How does the present-day Jasprit Bumrah compare with the likes of Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis?

[kron]

I think 65 tests will put him in the league of top 10 test bowlers of all time but getting in top 5 bracket is unlikely.

For that, you need quality alongwith longevity (80+ tests in my opinion).

Holding and Robert’s and garner all had under 60. Bumrah will be top 5 with ease.

 

[Ab Fan]

Holding and Robert’s and garner all had under 60. Bumrah will be top 5 with ease.

They are not top 10 let alone top 5. Also, they suffered a bit due to competition from Colin Croft and lost 8-10 games to WSC.

 

[Ab Fan]

You are not ahead of me, you are eons behind me. First get a potw and then we will talk

lol.. First learn to post sensibly before self promotion your so called potw.

 

[mominsaigol]

lol.. First learn to post sensibly before self promotion your so called potw.

First learn to speak the truth before spreading lies.

 

[pratiktc]

Honestly match count and wicket count as parameters for greatness are only for statisticians to obsess over.

Once a bowler develops a body of work with success and skill showcasing across wide variety of surfaces and situations then they are fit to be in conversation of game's best. Usually with modern schedules around 30-35 tests is enough for tours across countries.

At this point in his career Bumrah is already an all time great bowler. He has shown consistency and performance as a difference making bowler in all of Ind/Aus/SA/Eng.

I am not a fan of comparing players across eras but anyone who watches Bumrah knows they are seeing a special talent. Probably the first proper three format #1 bowler.

 

[kron]

They are not top 10 let alone top 5. Also, they suffered a bit due to competition from Colin Croft and lost 8-10 games to WSC.

They are all top 10 and they are better than any Asian bowler barring bumrah imran and wasim

 

[Ab Fan]

They are all top 10 and they are better than any Asian bowler barring bumrah imran and wasim

Not for me. My top 10 in no particular order - Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Imran, Steyn, Wasim, Donald, Lillee, Cummins/ Rabada/ Bumrah. That’s 12.

What is your top 10?

 

[kron]

Not for me. My top 10 in no particular order - Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Imran, Steyn, Wasim, Donald, Lillee, Cummins/ Rabada/ Bumrah. That’s 12.

What is your top 10?

Marshall
Mcgrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Bumrah
Rabada
Garner
Imran
Wasim
Cummins
Holding

In order for me if you say 12

Lillee is far too overrated
Donald choked too much vs Aus.

 

[Ab Fan]

Marshall
Mcgrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Bumrah
Rabada
Garner
Imran
Wasim
Cummins
Holding

In order for me if you say 12

Lillee is far too overrated
Donald choked too much vs Aus.

So, Roberts and Holding aren’t in your top 10 either so I don’t know why you said they are top 10?

 

[kron]

So, Roberts and Holding aren’t in your top 10 either so I don’t know why you said they are top 10?

I was going to say above Donald and Lillee sorry

I was going through the list and then I was like yea Nha I can’t put him above Rabada or garner or even Cummins.

 

[kron]

So, Roberts and Holding aren’t in your top 10 either so I don’t know why you said they are top 10?

Actually thinking of it, arguably a case can easily be made for holding over Wasim. Wasim average vs top 4 teams of his era was only 28.25

 

[Ab Fan]

Marshall
Mcgrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Bumrah
Rabada
Garner
Imran
Wasim
Cummins
Holding

In order for me if you say 12

Lillee is far too overrated
Donald choked too much vs Aus.

Lille’s WPM is simply phenomenal. 5 WPM tells us about his ability to run through sides.

Donald worst avg is vs Aus which is 31. Not too bad.

Garner is too high in your list. Just 7 5-fers and avg is freakish probably due to playing in strong team with all superstar bowlers. ATG bowler but just misses out from a top10 for me.

I will take Donald over Garner by just.

 

[kron]

Lille’s WPM is simply phenomenal. 5 WPM tells us about his ability to run through sides.

Donald worst avg is vs Aus which is 31. Not too bad.

Garner is too high in your list. Just 7 5-fers and avg is freakish probably due to playing in strong team with all superstar bowlers. ATG bowler but just misses out from a top10 for me.

I will take Donald over Garner by just.

Wasim should be lower actually
Imran can stay where he is

Would still say garner is better though than all including Donald.

 

[Ab Fan]

Wasim should be lower actually
Imran can stay where he is

Would still say garner is better though than all including Donald.

Garner is behind them all.

Wasim has 400 wickets at 23, IK 350 at 22 and Donald 330 at 22.

 

[Buffet]

Garner is behind them all.

Wasim has 400 wickets at 23, IK 350 at 22 and Donald 330 at 22.

Looking at only wickets tally without looking at opposition is not right way to judge any player. Garner had high quality wickets and majority of wickets were against the top 4 opposition.

Garner against top 4 oppositions - 252 wickets at avg of 20 - That's an elite category. He has 259 career wickets, so 97% of his career wickets came against top sides during his career. Even if you include 4 tests against India, he still has avg of 20.xx, that would be 100% of his career.


