performance and performance in crucnch moments are only 3 that is BOULT , RABADA , STARC.

This thread is about future of fast bowling. Bumrah, Cummins and Rabada are 25-26 and rest are even younger. So, the discussion limits to that.

Boult is 30 now and is a very good test bowler and excellent ODI bowler. Given his fitness, he can go on and take even 400 wickets but his away performance hasn't been all that impressive.

 

[Forum363]

Archers wickets proved instrumental in England lifting the WC. How many ICC trophies has Bumrah won for India? Because frankly nobody remembers the meaningless 5 match or 3 match ODI series which India are very good at winning.

No it's not the same because there is a BIG difference between the World Cup and the Champions Trophy.

Archer single-handedly had the biggest influence for England with the ball. And England likely would not have lifted the World Cup if it wasn't for his 20 wickets. It's really as simple as that.

As for Archer's ability. He doesn't need to play X number of matches to prove a point that has already been made. I don't think there are many bowlers who can lay claim to leading their team to a WC win with the ball in their first year of international cricket. But Archer definitely can.

Is winning world cups the biggest metric which outweighs every other one? Ofcourse it’s important and ofcourse there’s more importance than the champions trophy but to elevate him to Rabada / Cummins level just because of 11 ODIs is frankly ridiculous.

‘Single-handedly had the biggest impact as a bowler’ what does that even mean. England won the World Cup due to their batting - plain and simple. Archer was their best bowler so technically he has the ‘biggest impact’ but Mark Wood took 18 wickets and played one less game. He also contributed with the ball but it was their batting which stood out.

Again - just because Archer bowled well and his team won the World Cup, doesn’t mean he is immediately elevated to the level of Cummins etc.

Tell me, had New Zealand scored 1 more run and won the World Cup, would that mean that Ferguson (who bowled better than Jofra) would be as good as Cummins / Rabada too? But because England won on boundary count it means Jofra is up there. What about Shaheen - he only played 5 games!! And still got 16 wickets. Because Pakistan’s batting sucks it means Shaheen couldn’t lift the trophy so it lowers his status as a bowler?

Your criteria is ridiculous, just accept it. Jofra has been brilliant and has potential, but one series alone cannot elevate a player, even if it’s the World Cup. Especially when his performance is very good - not superhuman like Starc or Stokes for example.

 

[Forum363]

I don't think you understand the amount of wear and tear fast-bowlers go through. It's easy for you to sit behind a computer and say "oh that's enough time for him to get fit and play again" but that's not exactly how it works it real life. Bowling that much, and at that pace takes a lot out of fast-bowlers. It puts load on their muscles and increases risk of injury. Archer was playing continuously all year. He was playing after the New Zealand series as well and hence it wasn't a surprise that his pace had dropped and he got injured soon after.

Fast-bowlers need prolonged periods of rest. Every team has to prioritize and Root himself admitted that they had been playing Archer far too much. One of the reasons Bumrah has been successful is because India have managed his workload generally well and despite that he picked up an injury.

I completely understand the wear and tear. But let’s break this down simply.

You said Archer performed poorly in New Zealand because it was impossible for him to succeed due to his workload.

He played 11 ODIs for the World Cup, and then played 4 test matches.

After this he had more than 2 months rest before the New Zealand year. But according to you that’s not how it works in real life? Fast bowlers need prolonged periods of rest? Okay so put simply, how much rest would Archer have needed after those four Tests to be back to his best?

 

[therealAB]

[MENTION=147292]RedwoodOriginal[/MENTION]

Cam Green for Aus. Bowling all rounder who averages 22 with the ball, 44 with the bat in shield cricket. Only 21. Will play 100 tests for Aus

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=147292]RedwoodOriginal[/MENTION]

Cam Green for Aus. Bowling all rounder who averages 22 with the ball, 44 with the bat in shield cricket. Only 21. Will play 100 tests for Aus

Just checked his Shield stats. Some seriously impressive numbers. He could turn out to be the player Watson was supposed to become.

A massive IPL contract could be coming his way soon.

