Is Richard Hadlee underrated?

[Ab Fan]

Just checked he has got 36 5-fers in 86 tests. No fast bowler in the world from his era or after that has even come up close to matching that. Let's have a look at numbers of 5-fers in no. of matches of some other legendary bowlers:-

Malcolm Marshall:- 22 out of 81 tests
Dale Steyn:- 26 out of 86 tests
Imran Khan:- 23 out of 88 tests
D Lillee:- 23 out of 70 tests
Glenn McGrath:- 29 out of 124 tests
Allan Donald:- 20 out of 70 tests
Curtly Ambrose:- 22 out of 98 tests
Wasim Akram:- 25 out of 104 tests
Waqar Younis:- 22 out of 87 tests

In comparison, Richard Hadlee has 36 5-fers in just 86 tests. These are GOAT numbers IMO and makes him the greatest fast bowler of all-time ahead of any West Indian, Australian, Pakistani or a South African.

Discuss!

 

[jani_nasir]

Just checked he has got 36 5-fers in 86 tests. No fast bowler in the world from his era or after that has even come up close to matching that. Let's have a look at numbers of 5-fers in no. of matches of some other legendary bowlers:-

Malcolm Marshall:- 22 out of 81 tests
Dale Steyn:- 26 out of 86 tests
Imran Khan:- 23 out of 88 tests
D Lillee:- 23 out of 70 tests
Glenn McGrath:- 29 out of 124 tests
Allan Donald:- 20 out of 70 tests
Curtly Ambrose:- 22 out of 98 tests
Wasim Akram:- 25 out of 104 tests
Waqar Younis:- 22 out of 87 tests

In comparison, Richard Hadlee has 36 5-fers in just 86 tests. These are GOAT numbers IMO and makes him the greatest fast bowler of all-time ahead of any West Indian, Australian, Pakistani or a South African.

Discuss!

Wish I had seen him, but that's the bygone era.

Hard to compare generation to generation because stats lose their meaning, but definitely one of the greats.

Also keeping In mind subcontinent bowlers were getting beastly records on dead pitches and swealtering heat.

 

[Ab Fan]

Wish I had seen him, but that's the bygone era.

Hard to compare generation to generation because stats lose their meaning, but definitely one of the greats.

Also keeping In mind subcontinent bowlers were getting beastly records on dead pitches and swealtering heat.

But if we have a look at 5-fers of his own contemporaries- Imran, Marshall, Lillee and rest, he is still miles ahead of them. Does he not get due because of being a kiwi?

 

[Justcrazy]

But if we have a look at 5-fers of his own contemporaries- Imran, Marshall, Lillee and rest, he is still miles ahead of them. Does he not get due because of being a kiwi?

5 fers are not criteria for judging a bowler.

 

[Ab Fan]

5 fers are not criteria for judging a bowler.

5-fers determine the ability of the bowler to run through the side. It is an important parameter. And Hadlee has a great bowling average too playing in a weak side. He fits in all criteria for a bowler(performance everywhere) and is well ahead of rest in 5-fers.

 

[Robert]

I saw a lot of Sir Richard.

He copied Lillee’s action and mental approach to taking wickets - seeing the batsman as an obstacle to be out-thought.

In the late seventies he was a tearaway quick. He never had big injury trouble like Lillee, Imran and Marshall but in 1982 he suffered a nervous breakdown, becoming obsessive-compulsive as a control strategy. He saw a sports psychologist and got his head right, cut his run-up and dropped his pace by half a yard, and turned into a wicket machine.

He was like a spinner in that he tried to set the batters up. He would bowl four leg-cutters per over, then a couple of other types for variation - inswinger, or faster ball, or slower ball.

His only weakness was mental in that if the batsman was really aggressive then his head could go down. This happened when he faced Botham a couple of times, and in WI. I rate Lillee and Marshall higher for that reason - they keep on attacking no matter what.

Imran said Hadlee was the best ever green wicket bowler and I believe him. He was helped by the lush wickets in NZ in those days, and never played a five-test series. That and the short run-up helped his longevity.