To put it in context,

Some one like Wasim has 244 wickets at avg of 26 against top 5 opposition home and away combined. Wasim does have 170 wickets against bottom 2 teams/minnows at avg of 20. Garners's output against top teams was equal to Wasim's output against bottom/minnows. Picking 400 or 600 wickets won't change that fact. Both played enough against top teams and outputs were vastly different.

Garner can make a strong claim among the top 10 pacers. He may miss for some posters, but just looking at wickets tally will be way off the mark when rating Garner. Garner's 250 wickets were golden at avg of 20 because it was mostly against top sides. You can stil rate Wasim due to various intangibles.

Legacy is made with performance against good teams and during tough tours. Garner passes that filter with a flying colors just like Marshall, McGrath, Bumrah, IK etc.

 

[Ab Fan]

Looking at only wickets tally without looking at opposition is not right way to judge any player. Garner had high quality wickets and majority of wickets were against the top 4 opposition.

Garner against top 4 oppositions - 252 wickets at avg of 20 - That's an elite category. He has 259 career wickets, so 97% of his career wickets came against top sides during his career. Even if you include 4 tests against India, he still has avg of 20.xx, that would be 100% of his career.


To put it in context,

Some one like Wasim has 244 wickets at avg of 26 against top 5 opposition home and away combined. Wasim does have 170 wickets against bottom 2 teams/minnows at avg of 20. Garners's output against top teams was equal to Wasim's output against bottom/minnows. Picking 400 or 600 wickets won't change that fact. Both played enough against top teams and outputs were vastly different.

Garner can make a strong claim among the top 10 pacers. He may miss for some posters, but just looking at wickets tally will be way off the mark when rating Garner. Garner's 250 wickets were golden at avg of 20 because it was mostly against top sides. You can stil rate Wasim due to various intangibles.

Legacy is made with performance against good teams and during tough tours. Garner passes that filter with a flying colors just like Marshall, McGrath, Bumrah, IK etc.

I am not looking at only wickets tally here for Garner. Let’s talk a bit about how his career spanned.

Garner was seen as the support act in that four man pace attack, which initially was led by Andy Roberts and Michael Holding. Colin Croft also emerged during the same time and his fearsome pace took the spotlight straightaway. Then a year later, Marshall debuted and soon he started leading the attack with Holding. Garner was always seen as support act till 1984 when he finally got the new ball.

Now, he has great record and astonishing numbers but a lot of those who have seen them play would consider him at about similar level as Roberts and Holding. I can probably dig deep on these three w.r.t test matches they played( durability, too much competition, WSC matches etc) but this is not the thread about them.

Now, back to Bumrah, my point is that assuming he plays 60 tests and the quality he has brought, it will probably put him in the league of top 10 fast bowlers of all time( tests) but to be a top 5, I don’t really think it is enough. You have Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose with same quality and longer careers. Top 5 will require Bumrah to maintain that quality over longer period.

 

[kron]

Garner is behind them all.

Wasim has 400 wickets at 23, IK 350 at 22 and Donald 330 at 22.

Don’t care
Garner was a better bowler than both tbh

 

[kron]

I am not looking at only wickets tally here for Garner. Let’s talk a bit about how his career spanned.

Garner was seen as the support act in that four man pace attack, which initially was led by Andy Roberts and Michael Holding. Colin Croft also emerged during the same time and his fearsome pace took the spotlight straightaway. Then a year later, Marshall debuted and soon he started leading the attack with Holding. Garner was always seen as support act till 1984 when he finally got the new ball.

Now, he has great record and astonishing numbers but a lot of those who have seen them play would consider him at about similar level as Roberts and Holding. I can probably dig deep on these three w.r.t test matches they played( durability, too much competition, WSC matches etc) but this is not the thread about them.

Now, back to Bumrah, my point is that assuming he plays 60 tests and the quality he has brought, it will probably put him in the league of top 10 fast bowlers of all time( tests) but to be a top 5, I don’t really think it is enough. You have Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose with same quality and longer careers. Top 5 will require Bumrah to maintain that quality over longer period.

Bumrah has already done more than Wasim and Imran away from home. He is already 6th right now.

But yea for longevity 60 is plenty. Some greats have played 60 to 70.

 

[sweep_shot]

Bumrah is 2 levels below Waqar and 4-5 levels below Wasim. No comparison whatsoever.

Wasim and Waqar were not chuckers. Bumrah is potentially a chucker (we can't tell until he gets tested).

 

[Ab Fan]

Bumrah has already done more than Wasim and Imran away from home. He is already 6th right now.

But yea for longevity 60 is plenty. Some greats have played 60 to 70.

Not yet for me. Lack of durability in case of Bumrah puts him at 12-13 spot for me.

 

[AZulfi]

Marshall
Mcgrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Bumrah
Rabada
Garner
Imran
Wasim
Cummins
Holding

In order for me if you say 12

Lillee is far too overrated
Donald choked too much vs Aus.

