What's new

Your five greatest pace bowlers of all time?

H

Harsh Thakor

First Class Star
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Runs
3,521
Post of the Week
2
1.Sydney Barnes
2.Malcolm Marshall
3.Wasim Akram
4.Glen Mcgrath
5.Dennis Lillee

List not necessarily in order of merit.If it came to genuine pace and excluding fast -medium then arguably Imran Khan,Ray Lindwall , Fred Trueman or Andy Roberts could replace Mcgrath and Barnes.

On pure stats Sydney Barnes was in another league.On pure all-round skill or innovative ability Wasim may just nose Marshall.For intelligence in outmanoeuvering opponents Mcgrath was the king,who was the ultimate metronome.In terms of being the most complete Lillee could have been the closest who also was the most agressive or hostile.
 
Already gonna call that Indians are gonna come crying because you put McGrath at 4 and excluded Steyn. :))) Like they are fast bowling experts
 
1. Glenn McGrath
2. Malcolm Marshall
3. Richard Hadlee
4. Wasim Akram
5. Imran Khan
 
1. Malcolm Marshall
2.Glenn McGrath
3. Richard Hadlee
4. Imran Khan
5. Dale Steyn
 
Ab Fan said:
1. Malcolm Marshall
2.Glenn McGrath
3. Richard Hadlee
4. Imran Khan
5. Dale Steyn
Click to expand...

How did I miss Lillee?He is in top 5 and even in top 3.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wasim Akram
Glenn Mcgrath
Malcom Marshall
Richard Hadlee
Dale Steyn
 
Just like the previous thread, I'll only mention bowlers I've watched.

1) Glenn Mcgrath
2) Wasim Akram
3) Dale Steyn
4) Waqar Younis
5) Shoaib Akhtar (obviously biased here)

I also feel Mohammad Asif would have made this list with a full career. :angelo
 
malcolm marshall
curtley ambrose
richard hadlee
dennis lillee
wasim akram

modern day greats

glenn mcrath
shane bond
chaminda vaas
dale steyn
james anderson/brett lee
 
Robert said:
Lindwall, Trueman, Lillee, Marshall, Ambrose.
Click to expand...
Why Ambrose?Mcgrath had more all round skill and was a mre intelligent bowler with s better record.Trur Ambrose was more hostile than Mcgrath and the most accurate of all but he did. Not possess the armoury of Marshall and could become very predictable.On bad wickets he was the best of al particularly as a match winner but he did not champion the cause on flat wickets.In terms of skill I rank Wasim ahead who had considerably more weaponry.Mgrath was not genuinely quick but could be consistently more lethal than Curtly.Otherwise good choices particularly of Lindwall and Lillee who were Arguably the most complete of al right arm quicks.What about Hadlee and Imran?
 
Marshall
Steyn
Akram
Lillee
Ambrose

Honor roll: McGrath, Imran Khan, Holding, Hadlee, Allan Donald, Waqar, Andy Roberts.
 
Harsh Thakor said:
Why no Lillee, Hadlee or McGrath? To me all ahead of Ambrose ,Waqar or even Imran.
Click to expand...

Touché.

Although I must say McGrath is hugely overrated. He exploited the batsmen with bad techniques but ATG batters Sunny/SRT/Viv/Lara etc. would take his "unimaginative/repetitive" bowling to cleaners.
 
My list in the order will be

Marshall
Lillee
Wasim
Truman
McGrath

Though, I pick Was ahead of any of my XI because of being lefti & much better batsman.
 
1. Malcolm Marshall 99/100
2. Fred Trueman 95/100
3. Dennis Lillee 90/100
4. Richard Hadlee 85/100
5. Ian Bishop (at his peak) 85/100
 
Junaids said:
1. Malcolm Marshall 99/100
2. Fred Trueman 95/100
3. Dennis Lillee 90/100
4. Richard Hadlee 85/100
5. Ian Bishop (at his peak) 85/100
Click to expand...

No Wasim Akram?not even McGrath?2 0f the greatest bowlers.Mcgrath was more intelligent than Hadlee while Was had more all round skill.
 
Junaids said:
1. Malcolm Marshall 99/100
2. Fred Trueman 95/100
3. Dennis Lillee 90/100
4. Richard Hadlee 85/100
5. Ian Bishop (at his peak) 85/100
Click to expand...

MMHS said:
My list in the order will be

Marshall
Lillee
Wasim
Truman
McGrath

Though, I pick Was ahead of any of my XI because of being lefti & much better batsman.
Click to expand...