 

[hk031992]

I agree that some guys underrate him, in part because he is from New Zealand.

He is one of the top 3 quicks from the 80's, behind Marshall and on par with Imran.

One of the top 10 ATG IMO.

 

[Rahul1]

But if we have a look at 5-fers of his own contemporaries- Imran, Marshall, Lillee and rest, he is still miles ahead of them. Does he not get due because of being a kiwi?

He has that many 5fers because he was pretty much 'the' bowling attack of New Zealand so had majority of wickets to himself. Kind of like Murali.

Still wayyyy better than Lillee without a doubt.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

He is underrated but still not the best, Marshall will always remain the best of that era.
Hadlee was directly responsible for many great NZ victories.

 

[hk031992]

I saw a lot of Sir Richard.

He copied Lillee’s action and mental approach to taking wickets - seeing the batsman as an obstacle to be out-thought.

In the late seventies he was a tearaway quick. He never had big injury trouble like Lillee, Imran and Marshall but in 1982 he suffered a nervous breakdown, becoming obsessive-compulsive as a control strategy. He saw a sports psychologist and got his head right, cut his run-up and dropped his pace by half a yard, and turned into a wicket machine.

He was like a spinner in that he tried to set the batters up. He would bowl four leg-cutters per over, then a couple of other types for variation - inswinger, or faster ball, or slower ball.

His only weakness was mental in that if the batsman was really aggressive then his head could go down. This happened when he faced Botham a couple of times, and in WI. I rate Lillee and Marshall higher for that reason - they keep on attacking no matter what.

Imran said Hadlee was the best ever green wicket bowler and I believe him. He was helped by the lush wickets in NZ in those days, and never played a five-test series. That and the short run-up helped his longevity.

Interesting. I have never seen footage of him bowling very fast but i have heard other people say the same thing.

Do you think he could have achieved the same success had he continued to bowl fast and focused less on accuracy?

 

[Hasan123]

Yes he's underrated. An ATG.

 

[Tusker]

Interesting. I have never seen footage of him bowling very fast but i have heard other people say the same thing.

Do you think he could have achieved the same success had he continued to bowl fast and focused less on accuracy?

There isn't any footage because he never was fast. In the 1978/79 fast bowling competition his fastest delivery was 129kph. Don't trust everything that is said about these 70s and 80s cricketers. Especially coming from [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] and [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]. Not once have they been able to substantiate their words.

 

[Junaids]

He has that many 5fers because he was pretty much 'the' bowling attack of New Zealand so had majority of wickets to himself. Kind of like Murali.

Still wayyyy better than Lillee without a doubt.

No.
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] totally nailed it.

He was an ATG bowler, behind only Marshall and Lillee during his career.

Perhaps.....

1. Marshall
2. Trueman
3. Lillee
4. Steyn
5. Hadlee

 

[Junaids]

There isn't any footage because he never was fast. In the 1978/79 fast bowling competition his fastest delivery was 129kph. Don't trust everything that is said about these 70s and 80s cricketers. Especially coming from [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] and [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]. Not once have they been able to substantiate their words.

What about when I posted the thread displaying the high speed cameras when Thommo produced the fastest spell ever recorded at Perth in 75-76 (including the second fastest ball of all time on record)?

 

[Tusker]

What about when I posted the thread displaying the high speed cameras when Thommo produced the fastest spell ever recorded at Perth in 75-76 (including the second fastest ball of all time on record)?

You had claimed Thommo could easily bowl at 170ks

 

[Robert]

Interesting. I have never seen footage of him bowling very fast but i have heard other people say the same thing.

Do you think he could have achieved the same success had he continued to bowl fast and focused less on accuracy?

No, quite the reverse I think. He would have been more prone to injury, and would have had less control. But this faster delivery was really well disguised and took good batters by surprise.

He hated bowling at tailenders because they weren’t good enough to get a nick on him to slip!

 

[Robert]

His attempt on ‘the double’ of 100 wickets and 1000 runs for Notts in a season was meticulously planned. At Headingly and TB he reckoned on eight to ten wickets. At Somerset or the Oval would expect fewer wickets but more runs.

