Who has under-achieved the most amongst all West Indian pace bowlers?

[Harsh Thakor]

Most under achieved pace bowlers from West Indies.

This is my list of pace bowlers ranked in order of the difference between performance and actual ability.


1.Sylvester Clarke
2.Patrick Paterson
3.Colin Croft
4.Ian Bishop
5.Michael Holding /Andy Roberts




For sheer pace and hostility Sylvester Clarke was supreme.Reminiscent of thrusting a spear through a backbone in full flow.At his best on the 1978-79 tour of India and on the 1980 tour of Pakistan .Averaged over 27.85 with 42 test scalps inspite of being as lethal as anyone on his day.Reminded you of a boxer.Took Sunil Gavaskar's wicket nine times in India in 1978-79.


Patrick Paterson looked like breathing fire at his best and for a while wa s the most lethal of the Carribaen quickies.Took ferocity and intimidation to its ultimate height in India in 198788 and in Australia in 1988-89.Burnt himself out too early in his career.Average of over 30 hardly did justice to this thunderbolt.

Colin Croft for a while was more hostile or lethal than Hoding and Roberts and more penetrative.In 1977 against Pakistan he had a record haul of 33 wickets and topped the bowling averages on the 1979-80 tour of Australia and the 1981 home series versus England.Took almost 5 wickets per test at almost economcal average.In the end did not even have 200 test scalps to his name.

Ian Bishop was the most versatile after Marshal land Roberts .Serious back problems caused his reversal.Would have otherwise had many more test scalps.


Michael Holding arguably posesed more talent for fast bowling than anyone posesing the best ever action and the quickest speed through the air.Bowled the best spell and the best over in the history of test cricket.Haul of 249 wickets at 23.68 to me did not do justice to his true potential.Very injury prone and maybe did not work hard enough on his bowling.



Andy Roberts was arguably amongst the 5 most complete paceman of all,on par with Dennis Lillee in his time.No paceman was craftier of a better exponent of the fast and slow bouncer.Average of 25.61 hardly did him justice as he was more effective than Hadlee or Imran.

 

[Robert]

I don’t think of any of them as underachievers. They were in a very tough field and as soon as one started to slow down he was replaced.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

I don’t think of any of them as underachievers. They were in a very tough field and as soon as one started to slow down he was replaced.

Not even Clarke or Paterson?Like cylinders to start with.

 

[moghul]

Wayne Daniel , the "black diamond" born at wrong time in West Indies cricket, played only 10 tests as he joined Packers WSC at a very young age, so did not play much cricket for WI.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Wayne Daniel , the "black diamond" born at wrong time in West Indies cricket, played only 10 tests as he joined Packers WSC at a very young age, so did not play much cricket for WI.

great choice. well done.

 

[Sami92]

Tino Best & Fidel Edwards.

 

[ShahidDar08]

Dhilon, Edwards & Tino Best

 

[Junaids]

Bishop, due to injury.

He had everything: pace, swing, bounce and intelligence.

He was unquestionably the leader of the attack ahead of Ambrose, Walsh and late-career Marshall until the stress fractures made him change his action.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Bishop, due to injury.

He had everything: pace, swing, bounce and intelligence.

He was unquestionably the leader of the attack ahead of Ambrose, Walsh and late-career Marshall until the stress fractures made him change his action.

Great choice.More versatile than Ambrose in your view?or even Holding?

 

[topspin]

Bishop, due to injury.

He had everything: pace, swing, bounce and intelligence.

He was unquestionably the leader of the attack ahead of Ambrose, Walsh and late-career Marshall until the stress fractures made him change his action.

He had that fast 150k outswing. Having seen the clips on YT what a bowler he was pre-injury

 

[MMHS]

Keeping Bish out for injury (obviously he is top in my list, without injury, he could have taken 450 Test wickets), I think the most under rated/achiever is Andy Roberts. Andy was definitely the 2nd best fast bowler of 1970s, extremely cunning, skillful and he was definitely fast as well. He played lots of Test on absolute dead WIN tracks of 1970s, otherwise his average should have been below 23 for sure. Gavaskar rates him above Mike; Boycott, Amiss as well (probably Barry Richards also had some great words for his Hampshire team mate), and probably most cricket pundits will pick him over Joel Garner in Test. He had the most lethal bouncer in the game and he surprised batsmen lot with his change of pace. Clarke & Patterson were FAST, but don't think skillful enough, neither had the guile & or bowling intelligence like Roberts or Marshall.

 

[Centurion]

How about Franklyn Rose?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Keeping Bish out for injury (obviously he is top in my list, without injury, he could have taken 450 Test wickets), I think the most under rated/achiever is Andy Roberts. Andy was definitely the 2nd best fast bowler of 1970s, extremely cunning, skillful and he was definitely fast as well. He played lots of Test on absolute dead WIN tracks of 1970s, otherwise his average should have been below 23 for sure. Gavaskar rates him above Mike; Boycott, Amiss as well (probably Barry Richards also had some great words for his Hampshire team mate), and probably most cricket pundits will pick him over Joel Garner in Test. He had the most lethal bouncer in the game and he surprised batsmen lot with his change of pace. Clarke & Patterson were FAST, but don't think skillful enough, neither had the guile & or bowling intelligence like Roberts or Marshall.

Absolutely correct.great post.Howver do remember how lethal Clsrke and Paterson were or even Croft.No doubt Andy Roberts figures hardly did him justice as he was right up there with Lillee .What do you feel about Holding ?

 

[Robert]

Wayne Daniel , the "black diamond" born at wrong time in West Indies cricket, played only 10 tests as he joined Packers WSC at a very young age, so did not play much cricket for WI.

I saw him on CE, bowling if a short run in the Sunday League in Bradford, Yorks vs Middlesex.

I don’t think he underachieved, he just couldn’t get a game because everyone else was so good. Would have played seventy tests were he England-qualified.

 

[austerlitz]

Sylvester clarke.

 

[Robert]

Absolutely correct.great post.Howver do remember how lethal Clsrke and Paterson were or even Croft.No doubt Andy Roberts figures hardly did him justice as he was right up there with Lillee .What do you feel about Holding ?

I think this is harsh, Harsh. 250 wickets was very good for a bowler in those days. Trueman had set a marker at 305 but he was exceptional in his field. Then Lillee ran the marker out to 355 but Thommo had faded while Hogg and Lawson were not in their class for a sustained time.

So a lot of it is due to the strength of the field. Marshall suddenly appeared and made Roberts look slow and unfit, while Garner had got faster and got the other opening bowler job.