 

[therealAB]

Just checked his Shield stats. Some seriously impressive numbers. He could turn out to be the player Watson was supposed to become.

A massive IPL contract could be coming his way soon.

Yep, smashes it around with the bat as well. Only issues is that he seems to get injured heaps, although this could be because he is still young

 

[Rana]

Can’t wait for Naseem to bowl this summer in England.

 

[HitWicket]

Couldn’t control himself from bowling a wide either.

On the contrary under that massive amount of pressure it was an absolutely brilliant ball, can't go blaming him for the incorrect decision to call it wide.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

On the contrary under that massive amount of pressure it was an absolutely brilliant ball, can't go blaming him for the incorrect decision to call it wide.

Assume I accept that. Respond to the rest of my post please

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

[MENTION=147292]RedwoodOriginal[/MENTION]

Cam Green for Aus. Bowling all rounder who averages 22 with the ball, 44 with the bat in shield cricket. Only 21. Will play 100 tests for Aus

I was listing players who have played for their home countries so far. Otherwise a number of other players would have made the list.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Is winning world cups the biggest metric which outweighs every other one? Ofcourse it’s important and ofcourse there’s more importance than the champions trophy but to elevate him to Rabada / Cummins level just because of 11 ODIs is frankly ridiculous.

‘Single-handedly had the biggest impact as a bowler’ what does that even mean. England won the World Cup due to their batting - plain and simple. Archer was their best bowler so technically he has the ‘biggest impact’ but Mark Wood took 18 wickets and played one less game. He also contributed with the ball but it was their batting which stood out.

Again - just because Archer bowled well and his team won the World Cup, doesn’t mean he is immediately elevated to the level of Cummins etc.

Tell me, had New Zealand scored 1 more run and won the World Cup, would that mean that Ferguson (who bowled better than Jofra) would be as good as Cummins / Rabada too? But because England won on boundary count it means Jofra is up there. What about Shaheen - he only played 5 games!! And still got 16 wickets. Because Pakistan’s batting sucks it means Shaheen couldn’t lift the trophy so it lowers his status as a bowler?

Your criteria is ridiculous, just accept it. Jofra has been brilliant and has potential, but one series alone cannot elevate a player, even if it’s the World Cup. Especially when his performance is very good - not superhuman like Starc or Stokes for example.

Yup. In ODI cricket it is a very big metric. It what pips Archer ahead despite his lack of experience and puts him in the same group as the other three. Who is the best among the four is certainly up for debate but he is definitely in the same group as those other guys.

Shaheen is almost there for me. He bowled some match-winning spells in the World Cup but he is yet to win us some test matches. But he is literally inches away from being mentioned in the same breath as the other four. And with age on his side the world is his oyster provided he keeps the injuries in check.

Regarding Archer, look we can go around in circles all day but frankly I don't care what you have to say. Any person who chooses to debate in what ifs clearly does not understand cricket in my eyes because there simply isn't a more frivolous and asinine activity to indulge in when it comes to cricket. The entire point is that it is a game of fine margins and those fine margins are what in-turn define it, rather than the what ifs.

I have seen enough cricket to know when I've seen someone or something truly special. And Archer is just that. You can call my criteria ridiculous if you feel like it but no, I won't admit what you want me to admit. Playing a starring role in your side's World Cup victory is a very big deal. It etches your name in history. Whether you choose to admit that or not is entirely up to you.

 

[shamaan]

Naseem is a bit overhyped because of his fake age. In truth, he is roughly the same age as Shaheen but comfortably behind him in terms of development.

Overhyped on what basis do you think hes overhyped and how do you know Shaheen age is real?

 

[shamaan]

Khaleel Ahmed is really mediocre. Do not foresee a test future for him

Naseem Shah - probably wud do well in T20 & ODI but too short for test cricket

Hasnain - saw him in PSL. Do not really have smooth action to be consistent pace bowler

Lol in sena conditions he will be real deal and even in asain conditions he will be decent

 

[shamaan]

Can’t compare careers like that. Naseem would be years away from debut in multiple countries too.