With o let a few matches to go he was on course for the wickets and a long way behind on the runs. Clive Rice said his only hope was to hit a 200.

So he did just that.

 

[Bilal7]

Not underrated by me. One of the top five pace bowlers of all-time.

5-fers determine the ability of the bowler to run through the side. It is an important parameter. And Hadlee has a great bowling average too playing in a weak side. He fits in all criteria for a bowler(performance everywhere) and is well ahead of rest in 5-fers.

He has a higher ratio of five-fors because he had no competition in his team. Imran had some fine bowlers playing with him; the likes of Wasim, McGrath and Marshall even more so.

 

[hk031992]

There isn't any footage because he never was fast. In the 1978/79 fast bowling competition his fastest delivery was 129kph. Don't trust everything that is said about these 70s and 80s cricketers. Especially coming from [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] and [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]. Not once have they been able to substantiate their words.

i dont trust everything written about anyone.

 

[barah_admi]

Just checked he has got 36 5-fers in 86 tests. No fast bowler in the world from his era or after that has even come up close to matching that. Let's have a look at numbers of 5-fers in no. of matches of some other legendary bowlers:-

Malcolm Marshall:- 22 out of 81 tests
Dale Steyn:- 26 out of 86 tests
Imran Khan:- 23 out of 88 tests
D Lillee:- 23 out of 70 tests
Glenn McGrath:- 29 out of 124 tests
Allan Donald:- 20 out of 70 tests
Curtly Ambrose:- 22 out of 98 tests
Wasim Akram:- 25 out of 104 tests
Waqar Younis:- 22 out of 87 tests

In comparison, Richard Hadlee has 36 5-fers in just 86 tests. These are GOAT numbers IMO and makes him the greatest fast bowler of all-time ahead of any West Indian, Australian, Pakistani or a South African.

Discuss!

It is not enough to just look stats up on cricinfo, it is important to actually watch the cricketer. As great as Hadlee was, those who saw Khan, Lillee and Akram would rate them higher in most cases. Why? Because I assume they saw more skill, more resilience, more everything that makes someone great.

Hadlee however is still an ATG, one of the best ever in fact, just not better than those named. That does not impact upon his achievements in anyway.

 

[squarecut]

Who has underrated Richard Hadlee ? Young fans who were not born when he was around ? Then their rating does not matter.

Richard Hadlee was considered an alltime great when he retired, with the then world record tally of test wickets (431). Taking more test wickets than anyone else before him in itself is a testimony to the fact that he was an alltime great bowler.

He was a fast medium bowler and he had the advantage of bowling in New Zealand where he was often unplayable under favourable bowling conditions. Among the four great allrounders of the era (Imran Khan, Botham and Kapildev being the others), he claimed the most wickets while scored the least runs. He was arguably the biggest and greatest cricketer from Zealand till that time.

People who have lived through his era do not underrate him. And it is their opinion that matters.

 

[Buffet]

Top 5-6 bowlers in history is not a definition of being underrated.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Biggest match winner in test history.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

It is not enough to just look stats up on cricinfo, it is important to actually watch the cricketer. As great as Hadlee was, those who saw Khan, Lillee and Akram would rate them higher in most cases. Why? Because I assume they saw more skill, more resilience, more everything that makes someone great.

Hadlee however is still an ATG, one of the best ever in fact, just not better than those named. That does not impact upon his achievements in anyway.

Hadlee is >>>>>>>>>> Akram in tests. It's not even a comparisn.

 

[bujhee kom]

Paddles was top draw. He had no support though which helped him grab a mountain of wickets. He was quick. Not as mentally tough or aggressive as other top draw quicks. ATG who makes a top 5-7 quicks list.

 

[Robert]

Hadlee is >>>>>>>>>> Akram in tests. It's not even a comparisn.

I would not say so. I would put them roughly as equals - Hadlee better with the bat, mind.

 

[MMHS]

Probably the most under rated cricketer in PP - I actually asked this question (most under rated cricketer), and still none mentioned RJH. The ultimate one man army, along with Murali.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I would not say so. I would put them roughly as equals - Hadlee better with the bat, mind.