Where do you rank Hadlee?Or Ambrose?How do you compare Ambrose with Wasim or McGrath?
 
Harsh Thakor said:
Where do you rank Hadlee?Or Ambrose?How do you compare Ambrose with Wasim or McGrath?
Click to expand...

Ambi was behind - a bit of wicket dependent bowler. His record is exceptional in AUS or on 4th innings of under prepared tracks.

Hadlee actually will make my team over McGrath for his batting, but Mac was faster and won lot more critical battles - he was the best I have seen to target top opponent batsman. I haven't seen RJH that much like Mac, so might be a bit biased but indeed he was the best bowler on green tops for sure.
 
who is this barnes fellow? have we got videos on him, has anyone alive seen him play?
 
In no particular order

Malcolm Marshall
Wasim Akram
Glenn Mcgrath
Dale Steyn

5th one again us confusing.Should i consider a out and out tearaway like Holding or Trueman.Or should i go for someone like Hadlee and Miller?

Do i consider Mike Proctor?

What about Wes Hall Andy Roberts Allan Donald Imran Khan or Waqar Younis?

Should the imperious Ambrose miss out?
And then Dennis Lillee is so highly rated by many.

All things considered i choose Richard Hadlee.
 
My take:

Sydney Barnes - Best of the pre-modern era by a large margin

Malcolm Marshall - All-round best fast bowler ever

Glen McGrath - Best of the modern era

Richard Hadlee - Close to McGrath, near flawless record like McGrath

Imran Khan - Most devastating at his peak, best from subcontinent, awesome with new ball and reverse swing
 
It's difficult to visualize what Barnes exactly bowled but based on all accounts both him and O'Reilly were sort of like upgraded version of Kumble.
 
Most descriptions of Barnes make him out to be more a spinner than a pacer.

1. Marshall
2. McGrath
3. Steyn
4. Hadlee
5. Imran
 
Ashoke Dinda
Rau Iftikhar Ahmed
Munaf Patel
Mohammad Sami
Aizaz Cheema

wanted to add more guys but OP says just five...so after thinking for about 30 mins i have decided these 5 are the best
 
Chrish said:
It's difficult to visualize what Barnes exactly bowled but based on all accounts both him and O'Reilly were sort of like upgraded version of Kumble.
Click to expand...

He looks slower than Kumble. More like normal slow pace.
 
I will go with top 10

in no Particular order

Wasim , Lillee, Steyn, Imran , Marshall , Waqar ,Donald , Ambrose, Mcgrath,Trueman.
 
Shutdown Corner said:
Didnt McGrath make SRT his bunny?
Click to expand...

McGrath's bunny would be Atherton. 19 tests dismissals in 34 innings.


SRT 6 dismissals in 18 innings is not too far from average because 4 bowlers from opposition will get you 6 dismissals every 24 innings.
 
1) Malcolm Marshall
2) Imran Khan
3) Richard Hadlee
4) Wasim Akram
5) Glenn McGrath

To complete the top ten:

6) Dale Steyn
7) Waqar Younis
8) Allan Donald
9) Michael Holding
10) Dennis Lille/Fred Trueman/Sydney Barnes
 
UN talkz said:
Ashoke Dinda
Rau Iftikhar Ahmed
Munaf Patel
Mohammad Sami
Aizaz Cheema

wanted to add more guys but OP says just five...so after thinking for about 30 mins i have decided these 5 are the best
Click to expand...

*Rao Iftiqar Anjum
 
Chrish said:
It's difficult to visualize what Barnes exactly bowled but based on all accounts both him and O'Reilly were sort of like upgraded version of Kumble.
Click to expand...

Barnes wasn't a fast bowler bowling was easier in the late 1800s and early 1900s due to pitches helping bowling a lot more and a certain style of bowling slow medium fast spin was used best to exploit conditions O'reilly was best at this in the next era with pitches being more batsmen friendly.
 
UN talkz said:
Ashoke Dinda
Rau Iftikhar Ahmed
Munaf Patel
Mohammad Sami
Aizaz Cheema

wanted to add more guys but OP says just five...so after thinking for about 30 mins i have decided these 5 are the best
Click to expand...
Behold!
I can feel the opposition quaking vs this pace battery :)))

:yk :yk :yk
 
As usual, people are including 70 mph they never saw.

Marshall
McGrath
Steyn
Donald/Lillee
Imran/Wasim
 
I'm going to go ahead and assume this is for tests only:

1) Marshall
2) Ambrose
3) Imran
4) McGrath
5) Hadlee / Wasim

No particular order like the last thread.
 
