Pat Cummins/Josh Hazlewood/Mitchell Starc vs Jasprit Bumrah/Mohammad Shami/Mohammad Siraj, which is the better attack?

[street cricketer]

These two attacks are the premier attacks in Test cricket right now. If there's a crown for the best fast bowling attack in the world, it's between Australia and India.

Which team do you think has a better attack in Test cricket?

 

[Buffet]

These two attacks are the premier attacks in Test cricket right now. If there's a crown for the best fast bowling attack in the world, it's between Australia and India.

Which team do you think has a better attack in Test cricket?

You can debate here, but if you are talking about attack then you do need to add Lyon and Ashwin/Jadeja. After doing that there is no debate. Rarely do you see two world-class spinners in one team and in Asia, it makes a whole lot of difference.

 

[Manunited18]

I'd say India, Ashwain gives them the edge, but if Green developes well then Australian attack could be formidable.

 

[Unbiased-Fan]

Individually Australia has better pacers but as a unit they are on par with India.
Shami is more reliable pacer than Starc, Cummins is slightly better than Bumrah, Hazlewood is clearly superior to Siraj, Ashwin is better than Lyon and Jadeja is better than Green.
In tests, bowling strength of India and Australia is almost equal but in ODIs Australia is slightly better.

 

[James]

Maybe (by a whisker) India because they are doing the business in all conditions at the moment?

 

[Ab Fan]

India.

Indian attack is more proven away. Aussies attack are unproven in subcontinent so conclusion based on pure stats is wrong here.

 

[PakPremi]

India
Varied and performing well overseas.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Umesh and Shami are outstanding bowlers in Indian conditions. Even Ishant has improved his stat in the last few years.

 

[praveen]

You can debate here, but if you are talking about attack then you do need to add Lyon and Ashwin/Jadeja. After doing that there is no debate. Rarely do you see two world-class spinners in one team and in Asia, it makes a whole lot of difference.

Agree, there’s no comparison once we bring in the spinners. I’d also add Ishant and Umesh being India’s back-ups significantly boost the overall attack compared to Jhye/Neser/Boland. Green has the potential to overtake Shardul but still has quite a way to go as the latter has multiple important match winning contributions. If we stick to just the three bowlers mentioned in OP , I’d say Australia because Siraj is relatively new. Also , Cummins.

 

[Civil]

Ill go with bumrah shami siraj

Great sustained bowling effort against south africa.. was pleasure to watch as a neutral.

 

[Major]

One pace attack got one team all out for 36 and another for 68, you seriously comparing indian bowlers with them?

A good percentage of wixkets came from ashwin.

 

[dildilpak]

One pace attack got one team all out for 36 and another for 68, you seriously comparing indian bowlers with them?

A good percentage of wixkets came from ashwin.

And that same set of bowlers couldnt get one batsman out the whole series (Pujara -2018) & also were outbowled at home by a D team opposition bowlers no less. That turns the tide.

 

[Forward Defensive Push]

Australian trio is more brutal and consistent. Bumrah is the only guy who can replace Starc in their line up.

 

[street cricketer]

One pace attack got one team all out for 36 and another for 68, you seriously comparing indian bowlers with them?

A good percentage of wixkets came from ashwin.

Basing your argument on two innings is a flawed argument. Comparison of their numbers over a specific time period like 2 years or 3 years would be a better comparison.

 

[dildilpak]

I think we should reserve judgement till the Australian trio actually performs in Pakistan & India. If India is to be judged in SENA, then Australia has to be judged in the subcontinent.

 

[Unbiased-Fan]

One pace attack got one team all out for 36 and another for 68, you seriously comparing indian bowlers with them?

A good percentage of wixkets came from ashwin.

Same attack was bashed by our C team on so called fortress.

 

[Major]

Same attack was bashed by our C team on so called fortress.

Has the india attacked bowled teams out for 36 and 60ish this year?