Look at Hadlee's average with the ball when NZ won. He has single handedly destroyed opposition numerous times. Akram was never that deadly or effective. The no. of 5wkts shows Hadlee's impact. He was one man army. Akram is a great ODI bowler but there are a dozen pacers ho are better than him in tests.

 

[HuzaifaE]

He averaged sub 20 for his international test career beyond the age of 30. That is remarkable.

 

[Ab Fan]

I would not say so. I would put them roughly as equals - Hadlee better with the bat, mind.

Wasn't Wasim poor record against England the reason you didnt rated him as much?

 

[PakLFC]

Very much so. Richard played for an unfashionable side. Would have been appreciated much more had he played for a bigger country.

 

[Robert]

Wasn't Wasim poor record against England the reason you didnt rated him as much?

Yeah... he was overshadowed by Imran and later Waqar, England seemed to have worked him out more than the other nations, perhaps because they saw so much of him at Lancs. But then I looked as his figures in WI and Australia.

 

[Ab Fan]

Yeah... he was overshadowed by Imran and later Waqar, England seemed to have worked him out more than the other nations, perhaps because they saw so much of him at Lancs. But then I looked as his figures in WI and Australia.

Yes, but he was also the man of the match in 1992 WC final vs England that should count for big time too.

 

[Robert]

Look at Hadlee's average with the ball when NZ won. He has single handedly destroyed opposition numerous times. Akram was never that deadly or effective. The no. of 5wkts shows Hadlee's impact. He was one man army. Akram is a great ODI bowler but there are a dozen pacers ho are better than him in tests.

I would say that was because he was the only significant bowler. As Graham Gooch put it: “World class one end, Epping Seconds the other.” The only way for NZ to win a test was for Hadlee to take five wickets. Nobody else was likely to.

Whereas Wasim always had an excellent fast bowler at the other end to pinch his wickets.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I would say that was because he was the only significant bowler. As Graham Gooch put it: “World class one end, Epping Seconds the other.” The only way for NZ to win a test was for Hadlee to take five wickets. Nobody else was likely to.

Whereas Wasim always had an excellent fast bowler at the other end to pinch his wickets.

As I sad above, Akram never dominated in test cricket like Hadlee. Hadlee didn't need the likes of Imran and Waqar to build pressure on opponent. Talimg 5-fors alone isn't enough to win mtch, Hadlee took thse wicets for cheap runs and bundled the opposition numerous times, all by himself without any help. How many pacers in history have won matches single handedly for a weak team?

Hadlee is a competition to the likes of Ambrose in test, Akram is solidly a level below them. Akram isn't even as good as Imran in tests. People overrate him to unbelievable level calling him GoAT bowler. Akram wasn't even the best pacer in his era, and for a decent period not even the best in his own team.

 

[Perth93]

I saw Hadlee live at Brabourne stadium in 1988, on a brown wicket. He was 36 years old. Took 6 for 40odd and blew away an Indian lineup comprising Azhar, Vengsarkar, Srikant, Shastri, Siddhu and Kapil.

My 2nd pick in an all-time team after Marshall.

He and Macko were the greatest.

 

[Princejain191]

Just checked he has got 36 5-fers in 86 tests. No fast bowler in the world from his era or after that has even come up close to matching that. Let's have a look at numbers of 5-fers in no. of matches of some other legendary bowlers:-

Malcolm Marshall:- 22 out of 81 tests
Dale Steyn:- 26 out of 86 tests
Imran Khan:- 23 out of 88 tests
D Lillee:- 23 out of 70 tests
Glenn McGrath:- 29 out of 124 tests
Allan Donald:- 20 out of 70 tests
Curtly Ambrose:- 22 out of 98 tests
Wasim Akram:- 25 out of 104 tests
Waqar Younis:- 22 out of 87 tests

In comparison, Richard Hadlee has 36 5-fers in just 86 tests. These are GOAT numbers IMO and makes him the greatest fast bowler of all-time ahead of any West Indian, Australian, Pakistani or a South African.

Discuss!

