Test Cricket Wins: Who holds the edge – fast bowlers or spinners?

[FearlessRoar]

In Test cricket, conditions and strategy can vary greatly across regions and match situations. Some argue that fast bowlers are essential, especially in pace-friendly conditions, while others believe spin bowlers provide the key breakthroughs on deteriorating pitches.

What do you think? Does a Test match victory rely more on the impact of fast bowlers or spinners?

Share your thoughts on how each plays a role in different match contexts.

 

[Rajdeep]

It really varies from country to country and there is no single answer to it.

In Sub continent, its spinners...mostly arm/off spinners. Also, fast bowlers who can use old ball to get reverse swing.

In Eng and NZ - its seam and swing bowlers who can move the ball around the deck.

In Aust and SA - you need fast bowlers who can bowl with pace and extract bounce. Also, leg spinners.

 

[sweep_shot]

It depends on the type of pitch.

If it is a dustbowl, spin obviously.

If it is a green pitch, pace.

If it is a flat track, tearaway pace is the best (Shoaib Akthar, Brett Lee etc.).

 

[BouncerGuy]

There is no fixed formula here. It is purely condition-dependent. you would not take spin-heavy attacks in Australia and in the subcontinent, you will focus more on spinner.

 

[Muhammad Saad]

Depends on conditions and opposition strength.

This option should also be added in the poll as this is correct answer.

 

[Stewie]

The bowlers will be irrelevent if the T20 game continues the decline of test match batting throughout the world as we have so far witnessed. If you can put the ball on a length on a crumbling pitch, or green seaming surface, it doensnt matter if you bowl pace or spin, you will get them.

 

[Buffet]

Top 5 5-fers in won matches,

4 spinners and one great Dale Steyn.


Top 5 5-fers in won matches when playing away,

Again dominated by Spinners.

 

[Buffet]

Stats are not to prove that spinners are better. Great pacers is always better because they can be effective in all surfaces, but simply showing that spinners are underrated by many fans. Spinners can bowl long spells to keep control. Also, I see tendency to over rate pacers by many fans despite them not being top class just because they have lower average in conditions where spinners don't get much help from surface. That's expected but are they running through sides outside of home enough to be more valuable for their teams?

Case in point, Anderson and Ashwin. Many will point to poor returns of Ashwin in SA and Aus. But in his career, he has contributed more in wins than Anderson, home , away and all conditions taken together. He was also intrumental in series win in Aus by bowling long spells and keeping it very tight. Pacers can't bowl long spells to tie up one end and in case of Anderson, he simply does not have skills to run thorgh sides outside of Eng either.

Anderson despite playing so long has just 3 5-fers in win outside of his home. Ashwin has 5 5-fers in win outside home despite having a much shorter career. Both average 29-30 outside of home. Home and away both, Ashwin has contributed more than Anderson for his team, but very few sing songs of spinners. Same situation with Yasir Shah from Pakistan. He has 6 5-fers in win outside of home compared to Anderson 3 despite playing for 20 years.

I took Anderson as an example because spinners are somewhat condition dependent and Anderson was also condition dependent bowler. All the praise for Anderson and credit for having near 200 tests but he has just 3 5-fers in wins for Eng when not playing in Eng. I mean he got plenty of pace friendly venues and pitches in his career when playing outside of Eng.


Now if you ask me top tier pacers vs top tier spinners. I will take top tier pacers any day. Reason is simple, Top tier spinners have been dominated by gun batsmen more often, but it's harder to dominate top tier Pacers. Case in point, Warner was thrashed in Ind and WI. Murali was thrashed in Ind and Aus. So spinners can be thrased in 2-3 venues despite being great. Top tier pacers don't get thrashed so easily. Just becasue of this reason, top tier pacers over top tier spinners. But after top 8-10 top tier pacers, I will say top tier spinners are more valuable for their teams even if I consider all conditions. Tieing up one end for a long period is very under rated but it helps bowlers on other end.

 

[Buffet]

I know Murali numbers are inflated due to BD , but we can exlude minnows and see 5-fers in win by pacers and spinners.

5-fers in win by Pacers when playing away: Top 10 in history




5-fers in win by spinners when playing away: Top 10 in history


We can see that spinners have done a great job as well. Yes, they are easier to get hold but they can also bowl long spells to keep it tight when playing away.