Andy Roberts (known for his raw pace and ability to generate unpredictable, unplayable bounce) is a notable omission in your list. Many incl. Botham rate him the best and the most dangerous among the original fearsome Windies Quartet of Holding, Clarke, Roberts and Garner. Malcolm Marshall was not very threatening in the initial part of his career. He became a better and more complete bowler after 1983.

 

[Obaidd]

Honestly match count and wicket count as parameters for greatness are only for statisticians to obsess over.

Once a bowler develops a body of work with success and skill showcasing across wide variety of surfaces and situations then they are fit to be in conversation of game's best. Usually with modern schedules around 30-35 tests is enough for tours across countries.

At this point in his career Bumrah is already an all time great bowler. He has shown consistency and performance as a difference making bowler in all of Ind/Aus/SA/Eng.

I am not a fan of comparing players across eras but anyone who watches Bumrah knows they are seeing a special talent. Probably the first proper three format #1 bowler.

Pak fans can’t rate him fully until he performs in Tests against them.

 

[AZulfi]

Andy Roberts dismissing both Chappell brothers

 

[AZulfi]

Andy Roberts (known for his raw pace and ability to generate unpredictable, unplayable bounce) is a notable omission in your list. Many incl. Botham rate him the best and the most dangerous among the original fearsome Windies Quartet of Holding, Clarke, Roberts and Garner. Malcolm Marshall was not very threatening in the initial part of his career. He became a better and more complete bowler after 1983.

meant Croft. Clarke was a decent bowler too

 

[BouncerGuy]

atm, Bumrah's only issue is longevity.. If he conquers it, he is my top 3 for sure.

 

[Ab Fan]

Andy Roberts (known for his raw pace and ability to generate unpredictable, unplayable bounce) is a notable omission in your list. Many incl. Botham rate him the best and the most dangerous among the original fearsome Windies Quartet of Holding, Clarke, Roberts and Garner. Malcolm Marshall was not very threatening in the initial part of his career. He became a better and more complete bowler after 1983.

Lillee is better than Roberts and best bowler of his generation (70s).

 

[AZulfi]

Lillee is better than Roberts and best bowler of his generation (70s).

Lillee was average on sub-continental pitches

 

[AZulfi]

Lillee is better than Roberts and best bowler of his generation (70s).

Although Lillee played only 4 tests in Asia, 3 vs Pak and 1 vs SLA, his record was poor.

Only 6 wickets in 4 tests at 68.33

 

[Sachin fan]

Ben Stokes Out bowled Bumrah at Lords in second Innings.. Bumrah was taken out of attack when Joe Root came to bat. The best opposition batter comes to crease anf your Generational opts to finish spell due to work load

Yes because we always judge players by one series and wasim and waqar never had any average or bad series.

The points being used are ridiculous

 

[Ab Fan]

Although Lillee played only 4 tests in Asia, 3 vs Pak and 1 vs SLA, his record was poor.

Only 6 wickets in 4 tests at 68.33

That’s a very low sample honestly. Also, Subcontinent didn’t hold much relevance back in 70s. Lillee is widely regarded as one of the greatest bowlers of all time and his duels vs Viv is well remembered. Actually these two can also be considered best cricketers of 1970s.

 

[AZulfi]

It will be between Andy Roberts and Dennis Lillee, according to Botham

 

[AZulfi]

That’s a very low sample honestly. Also, Subcontinent didn’t hold much relevance back in 70s. Lillee is widely regarded as one of the greatest bowlers of all time and his duels vs Viv is well remembered. Actually these two can also be considered best cricketers of 1970s.

Lillee is indeed one of the greatest bowlers, but there were many other great bowlers in his era incl. the fearsome Windies quartet. I was just pointing out his record in Asia. During the three test series in Pakistan in 1980, Lillee only took 3 wickets at 101!

 

[Sachin fan]

I don't have any issues with people wanting longevity as a factor for greatness. But it's funny when the same guys hype Asif, Amir and Akhtar or don't consider longevity when comparing Smith vs Sachin.

At least be consistent in your logic and arguments. You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Ab Fan]

Lillee is indeed one of the greatest bowlers, but there were many other great bowlers in his era incl. the fearsome Windies quartet. I was just pointing out his record in Asia. During the three test series in Pakistan in 1980, Lillee only took 3 wickets at 101!

Yeah, fair to say that Andy Roberts
is one of those bowlers whose peer reputation often exceeds his raw stats. Even Gavaskar rated him as the toughest he faced. But his overall record is not really a top level and inferior to about 6-7 names from 70s and 80s.

 

[BouncerGuy]

STAY ON TOPIC

 

[kron]

Not yet for me. Lack of durability in case of Bumrah puts him at 12-13 spot for me.

Impact fear factor
Match winning ability
All matters more

At his peak he is better than all of those guys I put below him. That’s all matters.

If he gets to 65 tests he is in top 3 provided he finishes with similar stats to say Steyn in terms of average.