The reason for so many 5-fers for Richard Hadlee is same as the one you'd give for 67 of Murali's.

This is how Graham Gooch described the NZ-attack in 1986 - "like the World XI at one end, and Ilford Second XI at the other".

Hadlee was surrounded by mediocrity. The other bowlers that you have mentioned were not and that is why they have a lot lower 5-fers. But impressive how Hadlee carried the attack by himself.

 

[Ab Fan]

[MENTION=146727]Rahul1[/MENTION] , [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION], [MENTION=141397]Princejain191[/MENTION]

Murali would have been a GOAT(actually he is) but Murali isnt rated as higher as Warne if not for that 15° bias.

There is no such reason why Hadlee shouldn't be rated as among the top 3 greatest fast bowlers of all-time.

 

[Princejain191]

[MENTION=146727]Rahul1[/MENTION] , [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION], [MENTION=141397]Princejain191[/MENTION]

Murali would have been a GOAT(actually he is) but Murali isnt rated as higher as Warne if not for that 15° bias.

There is no such reason why Hadlee shouldn't be rated as among the top 3 greatest fast bowlers of all-time.

He is definitely a contender for the top, just like Murali. But maybe his pace, or the lack of it, counts against him when you are comparing him to the likes of Wasim, Imran, Steyn, Allan, etc.

And the list is always subjective, you might have a different perception of what these top 3 bowlers must have, for many express pace might be paramount, for some - accuracy. And his nationality also means that he won't be hyped to the extent that others were. No doubting his numbers and stature though.

 

[Perth93]

Yes speedguns are not a yardstick as long as you have the wrist action (Steyn, Ambrose) which makes balls leap off good length. Also Hadlee had a mean bouncer, just like Shaun Pollock.

 

[Robert]

That excellent action meant he got a lot of lift off a good length.

 

[Robert]

One more comment...

In the MCC vs RoW Bicentennery Match at Lords in 1987, Hadlee took the new ball for MCC with Marshall.

Maco made Hadlee look second rate that day, in terms of speed and movement off an uber-flattie.

 

[Perth93]

I remember that game. L

 

[Bilal7]

[MENTION=146727]Rahul1[/MENTION] , [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION], [MENTION=141397]Princejain191[/MENTION]

Murali would have been a GOAT(actually he is) but Murali isnt rated as higher as Warne if not for that 15° bias.

There is no such reason why Hadlee shouldn't be rated as among the top 3 greatest fast bowlers of all-time.

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

 

[Perth93]

That's an ace list, Bilal.
And makes me feel damn lucky for having lived through the late 80s and 90s. Saw everyone on this list bowl live in a stadium, barring Holding.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

I'd probably have lillee in ahead of Holding but yeah that's pretty much the list of ATG Pacers.

 

[Robert]

I'd probably have lillee in ahead of Holding but yeah that's pretty much the list of ATG Pacers.

Yeah. Lillee in for Holding. Marshall was #1 but I am not sure how to separate the rest. But I would not have Hadlee near the top due to his head occasionally dropping under fire.

Going back to the fifties I’d put Lindwall and Trueman in the top ten though I am not sure who they would displace.

 

[Bilal7]

That's an ace list, Bilal.
And makes me feel damn lucky for having lived through the late 80s and 90s. Saw everyone on this list bowl live in a stadium, barring Holding.

That must be pretty awesome. Who was your favorite?

I'd probably have lillee in ahead of Holding but yeah that's pretty much the list of ATG Pacers.

Lillee misses out because he did nothing in the subcontinent and dodged tours of Asia (at least allegedly). This would be akin to an Asian pacer almost never touring Australia, England or South Africa and failing whenever he did.

 

[Robert]

Lillee misses out because he did nothing in the subcontinent and dodged tours of Asia (at least allegedly). This would be akin to an Asian pacer almost never touring Australia, England or South Africa and failing whenever he did.

If this hypothetical Asian pacer was an utter terror in the Subcontinent though his nation never toured England, and the one time he went to Australia was carrying an injury and still bowled very long spells of medium pace on wickets prepared specifically to nullify him, I would still respect him.