He has been fast-tracked because our bowling is poor and the likes of Amir, Hasan and Wahab have gone off the rails for multiple reasons. If Naseem was in India, Australia or even England, he would not be in the reckoning for international selection at this point.

Archer’s career trajectory has been quite unique as well.

He was ignored by West Indies for the U-19 World Cup in 2014 when he was around Naseem’s age. That blunder meant that Caribbean cricket were deprived of their most gifted bowler of the generation.

Had West Indies selected him he could have made his international debut by 2014-15, but he had to move to the UK and his first-class debut was delayed until 2016-17.

Naseem looks decent for a 19-20 year old but let’s see what happens in the future. I personally don’t have faith in Pakistani players so I won’t be surprised if he fizzles out.

Ask Warner what he fought about naseem

 

[shamaan]

Can’t wait for Naseem to bowl this summer in England.

I agree with you he just needs abit or swing and he can be legal and shaheen he will control and take wickets

 

[Forum363]

Yup. In ODI cricket it is a very big metric. It what pips Archer ahead despite his lack of experience and puts him in the same group as the other three. Who is the best among the four is certainly up for debate but he is definitely in the same group as those other guys.

Shaheen is almost there for me. He bowled some match-winning spells in the World Cup but he is yet to win us some test matches. But he is literally inches away from being mentioned in the same breath as the other four. And with age on his side the world is his oyster provided he keeps the injuries in check.

Regarding Archer, look we can go around in circles all day but frankly I don't care what you have to say. Any person who chooses to debate in what ifs clearly does not understand cricket in my eyes because there simply isn't a more frivolous and asinine activity to indulge in when it comes to cricket. The entire point is that it is a game of fine margins and those fine margins are what in-turn define it, rather than the what ifs.

I have seen enough cricket to know when I've seen someone or something truly special. And Archer is just that. You can call my criteria ridiculous if you feel like it but no, I won't admit what you want me to admit. Playing a starring role in your side's World Cup victory is a very big deal. It etches your name in history. Whether you choose to admit that or not is entirely up to you.

Well you have admitted what I wanted you to. That you have seen a spark in Jofra which convinces you he will be a star, and it is this opinion rather than his actual performance (or lack of) which has resulted in you creating a thread putting him on the level of proven performers.

I accept that and we shall simply disagree on it.

 

[therealAB]

Can’t wait for Naseem to bowl this summer in England.

neither can the English batsmen

 

[Mamoon]

Overhyped on what basis do you think hes overhyped and how do you know Shaheen age is real?

There is no evidence that Shaheen’s age is fake, but PCB themselves called Naseem a 16 year old in 2016 before for some reason, they decided to reverse his age. Naseem himself confirmed last year that he was older than his official age.

Naseem is overhyped because a big reason for his hype is his fake age. PCB have marketed him as some bowling version of Tendulkar who is Test class at 16, and had PCB not done that, Naseem’s hype would have been less.

The truth is that both him and Shaheen are in the same age group but Shaheen is a bigger prospect and far ahead in terms of development. If PCB had done the same for Shaheen and called him a 16 year old, imagine the hype he would have received.

 

[Mamoon]

Ask Warner what he fought about naseem

Warner doesn’t know that PCB lied about Naseem’s age.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Well you have admitted what I wanted you to. That you have seen a spark in Jofra which convinces you he will be a star, and it is this opinion rather than his actual performance (or lack of) which has resulted in you creating a thread putting him on the level of proven performers.

I accept that and we shall simply disagree on it.

I admitted that pretty much from the outset. Maybe you didn't read carefully enough what I had to say as it didn't satisfy your biases, just like here, where you missed the part about his World Cup performances solidifying his name as a top-class bowler that can and has taken wickets against top-class oppositions.

 

[shamaan]

Warner doesn’t know that PCB lied about Naseem’s age.

And you no that hes lied and shaheen hasnt ?

 

[shamaan]

There is no evidence that Shaheen’s age is fake, but PCB themselves called Naseem a 16 year old in 2016 before for some reason, they decided to reverse his age. Naseem himself confirmed last year that he was older than his official age.