 

[kron]

I don't have any issues with people wanting longevity as a factor for greatness. But it's funny when the same guys hype Asif, Amir and Akhtar or don't consider longevity when comparing Smith vs Sachin.

At least be consistent in your logic and arguments. You cannot have it both ways.

Longevity matters only to an extent.

When you have played enough away matches then it’s a non issue. Like in bumrahs case.
He is already the best ever Asian bowler of all time.

If he was a Sena bowler and got to bowl entirely on Sena pitches and stat pad vs crap teams (which he does) then he would average like 17.

I am very impartial when it comes to discerning a player’s ability. I never rate someone high unless they prove themselves. I hate stat padders and that’s why I dislike kohli Rohit etc. but bumrah is truly something else.

It’s not even close.

 

[kron]

That’s a very low sample honestly. Also, Subcontinent didn’t hold much relevance back in 70s. Lillee is widely regarded as one of the greatest bowlers of all time and his duels vs Viv is well remembered. Actually these two can also be considered best cricketers of 1970s.

Lollee is rubbish outside helpful pitches. So overrated.

 

[kron]

Pak fans can’t rate him fully until he performs in Tests against them.

He doesn’t play vs trash teams

 

[kron]

Bumrah is 2 levels below Waqar and 4-5 levels below Wasim. No comparison whatsoever.

Wasim and Waqar were not chuckers. Bumrah is potentially a chucker (we can't tell until he gets tested).

Yea and then we all have to wake up one day to reality. Waqar is not better than shami. Shami is far better.

Let alone bumrah. Siraj probably won more away matches in sea than useless Waqar.

 

[RidiculousMan]

A bowler that cannot even remain fit cannot contest among goats. It's a disgrace to Cricketing Legends of the past

 

[Sachin fan]

A bowler that cannot even remain fit cannot contest among goats. It's a disgrace to Cricketing Legends of the past

Yet he has amongst the most overs bowled in test among fast bowlers in the last couple of years. And is nearing 250 wickets

And as I said, you guys hype Akhtar, asif, Amir who have way less matches and wickets, lol

 

[mominsaigol]

I don't have any issues with people wanting longevity as a factor for greatness. But it's funny when the same guys hype Asif, Amir and Akhtar or don't consider longevity when comparing Smith vs Sachin.

At least be consistent in your logic and arguments. You cannot have it both ways.

Smith has played 120 tests and is about to retire. That is longevity. But I agree with the rest of your argument

 

[Sachin fan]

Smith has played 120 tests and is about to retire. That is longevity. But I agree with the rest of your argument

But still doesn't have the longevity Sachin had. Bumrah is nearing 250 tests wickets. Either longevity matters or it doesn't, you cannot selectively use it for comparing Wasim/Waqar vs Bumrah and then not consider it when comparing Sachin vs Smith.

And reminder, Sachin's average etc at this this stage is way closer to Smith than Wasim/Waqars is to Bumrah.

If Smith>Sachin based on slight increase in average than Bumrah>>>Wasim and waqar using the same logic

 

[mominsaigol]

But still doesn't have the longevity Sachin had. Bumrah is nearing 250 tests wickets. Either longevity matters or it doesn't, you cannot selectively use it for comparing Wasim/Waqar vs Bumrah and then not consider it when comparing Sachin vs Smith.

And reminder, Sachin's average etc at this this stage is way closer to Smith than Wasim/Waqars is to Bumrah.

Longetivity should not be a metric in terms of match count.

It should be career vs Career. Smith throughout his career has achieved success same as Sachin.

The reason people talk about bumrah isnt due to match count, its cause he literally cannot play more then 2 tests in a row without huffing and puffing.

The reason he did so poorly in england is cause he had no stamina. His stamina was brutally exposed in this series.

The reason he doesnt have a 10 fer as well is cause he doesmt bowl that many overs for test standards.

No one sane or knowledgeable looks at his match count.

 

[Sachin fan]

Longetivity should not be a metric in terms of match count.

It should be career vs Career. Smith throughout his career has achieved success same as Sachin.

The reason people talk about bumrah isnt due to match count, its cause he literally cannot play more then 2 tests in a row without huffing and puffing.

The reason he did so poorly in england is cause he had no stamina. His stamina was brutally exposed in this series.

The reason he doesnt have a 10 fer as well is cause he doesmt bowl that many overs for test standards.

No one sane or knowledgeable looks at his match count.

Yet Bumrah is the bowlers who bowled the most number of overs in tests since 2024.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaCricket/comments/1llog23/jasprit_bumrah_4104_test_overs_since_2024_most_by

He was coming back from an injury which is why management wanted him to play only 3 tests and he choose to do it, it was voluntary,.not forced.

Just a reminder, except couple of trundlers no bowler bowled in all 10 innings of the England series, not even stokes.

You cannot compare him with bowlers who have barely bowled since 2024 and hence are able to play more matches.

You guys just hold bumrah to different standards compared to any other bowlers. I will repeat, even now he is among the bowlers bowling most overs in tests.