 

[Bilal7]

If this hypothetical Asian pacer was an utter terror in the Subcontinent though his nation never toured England, and the one time he went to Australia was carrying an injury and still bowled very long spells of medium pace on wickets prepared specifically to nullify him, I would still respect him.

I have a lot of respect for Lillee for the sole fact that he was the catalyst to turn a Pakistani medium pacer into Imran Khan. However, I have a hard time rating him above those other guys.

 

[Ab Fan]

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

Not Warne fans but the cricketing world rates Warne higher. If you look at most of the great lists of ex-pundits, they have Warne in the most influential and greatest cricketer of all-time. Murali is rated quite a bit lower to him.

If the list you put up is an all-time test ranking list,then how is Wasim ahead of McGrath, Steyn, Donald and Ambrose?Wasim was behind all these four in tests only ranking, although he is a GOAT in odis and overall I will put him alongside McGrath.

 

[jnaveen1980]

No. Sultan of Swing always has a special place. In swinging conditions nobody can match him.

 

[giri26]

Yes he is especially in this forum. His name almost never comes up when great bowlers are discussed in this forum.

 

[Robert]

I have a lot of respect for Lillee for the sole fact that he was the catalyst to turn a Pakistani medium pacer into Imran Khan. However, I have a hard time rating him above those other guys.

Boycott took the credit for that! Around 1974 he said he asked Imran why he was bowling medium pace when he could go yards quicker.

Imran said he learned the leg-cutter from Lillee after watching the great Aussie rolling his wrists like a spinner, and asked him what he was doing. Lillee in turn had learned it from Jon Snow, who clearly knew something....

 

[Perth93]

That must be pretty awesome. Who was your favorite?

Yep Bilal, me and 5 of my old school friends are all test fanatics and we go around watching any test we can in India and sometimes overseas. None of us even watch a ball of IPL. Our favourites are Marshall, then Ambrose (because no one gave us more shocking comeback spells in the newspaper, there was no internet back then, we'd just keep waiting for the newspaper to get scores) and finally Steyn because he's Donald plus.
I personally loved Waqar because I grew up on the Sharjah circuit.



Lillee misses out because he did nothing in the subcontinent and dodged tours of Asia (at least allegedly). This would be akin to an Asian pacer almost never touring Australia, England or South Africa and failing whenever he did.

I think you're being a bit harsh here. Downgrading Lillee for not performing in Pak is the same logic by which you should downgrade Waqar for never performing in Australia. And even though I love Waqar, I think Lillee should be in that list ahead of Waqar.

I'd actually drop both from the Top10 list and pick Andy Roberts instead as pure menacing pleasure.

 

[MMHS]

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

Great list, but somewhere DK Lillee has to be in top 5. Probably dropping Mac one slot down and one of Mike/Ambi out. And, Imran shouldn't be above Wasim.

 

[Robert]

I think you're being a bit harsh here. Downgrading Lillee for not performing in Pak is the same logic by which you should downgrade Waqar for never performing in Australia. And even though I love Waqar, I think Lillee should be in that list ahead of Waqar.

I'd actually drop both from the Top10 list and pick Andy Roberts instead as pure menacing pleasure.

And Waqar was at full speed in Australia.

 

[ManFan]

And Waqar was at full speed in Australia.

Waqar had come back from two-back injuries by the time he made his first tour of AUS in 96'.

If a prime Waqar could wreck havoc on the dead tracks of Asia in his early "prime" (where he outperformed Wasim), what would he have done on the bouncy tracks of Down Under?

 

[Robert]

Waqar had come back from two-back injuries by the time he made his first tour of AUS in 96'.

If a prime Waqar could wreck havoc on the dead tracks of Asia in his early "prime" (where he outperformed Wasim), what would he have done on the bouncy tracks of Down Under?

He was there in 1990.

I seem to remember him bowling pretty quick in the England series in 1997, though not as scary as in 1992.

 

[Robert]

1996, rather. The Ashes was 1997.

 

[ManFan]

He was there in 1990.

I seem to remember him bowling pretty quick in the England series in 1997, though not as scary as in 1992.

