Shane Bond vs Mitchell Starc: Better ODI bowler

[hk031992]

Who do you rank as a better odi bowler: Bond or Starc?

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Shane Bond.

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

Bond!

My second fav bowler of all time after Asif.

 

[WengerOut]

Starc

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

I cant remember I have seen any other bowler troubling the Aussie team (the greatest odi side in my lifetime) at their peak like Bond. Genius. Its so sad his career was hampered with injuries.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

So far, Bond. Starc seems to be losing his magic touch with the ball. Bond was lethal until he stopped playing.

 

[Suleiman]

Starc, he played a major role in Australia winning the 2015 WC.

 

[BaankeJi]

Bond. Too bad injuries ruined his career.

 

[Hasan123]

I'll take Starc just.

 

[Sam99]

In odis starc has great record but he has played odis rarely so idk how good he will perform now. It will depend how he performs in worldcup next year. Bond has always been one of my fav bowler but i will wait a bit for this.

 

[Ab Fan]

Starc in ODIS. Shane Bond is a "could have been case".

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Starc in ODIS. Shane Bond is a "could have been case".

So far, both have near identical stats. Starc will be ahead after 10 more matches.

Bond
Avg - 20.88
Wkts - 147

Starc
Avg - 20.95
Wkts - 141

 

[Justcrazy]

I would choose Bond. performed against best team of his age.

 

[the_outsider]

I used to be genuinely scared when India had to face up against Bond.

Frankly, to me, Bond looked faster than Starc does.

And he's bowled some absolutely devastating spells. Starc has too but Bond had a lot more of those in his short career.

 

[big_gamer007]

Finally a great comparison thread.

Personally I would go with Bond, he was amazing pity his career was marred with so many injuries.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Bond. Too bad injuries ruined his career.

Bond could have won 2003 wc for NZ if their batting could add some runs.

At their best Bond was faster than Starc he was 155 clicks bowler when he started and could move the ball.