I remember the same mental gymnastics with sachin

 

[mominsaigol]

Yet Bumrah is the bowlers who bowled the most number of overs in tests since 2024.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaCricket/comments/1llog23/jasprit_bumrah_4104_test_overs_since_2024_most_by

He was coming back from an injury which is why management wanted him to play only 3 tests and he choose to do it, it was voluntary,.not forced.

Just a reminder, except couple of trundlers no bowler bowled in all 10 innings of the England series, not even stokes.

You cannot compare him with bowlers who have barely bowled since 2024 and hence are able to play more matches.

You guys just hold bumrah to different standards compared to any other bowlers. I will repeat, even now he is among the bowlers bowling most overs in tests.

I remember the same mental gymnastics with sachin

Don't say You guys with me. I am not aware of what other people are arguing and couldn't bother.

I acknowledge bumrah skills wise is the best bowler on the planet atm. However he won't make it to top 5 or top 10 bowlers of all time that people have portrayed him to be.

The truth is despite his skills he hasn't even had 10% the career of Starc despite india being the world's strongest odi and t20 team and the world's best away touring team in tests and best home team in test.

Starc was directly responsible for wc 2015 win, was crucial in 2023 wtc and wc win. Has the greatest pink ball test bowling figured of all time, fastest 5 wicket haul, has 10 fers and has 400 wickets with amazing bgt and ashes performance.

His only black mark is BGT away series and a horrible 2021 t20 cup despite Australia winning it. Starc was awful.

Bumrah in comparison has a laughable test career given his current team state. As a bowler he will be remembered for losing India's first home series in a long time which was a whitewash, as well as ending india's dominace vs Australia in aus den.

He will also be remembered for his cr 2017 and wc 2023 botch despite winning a 2024 wc cup for his team.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Wasim is ahead for now cos he has 400+ wkts, so the difference in average can be countered with longevity.

As soon as Bumrah reaches 300 wkts he will only be judged on quality as 300 wkts is enough longevity.

The likes of Lillee, Khan have 350 odd wickets, Marshall is Goat contender and he has 380 wkts.

Bumrah is already ahead of Waqar because of his average performances against top team.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Bumrah will be remembered for doing what no other Asian bowler could do i.e win two back to back series in Aus and making the two best batsman of this generation his bunny.

On top of that he is already the GOAT t20i bowler.

 

[Ab Fan]

Impact fear factor
Match winning ability
All matters more

At his peak he is better than all of those guys I put below him. That’s all matters.

If he gets to 65 tests he is in top 3 provided he finishes with similar stats to say Steyn in terms of average.

Yes but why do you think the top 3 or top 5 fast bowlers of all time lacks these criteria - Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn, Imran.

Ambrose and Hadlee have phenomenal record in Australia. Steyn has phenomenal record in era of flat tracks across all parts of the world. Imran has phenomenal series in Windies with bowl and freakish home dominance.Averages under 30 everywhere.

In addition to having impact, fear factor, match winning ability, they also had longevity and it is beyond 80 tests.

Reckon Bumrah with 60-65 tests will be at same level as Donald or Lillee or Wasim or Cummins / Rabada(they can get to 100) in Tests.

 

[RyanRyan10]

I don't have any issues with people wanting longevity as a factor for greatness. But it's funny when the same guys hype Asif, Amir and Akhtar or don't consider longevity when comparing Smith vs Sachin.

At least be consistent in your logic and arguments. You cannot have it both ways.

India should aim to be an exceptional team rather than worrying about their best players being considered GOATs. Not many people will change their opinion of Bumrah when no matches are being played or after just a handful of games, whether the opinions are positive or negative. I know some individuals have revised their opinions but that has more to do with Bumrah's nationality and those opinions shouldn't be taken seriously.

You are also right about Pakistani fans overhyping Akhtar, Asif, and Amir. Bumrah has made Pakistan fans respect the two Ws more than they do. Not long ago, there was a thread discussing 90s players lacking a legacy, and some posters who are using the two Ws to belittle Bumrah here claimed they had no legacy. Waqar has been scrutinized many times on this forum by Pakistani fans and most sided with Amir when he retired blaming Waqar. Waqar's failure to win an ICC trophy is often brought up to make Amir look better.

 

[Obaidd]

Until Bumrah performs in tests vs Pakistan, Shoaib will have the edge on him.

Serious pak fans can’t rate him until they see him perform in tests vs Pak. Till that happens, he misses out on more respect from this side of the border. Not saying he can’t perform in tests vs Pak, just that he hasn’t and that’s a serious miss on his CV.

Ind fans discussing this on PP means they are looking for pak fans’ approval. I can understand that.

 

[mominsaigol]

Until Bumrah performs in tests vs Pakistan, Shoaib will have the edge on him.

Serious pak fans can’t rate him until they see him perform in tests vs Pak. Till that happens, he misses out on more respect from this side of the border. Not saying he can’t perform in tests vs Pak, just that he hasn’t and that’s a serious miss on his CV.

Ind fans discussing this on PP means they are looking for pak fans’ approval. I can understand that.