Naseem is overhyped because a big reason for his hype is his fake age. PCB have marketed him as some bowling version of Tendulkar who is Test class at 16, and had PCB not done that, Naseem’s hype would have been less.

The truth is that both him and Shaheen are in the same age group but Shaheen is a bigger prospect and far ahead in terms of development. If PCB had done the same for Shaheen and called him a 16 year old, imagine the hype he would have received.

Can you send me the link were pcb said hes 16 in 2016 and when naseem confirmed that hes older than his official age.

No one has said hes the bowling class as tendulkar think your over exaggerating.

 

[Forum363]

I admitted that pretty much from the outset. Maybe you didn't read carefully enough what I had to say as it didn't satisfy your biases, just like here, where you missed the part about his World Cup performances solidifying his name as a top-class bowler that can and has taken wickets against top-class oppositions.

Actually no, you said there are 4 bowlers who can be considered best in the world for their consistency across formats.

Not that you see a spark in his bowling which is causing you to put him in the same bracket as proven performers.

And let’s not even bring up the fact that you stated more than 2 months of rest is not adequate for a fast bowler and I don’t know the wear and tear of bowling fast. Then used this to justify his terrible performance in NZ. Please tell me how long is approximately required for very fast bowlers?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Actually no, you said there are 4 bowlers who can be considered best in the world for their consistency across formats.

Not that you see a spark in his bowling which is causing you to put him in the same bracket as proven performers.

And let’s not even bring up the fact that you stated more than 2 months of rest is not adequate for a fast bowler and I don’t know the wear and tear of bowling fast. Then used this to justify his terrible performance in NZ. Please tell me how long is approximately required for very fast bowlers?

This conversation is literally the equivalent of banging my head against a brick wall.

I'll summarize one last time:

- Archer is one of the four best bowlers in the world
- He has delivered in the longer and shorter formats despite a small sample size of matches
- Shorter format (World Cup), Longer format (The Ashes). In both he was the third highest wicket-taker
- He was instrumental in his side's first ever World Cup win meaning his name is already etched in the history of English cricket
- Based on the kind of skills, talent, wicket-taking ability he has one doesn't need to wait him to play X number of matches for him to be considered one of the best bowlers in the world
- Like any fast-bowler he is human and playing him too often will result in what we saw in New Zealand
- Despite a poor showing in New Zealand where he averaged over 100 he averages 27 in Tests which by all metrics is considered a good average reinforcing the notion that he is consistent across formats

I'm not gonna bother proving what I already said. You can scroll up the thread and you will find it. It was not in reply to a comment made by you.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

[MENTION=147292]RedwoodOriginal[/MENTION] I agree that he is one of the “most proven bowlers right now“ but a case could be made that even Shaheen is ahead of Jofra in terms of “best bowlers right now” i.e. skill

No doubt Jofra has that “spark”, like you said, I just think that with fast bowlers you often see sparks like these in their first year that fizzle out quickly.

 

[Forum363]

This conversation is literally the equivalent of banging my head against a brick wall.

I'll summarize one last time:

- Archer is one of the four best bowlers in the world
- He has delivered in the longer and shorter formats despite a small sample size of matches
- Shorter format (World Cup), Longer format (The Ashes). In both he was the third highest wicket-taker
- He was instrumental in his side's first ever World Cup win meaning his name is already etched in the history of English cricket
- Based on the kind of skills, talent, wicket-taking ability he has one doesn't need to wait him to play X number of matches for him to be considered one of the best bowlers in the world
- Like any fast-bowler he is human and playing him too often will result in what we saw in New Zealand
- Despite a poor showing in New Zealand where he averaged over 100 he averages 27 in Tests which by all metrics is considered a good average reinforcing the notion that he is consistent across formats

I'm not gonna bother proving what I already said. You can scroll up the thread and you will find it. It was not in reply to a comment made by you.

Just because you reiterate and summarise ridiculous statements doesn’t reinforce your logic.

Even just your first point is completely wrong. Jofra is not one of the four best bowlers in the world right now. An example of bowlers better than him include Starc, Shami, Boult, Roach, Hazlewood.