Aus always had very good spinner in pretty much entire history. That's needed unless you have great WI kind of attack and I am not sure how great they would have done in modern era with helmet and protections.

 

[sweep_shot]

I know Murali numbers are inflated due to BD , but we can exlude minnows and see 5-fers in win by pacers and spinners.

Murali played 133 Tests. Only 11 were against BD. His numbers are not "inflated due to BD". He also did great against strong opponents.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

It relies on the bowling unit overall.

Ideally you want the fast bowlers contributing more at the front end of a test match and the spinners coming into the game more as the game develops.

 

[Buffet]

Murali played 133 Tests. Only 11 were against BD. His numbers are not "inflated due to BD". He also did great against strong opponents.

5-fers in wins when playing away. That's the context.

Murali has 4 against BD when playing away
Murali has 7 against six coutries when playing away

That's a text book definition of inflated 5-fers in wins due to BD. You could be a good bowler but can have vastly inflated numbers due to minnow bashing. Does not mean that you were bad against others. They are not exlusive.

 

[sweep_shot]

5-fers in wins when playing away. That's the context.

Murali has 4 against BD when playing away
Murali has 7 against six coutries when playing away

That's a text book definition of inflated 5-fers in wins due to BD. You could be a good bowler but can have vastly inflated numbers due to minnow bashing. Does not mean that you were bad against others. They are not exlusive.

Why you you omit home Tests? Both home and away Tests should be considered.

 

[sweep_shot]

5-fers in wins when playing away. That's the context.

Murali has 4 against BD when playing away
Murali has 7 against six coutries when playing away

That's a text book definition of inflated 5-fers in wins due to BD. You could be a good bowler but can have vastly inflated numbers due to minnow bashing. Does not mean that you were bad against others. They are not exlusive.

Murali has 800 Test wickets. Out of those 800, only 89 came against BD.

I think it would be statistical dishonesty to call Murali's stats "inflated due to BD". He has hundreds of wickets against top sides.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

I think it depends on wicket and pitch but generally it's the job of pacers and spinners can be hit for plenty even on run turner through good connection.

 

[Buffet]

Murali has 800 Test wickets. Out of those 800, only 89 came against BD.

I think it would be statistical dishonesty to call Murali's stats "inflated due to BD". He has hundreds of wickets against top sides.

Comprehension skills??

I was talking in context of pacers or spinners taking their team to win in away conditions.

He has done more than a good job and comes in list. Not sure what are you talking here. His numbers are inflated due to BD but hardly matters in that context.

 

[sweep_shot]

Comprehension skills??

I was talking in context of pacers or spinners taking their team to win in away conditions.

He has done more than a good job and comes in list. Not sure what are you talking here. His numbers are inflated due to BD but hardly matters in that context.

Why you only talk about "away conditions"? Cricket is not just played in away tours.

Your obsession with "away tours in opposition dens" is truly fascinating. Your nickname should be "Mister Away".

Murali has 800 Test wickets. I think it is factually inaccurate to call his stats inflated because he has so many wickets.

 

[Buffet]

Why you you omit home Tests? Both home and away Tests should be considered.

Away is true greatness so highlighted away, but Home and away are included in over all number posterd above. I forgot to take out minnows.

Here are numbers after excluding BD, Zim etc. 5-fers in win list is dominated by spinners. Same trend.

 

[sweep_shot]

Away is true greatness so highlighted away, but Home and away are included in over all number posterd above. I forgot to take out minnows.

True greatness is determined by all factors. Not just how someone did in away tours.

You can't expect a spinner to do well on a flat SENA pitch or a green pitch. There are many factors involved.

You make it seem black and white with your filtered/manipulated stats. But, it is more complex than that.

 

[Buffet]

Why you only talk about "away conditions"? Cricket is not just played in away tours.

From any country, for every 10 players who have great track record at home, you will see 1 having great track record away.

It's not obsession, it's called having an understanding of difference between very good in home conditions vs being great due to doing well in all conditions. You are free to rate home and away equal.

 

[Buffet]

True greatness is determined by all factors. Not just how someone did in away tours.

You can't expect a spinner to do well on a flat SENA pitch or a green pitch. There are many factors involved.

You make it seem black and white with your filtered/manipulated stats. But, it is more complex than that.

No one expects spinners to do equally well in all conditions. Despite that, many spinners have contributed more in wins for their countries when playing away as well.