 

[Major]

Basing your argument on two innings is a flawed argument. Comparison of their numbers over a specific time period like 2 years or 3 years would be a better comparison.

No its not flawed. Getting a team bowled out for 36 in test crixket is one of the best bowling achievements ever. They than did the same with england, thus bowling out a team for less than hundred twice in the space of 13 months

 

[Unbiased-Fan]

Has the india attacked bowled teams out for 36 and 60ish this year?

So you are judging an attack based on only one innings, right ??
Pakistan has conceded second most runs in an ODI innings (444 vs England), so do you think Pakistan is the 2nd worst bowling unit in ODIs?

 

[Marathonrunner]

Would give the advantage to India as there pace attack has worked in Aus, Eng and SA. In India it’s all the way Ash and Boomrah

 

[BreadPakoda]

Has the india attacked bowled teams out for 36 and 60ish this year?

Unlike others, I feel this is somewhat a valid point. However, Australia has achieved this at home and not away. India does not have the pace friendly conditions to do this at home, and its extremely difficult to bundle out teams for such low totals in their dens. India did dismiss WI for 100 and 117 last time around with Bumrah taking 5/7 and 6/27.

 

[Major]

So you are judging an attack based on only one innings, right ??
Pakistan has conceded second most runs in an ODI innings (444 vs England), so do you think Pakistan is the 2nd worst bowling unit in ODIs?

this thread is not about Pakistan. Plus, the attack back than of Pak and now has evolved and changed aswell.

Reread my post, its not based on 1 innings but 2 innings. 36 all out and 60ish all out is a big bowling achievement.

When India does that even once than maybe try to compare it with Australia and when you do it more than Australia, only than would you have an argument or the respect to compare the likes bumrah,shami and siraj to the All Mighty Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins...

 

[Savak]

Starc has always been neutralized by India. India's bowling attack is more proven in all conditions

 

[Major]

Unlike others, I feel this is somewhat a valid point. However, Australia has achieved this at home and not away. India does not have the pace friendly conditions to do this at home, and its extremely difficult to bundle out teams for such low totals in their dens. India did dismiss WI for 100 and 117 last time around with Bumrah taking 5/7 and 6/27.

Well Indians do harp about what they did in the MCG, and now that they are comparing bowlers, on bowling condition wickets the performances of both team is there for everyone to see.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Has the india attacked bowled teams out for 36 and 60ish this year?

Yes.
We bowled Nz out for 62!

 

[Major]

Yes.
We bowled Nz out for 62!

Read the thread title, than read the score card of the 62 all out.

 

[JaDed]

No its not flawed. Getting a team bowled out for 36 in test crixket is one of the best bowling achievements ever. They than did the same with england, thus bowling out a team for less than hundred twice in the space of 13 months

They lost the 36 ao series though.. where the decider was in their “fortress” clearly not good enough then?

 

[street cricketer]

No its not flawed. Getting a team bowled out for 36 in test crixket is one of the best bowling achievements ever. They than did the same with england, thus bowling out a team for less than hundred twice in the space of 13 months

Er no...When doing a statistical analysis, you don't compare the peaks of two players/teams. It's why the "average" is the most important statistic while comparing batsmen or bowlers and not the highest score or the best figures. Sehwag scored a triple century, Tendulkar never did and his highest score was 241 I think. But nobody would rate Sehwag as a better Test batsman just because he has a higher test score than Tendulkar.

 

[Devadwal]

One pace attack got one team all out for 36 and another for 68, you seriously comparing indian bowlers with them?

A good percentage of wixkets came from ashwin.

One pace attacks can't even take more than three wickets at own home on 5th day pitch ( Sydney) and same attack can't even win at so called fortress

 

[sweep_shot]

Both attacks are good.

Bumrah, Shami, and Siraj are better perhaps.

 

[moghul]

Australian trio is way ahead. They are taller, faster and very skillful. Indians are equally skillful but not tall at all and not pacy .