He is a fast bowler but you’re refusing to acknowledge how a 9 week rest was not enough for him to recuperate? And if that’s how his career will go then he will certainly fizzle out because even a few weeks without cricket is a luxury these days. Stop making excuses for his rubbish performance.

Lol do you realise the definition of consistent? Performing brilliantly in one series and then terribly in the next to end up with a decent average is the opposite of consistent performance.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

[MENTION=147292]RedwoodOriginal[/MENTION] I agree that he is one of the “most proven bowlers right now“ but a case could be made that even Shaheen is ahead of Jofra in terms of “best bowlers right now” i.e. skill

No doubt Jofra has that “spark”, like you said, I just think that with fast bowlers you often see sparks like these in their first year that fizzle out quickly.

Look that's your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. I am coming from the stand-point of England's World Cup win and his role in making that possible. But also from a personal experience of watching cricket. I can't remember the last time I saw a bowler who broke-out in such a huge way, gave such impressive performances in his first year and then fizzled out. And keep in mind that Pakistani fast-bowlers have to be excluded from this group because their careers are defined by things uniquely exclusive to them.

 

[Mamoon]

Honestly, I would take Archer over every fast bowler in the world in every format except:

Cummins in Tests and Starc in LOIs.

Yes the sample size is very low, but he is special.

If England can keep him fit, he is going to fly and make England fly alongside him.

Bumrah, Boult, Rabada, Shami etc. are all quality bowlers with greater samples, but if I pick them over Archer in my team, I know I would end up regretting it.

 

[Mamoon]

Archer can be as good as any fast bowler who has ever played the game. There is no limit to the potential that he carries. He could be anyone or anything.

I am completely baffled by how anyone can pick Roach over him just because Roach has played more cricket.

We are talking about two fast bowlers who have at least a gulf of three levels between them.

 

[therealAB]

Honestly, I would take Archer over every fast bowler in the world in every format except:

Cummins in Tests and Starc in LOIs.

Yes the sample size is very low, but he is special.

If England can keep him fit, he is going to fly and make England fly alongside him.

Bumrah, Boult, Rabada, Shami etc. are all quality bowlers with greater samples, but if I pick them over Archer in my team, I know I would end up regretting it.

is that going forward, or for a match right now. While I agree that if one was looking to build a team over the next ten years, Archer would be one of the first picked, I would not pick him over Rabada, Shami, Hazlewood, Bumrah or Holder in tests right now or Bumrah in ODI's

 

[Mamoon]

is that going forward, or for a match right now. While I agree that if one was looking to build a team over the next ten years, Archer would be one of the first picked, I would not pick him over Rabada, Shami, Hazlewood, Bumrah or Holder in tests right now or Bumrah in ODI's

Right now.

Holder, seriously?

I have a lot of time for Holder. He is a fantastic cricketer and a very good leader, but would you actually contemplate picking him as a bowler ahead of Archer?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

is that going forward, or for a match right now. While I agree that if one was looking to build a team over the next ten years, Archer would be one of the first picked, I would not pick him over Rabada, Shami, Hazlewood, Bumrah or Holder in tests right now or Bumrah in ODI's

Lol you're kidding right? Hazelwood is rarely fit, Holder has sporadic great performances with the ball, coupled with mediocrity, Shami is good but not that good and won't be around for long given his age which has to be 35+

 

[therealAB]

Right now.

Holder, seriously?

I have a lot of time for Holder. He is a fantastic cricketer and a very good leader, but would you actually contemplate picking him as a bowler ahead of Archer?

test only, yep. Holder has been magnificent over the past couple of years

 

[therealAB]

Lol you're kidding right? Hazelwood is rarely fit, Holder has sporadic great performances with the ball, coupled with mediocrity, Shami is good but not that good and won't be around for long given his age which has to be 35+

Holder has been fantastic for the last few years, averaging about 20
Hazlewood generally fit, not sure what you are talking about. Outperformed Jofra in the ashes
Shami has been great for the past few years. Averages 23.5 since the start of 2017 bowling on India wickets at home.