If spinners have a higher number of 5-fers away in places like SL, WI, Pak, Ind then I do rate them very high compared to pacers who have not won matches for their country despite having places like SA, Aus, Eng etc as away.

So when you look at all away bucket, it includes all kinds of conditions for pacers and spinners. Taken together it presents a good picture of ability of pacers and spinners both. I was making the same point about Anderson eariler, he has bowled in all kinds of conditions and yet he has 3 5-fers in win despite playing near 200 tests. That's not greatness despite having lots of 5-fers in win in home conditions. His greatness is limited to home conditions. Only top tiers do well in all conditions.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

mostly depends on the the conditions but yeah spinners mostly get the edge of taking wickets in longer format of the game.

 

[Kianig89]

Lethal fast bowlers are the crown of cricket, no better sight than a fast bowler or seamer spearing in or seaming in, that's pure poetry.

Steyn making banana Swings and batsmen dancing at it or , Asif outfoxing the great KP many a times.

Real Fast bowlers are than mainstay of Test teams.

McGrath , Akram, Walsh , Steyn etc anyday over Murali and Warne.

Spinners mostly do the donkey work and come into game in 2nd innings.

Fast bowlers can wreck havoc from 1st session and reverse it like crazy on anytime of the day.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

WI of 1980s was a lethal side owing to pacers... I don't remember that they used to rely on any spinner except Sobers playing the double role.

 

[Buffet]

WI of 1980s was a lethal side owing to pacers... I don't remember that they used to rely on any spinner except Sobers playing the double role.

Sobers last played in 1974.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Sobers last played in 1974.

Thanks I stand corrected, but still WI used to rely heavily on pacers in that era

 

[Buffet]

Thanks I stand corrected, but still WI used to rely heavily on pacers in that era

True.

I would have loved to see the great WI attack bowling in modern era with batsmen having protection.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Test cricket in Perth at WACA... nobody can make that game more lively than fast and furious pacers

 

[DeadlyVenom]

True.

I would have loved to see the great WI attack bowling in modern era with batsmen having protection.

They got away with some cruelty back in the day. Peppering batsmen body when batsman had no protection.

Imagine Shoaib and Lee if they had that luxury.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Lethal fast bowlers are the crown of cricket, no better sight than a fast bowler or seamer spearing in or seaming in, that's pure poetry.

Steyn making banana Swings and batsmen dancing at it or , Asif outfoxing the great KP many a times.

Real Fast bowlers are than mainstay of Test teams.

McGrath , Akram, Walsh , Steyn etc anyday over Murali and Warne.

Spinners mostly do the donkey work and come into game in 2nd innings.

Fast bowlers can wreck havoc from 1st session and reverse it like crazy on anytime of the day.

A canny spinner on a turning track with fielders all around the bat is also a real spectacle.

I really enjoy fast bowling it is truly exciting when the batsman is being tested but I watching a quality spinner especially a leggie is not far off the same thrill.

 

[Buffet]

They got away with some cruelty back in the day. Peppering batsmen body when batsman had no protection.

Imagine Shoaib and Lee if they had that luxury.

Yah, not having protection played a part back then.

 

[ElRaja]

quicks obviosly, they can set up a win in the first innings, or finish teams of in the second. spinners usually dont come into it in the first innings on sporting decks.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Spinners can go for runs and if the track is not a spin-friendly one, they are not gonna pick any wickets. Pacers can at least try and save runs if not getting wickets.

As I said, we cannot say that spin holds the edge or pacer holds the edge, it depends on conditions and skills.

 

[sweep_shot]

Spinners can go for runs and if the track is not a spin-friendly one, they are not gonna pick any wickets. Pacers can at least try and save runs if not getting wickets.

As I said, we cannot say that spin holds the edge or pacer holds the edge, it depends on conditions and skills.

On a flat pitch, pacers are better. Express pacers particularly (Shoaib Akthar, Brett Lee etc.).

 

[BouncerGuy]

On a flat pitch, pacers are better. Express pacers particularly (Shoaib Akthar, Brett Lee etc.).

Yes. That is what i mentioned above. Spinners will get thrashed on flat tracks.

 

[KP From India]

Why you only talk about "away conditions"? Cricket is not just played in away tours.

Your obsession with "away tours in opposition dens" is truly fascinating. Your nickname should be "Mister Away".