You’re correct. He did play in 90’ and he did well without being exceptional. Was economical but did not take as many wickets as Wasim.

However, in between the six year gap for the next tour, he underwent two back injuries which slowed his speed down tremedously.

In 95-96’, he took 8 wickets @ ~33 runs per wicket.

In 99’, he only played 1 match and took 2 wickets @ 40 runs per wicket. But that’s a little harsh.

So in reality, to say he failed in AUS is an overstatement when compared to someone like DK who in 3 tests against Pakistan in 80’, took only 3 wickets @ over a 100 runs per wicket. That was the ONLY test series he played in PAK.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

Great ranking apart from leaving out Dennis Lillee who must make the top 5.Bilal,praise your list but still ask why Holding above Ambrose?Imran ahead of Hadlee?Wasim ahead of Mcgrath.Appreciate answer.For sheer performance could well be the other way around.Hadlee had more consistency and control than Imran,Ambrose was more accurate and penetrative than Holding and Mcgrath had a better record than Wasim.Imran more agressive than Richard buit not as penetrative while Ambrose turned more games than Holding.Wasim more talented but Mcgrath was the more intelligent and consistent.anyway matter of opinion.Lilee ,still the most complete of paceman amongst right arm fast bowlers.For sheer skill Wasim is on top.

 

[Robert]

I’d take Imran over Hadlee even discounting their batting. He was more aggressive, nastier to face and never took a backward step.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Richard Hadlee was like a Glen Mcgrath of his era.Statistically arguably the best of all fast bowlers.Posessed more control than any pacemen ever with Mcgrath.Still he lacked the agression and versatility of a Lillee,Wasim,Marshall or Andy Roberts.In some ways it was to Hadlee's advantage statistically that he bowled for a weaker side that enabled him to capture more 5 wicket and 10 wicket hauls.Hard for Marshal who had to bowl along 2-3 other great paceman throughout.I rate Hadlee marginally ahead of Imran as he bore the brunt of a weaker attack and was a more consistent performer.Hadlee was a very intelligent bolwer and could analyze opponent's weaknesses like a computer.Still for pure bowling intelligence Glen Mcgrath had no equal.Mcgrah alos bolwed in an era where thee was considerably more protective headgear for batsmen,restriction on bouncers and flatter wickets.For pure overall skil Mcgrath may edge Hadlee and Wasim would overshadow Imran.

Overall I fell arguably Marshall,Wasim Lillee and Mcgrath may just edge Hadlee but all this is personal opinion.Hadlee would by a whisker rank ahead of Imran and Ambrose.Both were more explosive than Richard but not as crafty .Infact on pure craft Lindwall and Andy Roberts may rate ahead of even Hadlee or Mcgrath.

In an all-time xi Hadlee may make it as he had considerable batting skill and may have been a better accomplice to the skill of Wasim and Marshall,than Imran,Ambrose or Mcgrath.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

No.

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] totally nailed it.

He was an ATG bowler, behind only Marshall and Lillee during his career.

Perhaps.....

1. Marshall
2. Trueman
3. Lillee
4. Steyn
5. Hadlee

Richard Hadlee was like a Glen Mcgrath of his era.Statistically arguably the best of all fast bowlers.Posessed more control than any pacemen ever with Mcgrath.Still he lacked the agression and versatility of a Lillee,Wasim,Marshall or Andy Roberts.In some ways it was to Hadlee's advantage statistically that he bowled for a weaker side that enabled him to capture more 5 wicket and 10 wicket hauls.Hard for Marshal who had to bowl along 2-3 other great paceman throughout.I rate Hadlee marginally ahead of Imran as he bore the brunt of a weaker attack and was a more consistent performer.Hadlee was a very intelligent bolwer and could analyze opponent's weaknesses like a computer.Still for pure bowling intelligence Glen Mcgrath had no equal.Mcgrah alos bolwed in an era where thee was considerably more protective headgear for batsmen,restriction on bouncers and flatter wickets.For pure overall skil Mcgrath may edge Hadlee and Wasim would overshadow Imran.