 

[Nikhil_cric]

It's an interesting comparison. On thing is clear. 2015 onwards, the quality of bowling attacks have home up in terms of the deliveries actually bowled.

Now this may be also because of a trend towards bowler friendly, results-oriented wickets compared to the previous decade but it's no doubt been hard for batting in general.

Of the top 10 bowling performances by a bowling attack in a 3+match test series, 3 have been India, 3 by Australia, 3 by South Africa and 1 by England.

Even in that, the current Ashes is considered by Cricviz to be the greatest bowling performance of the last 15 years.

Even taking conditions into account, that's one helluva performance. People can criticise England's batting all they want and they may be right.

But the facts are these - England had to bat against the toughest bowling seen in the last 15 years and that's not easy to do.

 

[cricketerB94]

In tests, this Indian pace bowling attack is probably better, but in LOIs, this Australian pace attack is better.

 

[dildilpak]

Australian trio is way ahead. They are taller, faster and very skillful. Indians are equally skillful but not tall at all and not pacy .

How does being tall or not matter? To prove you are better, you just need better bowling figures on all types of wickets. Yes, the Australian trio are pretty formidable at home - but they drew the Ashes the last time they played in England & lost home series in Australia twice against India, which the Indians have never done. So how does the Australian trio become better?

 

[Devadwal]

Australian trio is way ahead. They are taller, faster and very skillful. Indians are equally skillful but not tall at all and not pacy .

Sucess is not judge based on how bowlers are taller,faster or experienced rather than performance

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

I think Australian trio is better if Starc is firing

 

[happydavy]

I think India bowlers are more evergreen kind of bowlers, they are able to perform everywhere whereas Australian bowlers somehow struggle in England and India. Shami gives indian bowling lineup a huge edge as he's the only one who india plays in all conditions, India doesn't play bhumra in India or Asia.

 

[U$ofA]

I will wait till we see how they Aus bowlers do in Pak and Ind. Only then will it be a fair comparison.

 

[kumjsr]

Australian pace attack has failed to defend 300+ score twice - Headingley and Gabba. Pakistan managed to score 450 while chasing 490. Right now it's difficult to imagine a bowling attack of Shami, Bumrah and Siraj conceding 300+ on day 5.

Australian pace attack failed to dismiss two injured batsmen for over 40 overs at Sydney. They picked up 2 wickets in 90+ overs and India ended up with score of 334/5.

Aussies have higher peaks like dismissing Indian team for 36 and deeper lows as mentioned above.

 

[Giannis]

The first trio evokes a fear that the latter does not.

 

[U$ofA]

The first trio evokes a fear that the latter does not.

Does it result in more wickets though? If both set of bowlers take 20 wickets then it does not matter. And that should be the focus, 20 wickets.

 

[street cricketer]

Australian trio is way ahead. They are taller, faster and very skillful. Indians are equally skillful but not tall at all and not pacy .

 

[Joseph Gomes]

India and it's not even debatable. They have destroyed all opponent's away from home. Let Australia beat England and India in an away series first.

At the end of the day, only results matter. Indian bowlers are far better at taking 20 wickets away from home to win matches.

 

[wrongun]

India.

Indian attack is more proven away. Aussies attack are unproven in subcontinent so conclusion based on pure stats is wrong here.

If spinners are included, India has the better attack.

Pacers is close but I agree India's have been tested & produced the goods more often than not, in a wider range of conditions. I quite enjoy watching them actually.

Australia has some very, very good pacers and a good spinner (Ashwin is better than just good). Oz are scheduled to play a lot of cricket in Asian in the next year so our pace attack will be required to adapt their lengths (fuller), line (straighter) & skill set (more reverse, more cutters) and we'll see how good they are. I'm really excited to see Cummins make the transition.

 

[wrongun]

India and it's not even debatable. They have destroyed all opponent's away from home. Let Australia beat England and India in an away series first.