Re the age, I am talking about a test for tomorrow, based on how good they are ATM

 

[aloo paratha]

Honestly, I would take Archer over every fast bowler in the world in every format except:

Cummins in Tests and Starc in LOIs.

Yes the sample size is very low, but he is special.

If England can keep him fit, he is going to fly and make England fly alongside him.

Bumrah, Boult, Rabada, Shami etc. are all quality bowlers with greater samples, but if I pick them over Archer in my team, I know I would end up regretting it.

He was very special against New Zealand last year, averaging 104 in the series, only taking 2 wickets.

 

[Square Drive]

Archer being overrated big time here.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

Look that's your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. I am coming from the stand-point of England's World Cup win and his role in making that possible. But also from a personal experience of watching cricket. I can't remember the last time I saw a bowler who broke-out in such a huge way, gave such impressive performances in his first year and then fizzled out. And keep in mind that Pakistani fast-bowlers have to be excluded from this group because their careers are defined by things uniquely exclusive to them.

I didn’t state my own opinion but rather express what a possible opinion some would argue might be. If it is even up to discussion that Shaheen is ahead of Archer, then it’s a fallacy to say Archer is in the top 4 bowlers in the world right now.

And mind you, England should have lost that world cup, going by the rules. In which case Jofra would have remained a “good breakout bowler of the world cup”. If his entire reputation depends on an umpiring mistake, then the debate opens up even more. I think a fairer comparison is to separate the tiers as follows (age 28 and below).

Tier 1: Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah, Kagiso Rabada

Tier 2: Shaheen Shah Afridi, Jofra Archer

The rest are unknown quantities. I personally like Naseem, Jhye Richardson, and Lahiru Kumara.

 

[Mamoon]

He was very special against New Zealand last year, averaging 104 in the series, only taking 2 wickets.

No bowler in history has been successful in every single series. The New Zealand series was a complete anomaly because he was burned out. England ran him into the ground by playing him constantly across formats,

 

[Arsal_AK]

The way Archer is being talked about, you would think he had blown away oppositions around the globe and has been doing it for years.

In reality he has had a couple of good series, has potential but that's is it.

 

[Forum363]

No bowler in history has been successful in every single series. The New Zealand series was a complete anomaly because he was burned out. England ran him into the ground by playing him constantly across formats,

He had more than 2 months rest after the final ashes test. This should have been adequate to recuperate.

You cannot use burned out as an excuse for his terrible performance.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I didn’t state my own opinion but rather express what a possible opinion some would argue might be. If it is even up to discussion that Shaheen is ahead of Archer, then it’s a fallacy to say Archer is in the top 4 bowlers in the world right now.

And mind you, England should have lost that world cup, going by the rules. In which case Jofra would have remained a “good breakout bowler of the world cup”. If his entire reputation depends on an umpiring mistake, then the debate opens up even more. I think a fairer comparison is to separate the tiers as follows (age 28 and below).

Tier 1: Pat Cummins, Jasprit Bumrah, Kagiso Rabada

Tier 2: Shaheen Shah Afridi, Jofra Archer

The rest are unknown quantities. I personally like Naseem, Jhye Richardson, and Lahiru Kumara.

Again that's you opinion. I don't think so. To me, Archer looks like a more complete bowler than Shaheen at the moment.

And please don't indulge in what ifs, I told the poster the same thing. It's an absolutely frivolous and pointless activity.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Holder has been fantastic for the last few years, averaging about 20
Hazlewood generally fit, not sure what you are talking about. Outperformed Jofra in the ashes
Shami has been great for the past few years. Averages 23.5 since the start of 2017 bowling on India wickets at home.

Re the age, I am talking about a test for tomorrow, based on how good they are ATM

Are you joking or being serious? He was kept out of the World Cup so he could be fit for the Ashes. Why? because he has a history of injuries. He has gotten injured in 2017, 2018, twice in 2019. Last time he played for Australia, against New Zealand he picked up an injury. He is probably one of the most injury prone bowlers in the world.