Shush be careful, Indians don't understand sarcasm. They might start jumping on you

 

[Buffet]

I am not looking at only wickets tally here for Garner. Let’s talk a bit about how his career spanned.

Garner was seen as the support act in that four man pace attack, which initially was led by Andy Roberts and Michael Holding. Colin Croft also emerged during the same time and his fearsome pace took the spotlight straightaway. Then a year later, Marshall debuted and soon he started leading the attack with Holding. Garner was always seen as support act till 1984 when he finally got the new ball.

Now, he has great record and astonishing numbers but a lot of those who have seen them play would consider him at about similar level as Roberts and Holding. I can probably dig deep on these three w.r.t test matches they played( durability, too much competition, WSC matches etc) but this is not the thread about them.

Now, back to Bumrah, my point is that assuming he plays 60 tests and the quality he has brought, it will probably put him in the league of top 10 fast bowlers of all time( tests) but to be a top 5, I don’t really think it is enough. You have Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose with same quality and longer careers. Top 5 will require Bumrah to maintain that quality over longer period.

Yes, you could be support act and still be better than many others. You can simply see SR and Avg combinations to see effectiveness of bowler in different conditions. Being a support act of best fact bowler( Marshall) in history is not a negative.

Bumrah has a pretty good case of top 10 right now. 3 tours each of Eng, SA, and Aus with MOS in in each venues. Very good in Asian conditions as well. I don't think 60 tsts or 70 tests makes any difference. If he has 300+ wickets with mostly high quality wickets ( tough tours, top teams) then he will go above Ambrose and Steyn. That will put him among the top 5. Right now he is behind them but not by much.

Where he ends up in top 10 will depend on what happens in his rest of his career, but he is comfortably among the top 10 for me. He has more away wickets than likes of Steyn, Garner, Holding, Donald etc and more wickets in India than pretty much all ATG pacers. So very large sample size in different conditions to judge.

 

[Obaidd]

Shush be careful, Indians don't understand sarcasm. They might start jumping on you

Seriously though, I can’t rate him in tests until he performs vs my team. Rival fans respect opp players who perform against their team.

Shoaib has the edge on him vis-à-vis pak ind tests. Heck, Irfan Pathan has a bigger tests legacy vs Pak. Not Bumrah’s fault but a major miss from his CV.

 

[Buffet]

Longevity matters only to an extent.

When you have played enough away matches then it’s a non issue. Like in bumrahs case.
He is already the best ever Asian bowler of all time.

If he was a Sena bowler and got to bowl entirely on Sena pitches and stat pad vs crap teams (which he does) then he would average like 17.

I am very impartial when it comes to discerning a player’s ability. I never rate someone high unless they prove themselves. I hate stat padders and that’s why I dislike kohli Rohit etc. but bumrah is truly something else.

It’s not even close.

Only 7 pacers have sub 25 avg away and 150+ wickets against non-minnows. May be only 6 if we exclude SL of early 90s which may take out Wasim from list.

So 6-7 pacers in entire history. it will be comical if anyone still talks about longevity if Bumrah gets to 200+ away wickets. He has done 3 tours each for Eng, Aus and SA so most of the away wickets were against top teams and not some filler wickets.




---------------------

Smith has enough longevity to be judged as batsman and Bumrah has enough longevity to be judged as a pacer. Longevity is important to an extent to have a large enough sample size in different conditions. Both have done enough to be among the top 10 in history.

 

[mominsaigol]

Seriously though, I can’t rate him in tests until he performs vs my team. Rival fans respect opp players who perform against their team.

Shoaib has the edge on him vis-à-vis pak ind tests. Heck, Irfan Pathan has a bigger tests legacy vs Pak. Not Bumrah’s fault but a major miss from his CV.

India doesn't play test vs Pakistan so not a fair comparison.

I like bumrah its just indian fans overdo it.

Bumrah is a great bowler but he isn't even top 15 test bowlers of all time. He has virtually no stamina for test. Literally none. England badly exposed him and now that hes 31, cracks will eventually show in his record.

He's had a poor series vs NZ and Eng recently. A good series vs Aus though but in a losing cause and boland still outperformed him.

 

[kron]

Yes but why do you think the top 3 or top 5 fast bowlers of all time lacks these criteria - Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, Steyn, Imran.

Ambrose and Hadlee have phenomenal record in Australia. Steyn has phenomenal record in era of flat tracks across all parts of the world. Imran has phenomenal series in Windies with bowl and freakish home dominance.Averages under 30 everywhere.

In addition to having impact, fear factor, match winning ability, they also had longevity and it is beyond 80 tests.

Reckon Bumrah with 60-65 tests will be at same level as Donald or Lillee or Wasim or Cummins / Rabada(they can get to 100) in Tests.

Bumrah has already left all those guys in the last paragraph for deaD
Insult to even compare a fodder like Lillee with bumrah.

Rabada yes he is good
Donald was just a choker vs the one good team in his era

Steyn had flat pitch era only in England and India mostly. he also benefitted from bowling on seaming tracks in SA and AUS

It wasn’t always flat per se in other countries.