At the end of the day, only results matter. Indian bowlers are far better at taking 20 wickets away from home to win matches.

You need batsmen to win matches away too though... Our relatively weak batting is why Oz isn't a top 2 Test team right now.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

You need batsmen to win matches away too though... Our relatively weak batting is why Oz isn't a top 2 Test team right now.

Agree with you, I think only conparing pacers not spinners then Australia has better attack with Richardson, Bolland as reserve.
If Starc was consistent then this was not up to even debate

 

[Major]

and lost a series to SA.

While Australia winning it in Ashes

 

[Nikhil_cric]

and lost a series to SA.

While Australia winning it in Ashes

Yes, because our attack does not win us series at home.

 

[Smudger]

and lost a series to SA.

While Australia winning it in Ashes

Aus failed to win against india

 

[Hyder]

They should ve done better than taking 3 wickets on this wicket. If kohli bowled homself whole day even he ll get 1 or 2 wkts. I knew sa ll chase both totals but with so much ease was never in my mind.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Starc to Ishan Kishan 0(1)

Hazlewood two wickets in his very first over, handed over Golden Ducks to

Rohit Sharma 0(6)
Shreyas Iyer 0(3)

 

[jnaveen1980]

To be fair India gifted two wickets. Almsot gifted third one. It is a slow pitch. You are going to be early into your shot most of the time. You have to toss away few instinctive shots here and play with utmost disicpline.

 

[captain.hansolo]

Starc to Ishan Kishan 0(1)

Hazlewood two wickets in his very first over, handed over Golden Ducks to

Rohit Sharma 0(6)
Shreyas Iyer 0(3)

and almost immediately thereafter this attack was handled well.

there is hardly anyone who will doubt that ishan kishan was out to a rank long hop. wide, little swing and not rushed for pace, he just was not warmed up enough to go for that shot. rohit's decision could have easily gone the other way, but noentheless, i feel hazlewood had his number today.

and finally, iyer was out to a playing shot, he was in control, he just placed it poorly. if anything, iyer and kishan are guilty of too much enthusiasm too quickly.

that is not to say that hazelwood cummins and starc did not square up the batsmen thereafter, but they were not any more potent that bumrah and siraj. pandya was listless today.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

What is interesting about both these attacks is that they are multi-format attacks which have had success in both ODI's and Tests. Other attacks are either format exclusive with bowlers getting injured after just bowling 10 overs or whatever or clearly mediocre in one or the other format.

 

[BouncerGuy]

What is interesting about both these attacks is that they are multi-format attacks which have had success in both ODI's and Tests. Other attacks are either format exclusive with bowlers getting injured after just bowling 10 overs or whatever or clearly mediocre in one or the other format.

I agree. Both if these attacks are suited for any format. They don't mind bowling on speels in test matches and bowling death overs in odi and t20.

 

[kron]

I agree. Both if these attacks are suited for any format. They don't mind bowling on speels in test matches and bowling death overs in odi and t20.

In my opinion:

In Asia, West indies

Indian attack is superior to aus attack.

In nz aus, Australia is superior

In England it's roughly the same. Bumrah dint play the final last time. Slight edge to aus

In aus the difference is very minimal.
As india managed to win there twice.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Time for Australia to maybe bring a new face in. This is a great attack. But think a lot of Bharatiya batters have seen too much of them.

 

[Savak]

Time for Australia to maybe bring a new face in. This is a great attack. But think a lot of Bharatiya batters have seen too much of them.

Fully agreed. These bowlers have failed against the same team in their home conditions for three test series in a row in the last 6 years. It is very apparent they no longer have the same intensity and belief vs the same team as they do against other opponents.

Unless Australia do not have capable replacements.

 

[RidiculousMan]

These days it seems so cause the Trio is passing their prime.

 

[Devadwal]

These days it seems so cause the Trio is passing their prime.

This is the case whenever they were / are playing against india but not against other team's . Why?