Overall I fell arguably Marshall,Wasim Lillee and Mcgrath may just edge Hadlee but all this is personal opinion.Hadlee would by a whisker rank ahead of Imran and Ambrose.Both were more explosive than Richard but not as crafty .Infact on pure craft Lindwall and Andy Roberts may rate ahead of even Hadlee or Mcgrath.

In an all-time xi Hadlee may make it as he had considerable batting skill and may have been a better accomplice to the skill of Wasim and Marshall,than Imran,Ambrose or Mcgrath.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Murali is the best spinner of all time, across formats. I don't care what Warne or his fans say.

Hadlee is top three for me. My all-time, test-only ranking looks like this:

1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath
6) Dale Steyn
7) Allan Donald
8) Waqar Younis
9) Michael Holding
10) Curtly Ambrose

Keep in mind that there is a minute difference in skill between these guys and a team would not be substantially worse off with Ambrose in their team instead of Hadlee, for example. All ATG bowlers are on the same level just like all ATG batsmen are on the same level.

Curtly below waqar in test matches?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

No.

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] totally nailed it.

He was an ATG bowler, behind only Marshall and Lillee during his career.

Perhaps.....

1. Marshall
2. Trueman
3. Lillee
4. Steyn
5. Hadlee

No Glen Mcgrath or Wasim Akram.?Any reason.I feel both were right up there with Lillee and Marshall.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

I’d take Imran over Hadlee even discounting their batting. He was more aggressive, nastier to face and never took a backward step.

do read and reply to my latest post

 

[The_Odd_One]

1. Marshall
2. McGrath
3. Steyn
4. Imran
5. Akram
6. Ambrose
7. Hadlee
8. Lillee
9. Donald
10. Holding

Both Steyn and McGrath are massively underrated. McGrath bowled to plenty of ATG batsmen and in all conditions and none could dominate him. Steyn is so far ahead of others with his wicket taking ability that the second best bowler of his time is not even half as good as him.

 

[MenInG]

Sir Richard Hadlee is not just a name in New Zealand Cricket history, he signifies an era of greatness. Regarded as one of the greatest players to have played the game of cricket, Hadlee bid adieu to Test cricket on July 10, 1990. In his career spanning nearly 2 decades, Hadlee carried the New Zealand’s bowling on his shoulder and gave many match-winning performances for the Black Caps.

Even in the last match of his international cricket at the age of 39, there was not any trace of rust in his bowling. Hadlee was still effective, and he managed to pick up 8 wickets in his last match showing what champion players are made of.

Born to former New Zealand cricketer Walter Hadlee, he grew up around the game and it was almost inevitable that he would choose Cricket as his career. He made his debut against Pakistan in 1973 but his first moment of glory came against Indian in 1976 when he delivered a spell of 7/23.

Hadlee never looked back since then. In his illustrious career, the New Zealander troubled every team but neighbours Australia were his favourite target. He picked 130 wickets in 23 matches that he played against the Aussie

The original Sultan of Swing- Hadlee became the first bowler to cross over the mark of 400 wickets in Test cricket. He finished off his 86 match Test career as the all-time leading wicket-taker with 431 wickets. A record which was later broken by India’s Kapil Dev. Hadlee picked 36 fifers and 10 ten-wicket hauls in his career.

And not just bowling, Hadlee was also effective with the bat and was considered as one of the best all-rounders of the era. He scored 3,124 runs along with 2 centuries and 15 half-centuries.

Hadlee was honoured with knighthood shortly after his retirement from the game and he was formally inducted into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame in the year 2009.

https://www.news18.com/cricketnext/...hadlee-bid-adieu-to-test-cricket-3946442.html

 

[Snatch]

[MENTION=146727]Rahul1[/MENTION] , [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION], [MENTION=141397]Princejain191[/MENTION]

Murali would have been a GOAT(actually he is) but Murali isnt rated as higher as Warne if not for that 15° bias.

There is no such reason why Hadlee shouldn't be rated as among the top 3 greatest fast bowlers of all-time.

Yes good case for him at 2 behind Marshall