And I would say ability wise bumrah is better than even Steyn.

He needs longevity though to get past him. Atleast 60 65 tests and that should be enough.

India were number 1 in tests for 5 straight years under kohli. Bumrah played a huge role in that accomplishment. He revolutionised the Indian bowling attack which became the goat Asian pace attack of all time.

Wasim himself said bumrah is better anyway.

He needs one more good away series in England and SA. And ideally Nz away as well. Then it should be good.
He has done more than enough.

And a good home showing vs SA and Aus when they tour next time will just cement his status as one of the best ever.

Steyn btw has a pretty average record in Aus, England and even in pak iirc.
He gets overrated a lot. Yes some of the games were on flat pitches but there were plenty of pitches that were spicy too. It was a mixed bag.

Ambrose dint even tour India and a weak Indian team actually did well vs him in West Indies. He averaged like 36 plus vs india on those treacherous crappy pitches.

90s bowling stats should be taken with a grain of salt. Lot of them stat padded and benefitted a lot by over stepping, bowling no balls, unlimited bouncers and crap. Uneven bouncy pitch etc.

Add 3 extra runs to their average. Probably looking at 24 ish vs modern era with real drs systems and supposedly impartial umpires.

 

[RidiculousMan]

Yet he has amongst the most overs bowled in test among fast bowlers in the last couple of years. And is nearing 250 wickets

Not enough when you compare it against real Goats like Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Imran, Marshall, Walsh, Steyn, etc

 

[Ab Fan]

Yes, you could be support act and still be better than many others. You can simply see SR and Avg combinations to see effectiveness of bowler in different conditions. Being a support act of best fact bowler( Marshall) in history is not a negative.

Bumrah has a pretty good case of top 10 right now. 3 tours each of Eng, SA, and Aus with MOS in in each venues. Very good in Asian conditions as well. I don't think 60 tsts or 70 tests makes any difference. If he has 300+ wickets with mostly high quality wickets ( tough tours, top teams) then he will go above Ambrose and Steyn. That will put him among the top 5. Right now he is behind them but not by much.

Where he ends up in top 10 will depend on what happens in his rest of his career, but he is comfortably among the top 10 for me. He has more away wickets than likes of Steyn, Garner, Holding, Donald etc and more wickets in India than pretty much all ATG pacers. So very large sample size in different conditions to judge.

Only 7 pacers have sub 25 avg away and 150+ wickets against non-minnows. May be only 6 if we exclude SL of early 90s which may take out Wasim from list.

So 6-7 pacers in entire history. it will be comical if anyone still talks about longevity if Bumrah gets to 200+ away wickets. He has done 3 tours each for Eng, Aus and SA so most of the away wickets were against top teams and not some filler wickets.

View attachment 157599


---------------------

Smith has enough longevity to be judged as batsman and Bumrah has enough longevity to be judged as a pacer. Longevity is important to an extent to have a large enough sample size in different conditions. Both have done enough to be among the top 10 in history.

I won’t put same parameter for a support bowler and lead bowler. Support bowlers have an advantage that they get away from a bad spell on bad days. Example- When Philander and Rabada both played in Ind and SL, Philander got away with not so mediocre figures. Garner with only 7 5-fers is below Steyn, IK, Wasim, Donald for me. These names were lead bowlers for their team all over the world and they were top performing teams too.

Bumrah is a phenomenal bowler but not someone who has zero holes in his resume. The blame for NZ beating India 2-0 and 3-0 in last two tours lies on him too, especially when you are willing to put it in top 10 test bowlers of all time. Add to it the lack of durability- multiple injuries and skipping games as part of workload management. The three tours he completed were also the ones where he missed a Gabba test in 2020 tour, couldn’t complete Sydney Test( which was a fast bowling shootout) and skipped two tests in England this year. He is quality bowler with one hole( NZ) that can be ignored but not the other one.

Steve Smith doesn’t have any hole in Test cricket and longevity is also covered with 10k+ runs.

 

[Ab Fan]

Bumrah has already left all those guys in the last paragraph for deaD
Insult to even compare a fodder like Lillee with bumrah.

Rabada yes he is good
Donald was just a choker vs the one good team in his era

Steyn had flat pitch era only in England and India mostly. he also benefitted from bowling on seaming tracks in SA and AUS

It wasn’t always flat per se in other countries.

And I would say ability wise bumrah is better than even Steyn.

He needs longevity though to get past him. Atleast 60 65 tests and that should be enough.

India were number 1 in tests for 5 straight years under kohli. Bumrah played a huge role in that accomplishment. He revolutionised the Indian bowling attack which became the goat Asian pace attack of all time.

Wasim himself said bumrah is better anyway.

He needs one more good away series in England and SA. And ideally Nz away as well. Then it should be good.
He has done more than enough.

And a good home showing vs SA and Aus when they tour next time will just cement his status as one of the best ever.