Murali has 800 Test wickets. I think it is factually inaccurate to call his stats inflated because he has so many wickets.

But but.....Ashwin would get scrutinized after having large sample size of near 550 wickets....But but but Other Spinners in Asia taking 5 Fers for fun in SENA conditions Saar....

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Spinners can only be affective on rank turners while pacers could succeed anywhere owing to their deft bowlingm

 

[kron]

It depends on the type of pitch.

If it is a dustbowl, spin obviously.

If it is a green pitch, pace.

If it is a flat track, tearaway pace is the best (Shoaib Akthar, Brett Lee etc.).

flat pitch i would say guy with best all round skills and ability to reverse plus also bounce ability matters more than pace.

so thatss where best bowlers perform. so i would say bumrah cummins rabada are the best bowlers for that reason. best on flat pitches.

overall i dont care what anyone says, fast bowler >> spinner
always.

apart from dust bowls.

 

[FearlessRoar]

On subcontinent surfaces, spinners are proving to be the best bowling weapons

 

[W63L35]

Stats are not to prove that spinners are better. Great pacers is always better because they can be effective in all surfaces, but simply showing that spinners are underrated by many fans. Spinners can bowl long spells to keep control. Also, I see tendency to over rate pacers by many fans despite them not being top class just because they have lower average in conditions where spinners don't get much help from surface. That's expected but are they running through sides outside of home enough to be more valuable for their teams?

Case in point, Anderson and Ashwin. Many will point to poor returns of Ashwin in SA and Aus. But in his career, he has contributed more in wins than Anderson, home , away and all conditions taken together. He was also intrumental in series win in Aus by bowling long spells and keeping it very tight. Pacers can't bowl long spells to tie up one end and in case of Anderson, he simply does not have skills to run thorgh sides outside of Eng either.

Anderson despite playing so long has just 3 5-fers in win outside of his home. Ashwin has 5 5-fers in win outside home despite having a much shorter career. Both average 29-30 outside of home. Home and away both, Ashwin has contributed more than Anderson for his team, but very few sing songs of spinners. Same situation with Yasir Shah from Pakistan. He has 6 5-fers in win outside of home compared to Anderson 3 despite playing for 20 years.

I took Anderson as an example because spinners are somewhat condition dependent and Anderson was also condition dependent bowler. All the praise for Anderson and credit for having near 200 tests but he has just 3 5-fers in wins for Eng when not playing in Eng. I mean he got plenty of pace friendly venues and pitches in his career when playing outside of Eng.


Now if you ask me top tier pacers vs top tier spinners. I will take top tier pacers any day. Reason is simple, Top tier spinners have been dominated by gun batsmen more often, but it's harder to dominate top tier Pacers. Case in point, Warner was thrashed in Ind and WI. Murali was thrashed in Ind and Aus. So spinners can be thrased in 2-3 venues despite being great. Top tier pacers don't get thrashed so easily. Just becasue of this reason, top tier pacers over top tier spinners. But after top 8-10 top tier pacers, I will say top tier spinners are more valuable for their teams even if I consider all conditions. Tieing up one end for a long period is very under rated but it helps bowlers on other end.

Good stats and good write up!

I would like add only one point. The biggest factor that separates spinners fast bowlers is their peak years. Fast bowlers have very short careers as compared to fast bowlers (Anderson is a an exception). Many fast bowlers broke down during the peak of their careers and lost the precious years of their playing careers. Dennis Lillee and Imran Khan were out at the peak of their careers with stress fractures. Shoaib Akhtar was in and out of the team due to injuries.

Things have vastly improved for fast bowlers since 1990s from fitness and recovery standpoint. I remember reading Fred Trueman's quote in a book ... he was the first fast bowler to take 300 test wickets. He said, the next fast bowler who will take 300 test wickets, will be one tired bowler. Well, guess what? Another 28 fast bowlers have taken 300+ wickets since. Broad and Anderson doubled the 300 test wickets.... and yet, only 10 spinners have taken 300+ career wickets.

Personally, I will watch bowlers like Wasim, Anderson, Shoaib, McGrath, Styne and Waqar any day, any time over any spinner.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

In SENA it's always pacers.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

In SENA it's always pacers.

but our Sena-Pati of fast bowlers Mr Shaheen Afridi cant even dominate in such conditions. lol