Steyn btw has a pretty average record in Aus, England and even in pak iirc.
He gets overrated a lot. Yes some of the games were on flat pitches but there were plenty of pitches that were spicy too. It was a mixed bag.

Ambrose dint even tour India and a weak Indian team actually did well vs him in West Indies. He averaged like 36 plus vs india on those treacherous crappy pitches.

90s bowling stats should be taken with a grain of salt. Lot of them stat padded and benefitted a lot by over stepping, bowling no balls, unlimited bouncers and crap. Uneven bouncy pitch etc.

Add 3 extra runs to their average. Probably looking at 24 ish vs modern era with real drs systems and supposedly impartial umpires.

Donald has one weakness - failed or rather didn’t performed really well vs Australia. He was phenomenal vs rest both home and away.

Bumrah has two weakness - failed vs New Zealand as well as injury concerns leading to workload management and lack of durability.

Ambrose has one - he didn’t toured India but that doesn’t guarantee that he would fail there. Even if he failed, his average would be 21.

Rules for no ball is same as earlier in Tests, not sure what’s the point. Conditions have been extremely bowling friendly in Bumrah and Rabada era too.

 

[Ab Fan]

Not enough when you compare it against real Goats like Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Imran, Marshall, Walsh, Steyn, etc

Waqar and Walsh are far from real GOATs and there can’t be that many GOATs to begin with.

 

[Ab Fan]

@Buffet @kron, When I think of top 10 test bowlers of all time( fast bowlers), one gaping hole is acceptable but not two.

Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, IK, Steyn, Wasim, Donald - 8 names that I don’t think have more than one hole ( mostly failure vs one opponent) in their careers.

Bumrah, Lillee and Rabada each have two. Lillee failed in Pakistan and remained unproven in subcontinent. Rabada failed in India and Pakistan both. His average is also around 30 in New Zealand. Cummins has failed in Sri Lanka and unproven in India. He had a poor Ashes in 2023 tour to England where he averaged 37 with bowl.

So, I would reckon those top 8 stay as they are and behind them you have Bumrah, Cummins, Rabada, Lillee, Garner and Holding in same tier. That’s a top 9-15 level test bowlers. That would be my standing given they have multiple loopholes.

 

[kron]

Donald has one weakness - failed or rather didn’t performed really well vs Australia. He was phenomenal vs rest both home and away.

Bumrah has two weakness - failed vs New Zealand as well as injury concerns leading to workload management and lack of durability.

Ambrose has one - he didn’t toured India but that doesn’t guarantee that he would fail there. Even if he failed, his average would be 21.

Rules for no ball is same as earlier in Tests, not sure what’s the point. Conditions have been extremely bowling friendly in Bumrah and Rabada era too.

Bumrah averaged 31 in nz
That’s not even that bad.

 

[kron]

@Buffet @kron, When I think of top 10 test bowlers of all time( fast bowlers), one gaping hole is acceptable but not two.

Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, IK, Steyn, Wasim, Donald - 8 names that I don’t think have more than one hole ( mostly failure vs one opponent) in their careers.

Bumrah, Lillee and Rabada each have two. Lillee failed in Pakistan and remained unproven in subcontinent. Rabada failed in India and Pakistan both. His average is also around 30 in New Zealand. Cummins has failed in Sri Lanka and unproven in India. He had a poor Ashes in 2023 tour to England where he averaged 37 with bowl.

So, I would reckon those top 8 stay as they are and behind them you have Bumrah, Cummins, Rabada, Lillee, Garner and Holding in same tier. That’s a top 9-15 level test bowlers. That would be my standing given they have multiple loopholes.

How does bumrah have 2 weaknesses?

Steyn has 2 or 3

 

[Ab Fan]

Bumrah averaged 31 in nz
That’s not even that bad.

40+ Vs NZ. Compare it to 31 for Donald vs Aus. It is a number that is unlikely to come under 30 even if he has one good tour.

 

[Ab Fan]

How does bumrah have 2 weaknesses?

Steyn has 2 or 3

Already mentioned and it was your post only that I quoted. Donald Ambrose Steyn Wasim all had one gap. Bumrah has two and those are major holes.

Donald has one weakness - failed or rather didn’t performed really well vs Australia. He was phenomenal vs rest both home and away.

Bumrah has two weakness - failed vs New Zealand as well as injury concerns leading to workload management and lack of durability.

Ambrose has one - he didn’t toured India but that doesn’t guarantee that he would fail there. Even if he failed, his average would be 21.

Rules for no ball is same as earlier in Tests, not sure what’s the point. Conditions have been extremely bowling friendly in Bumrah and Rabada era too.

 

[kron]

40+ Vs NZ. Compare it to 31 for Donald vs Aus. It is a number that is unlikely to come under 30 even if he has one good tour.

On dead docile pitches yea in India where everyone bowled poorly.

Sure.

Donald has choked vs Aus a lot. Even at home he got hit a lot.

Anyway one weakness is normal

Steyn has had 2 weaknesses. Maybe even 3 as his Aus tours he dint average all that great