Of the fast bowlers that I have seen, I considered the top to be:

1. Wasim Akram
2. Allan Donald
3. Glenn McGrath
4. Curtly Ambrose
5. Dale Steyn

If I go back a decade or two, I reckon only Wasim & McGrath would make the list, and the three that I would add are probably Marshall, Imran & Hadlee.
 
People don't realize what a beast Imran Khan really was. Average of 13 during his peak and 19 during the last ten years of his career, while having a decent at best, Sarfaraz Nawaz and rookie Akram for help is insanely good.

He also missed two years from his peak to injury and had batting and captaincy duties apart from the bowling.

Placing him any lower than #5 is completely unjustifiable.

Along with that, Michael Holding is another who is grossly underrated.
 
I'll only speak of what I've seen and unfortunately I grew up in the 90s:

1) Wasim
2) Waqar
3) Shoaib
4) Bond
5) Lee
 
Harsh Thakor said:
Where do you rank Hadlee?Or Ambrose?How do you compare Ambrose with Wasim or McGrath?
Click to expand...
I think that Glenn McGrath is massively over-rated.

The thing about McGrath is that he had Shane Warne in the same attack. I can't remember any time in 40-odd years of watching cricket in which 2 bowlers in the same attack were basically impossible to score off without taking unnecessary risks.

And then you have to add in that Jason Gillespie was himself an incredibly fine bowler, only a smidgen short of Dale Steyn's level. He was more dangerous than either McGrath or Warne, but he was not as miserly.

Glenn McGrath's career coincided with a period of fairly poor batsmanship in terms of defensive skills and ability to bat out the day and show more patience than the bowler. Lara and Tendulkar were both hopeless at it and Dravid had the mental strength but a slightly less reliable technique.

I can't see anything in Glenn McGrath which was any better - or even any different - to Curtly Ambrose, Joel Garner and Vince Van Der Bijl. They were four clones of one another. And their records are incredibly similar too - McGrath just lasted longer than Garner and had more opportunities than Van der Bijl.

As for Richard Hadlee, he was very similar to Dennis Lillee - which is how we know that Lillee would have been fine in Asia - but not as quick. He also could be quite robotic like Ambrose or Garner or McGrath, and a batsman could get in against Hadlee in a way in which he couldn't with Lillee because Lillee would try something different like a barrage of bouncers.

The other week we had a thread about the very accurate high speed film cameras of the 1970s. We know from the most precise testing of all (WACA 1975-76) that Dennis Lillee was measured at 154.8K (96.2 mph).

That's significant. Hadlee was nowhere near that pace - the fastest I saw him bowl was the low 140's and he deliberately bowled in the mid-130's most of the time.

Lillee had that extra dimension of raw pace, which tends to be overlooked because the day he was measured at 154.8, Thommo was measured at 160.6 and Roberts at 157.4.

You had Lillee, Thomson and Roberts as contemporaries, and of course the previous year Roberts had been measured at 159.49K. The fact that Lillee was a little less quick has over the years been simplified to his being fast-medium, but of course he wasn't. He was quick. Just not as quick as Thommo and Roberts.
 
Buffet said:
McGrath's bunny would be Atherton. 19 tests dismissals in 34 innings.


SRT 6 dismissals in 18 innings is not too far from average because 4 bowlers from opposition will get you 6 dismissals every 24 innings.
Click to expand...

Openers have a very high chance of getting dismissed by fast bowlers.
 
Junaids said:
I think that Glenn McGrath is massively over-rated.

The thing about McGrath is that he had Shane Warne in the same attack. I can't remember any time in 40-odd years of watching cricket in which 2 bowlers in the same attack were basically impossible to score off without taking unnecessary risks.

And then you have to add in that Jason Gillespie was himself an incredibly fine bowler, only a smidgen short of Dale Steyn's level. He was more dangerous than either McGrath or Warne, but he was not as miserly.

Glenn McGrath's career coincided with a period of fairly poor batsmanship in terms of defensive skills and ability to bat out the day and show more patience than the bowler. Lara and Tendulkar were both hopeless at it and Dravid had the mental strength but a slightly less reliable technique.

I can't see anything in Glenn McGrath which was any better - or even any different - to Curtly Ambrose, Joel Garner and Vince Van Der Bijl. They were four clones of one another. And their records are incredibly similar too - McGrath just lasted longer than Garner and had more opportunities than Van der Bijl.

As for Richard Hadlee, he was very similar to Dennis Lillee - which is how we know that Lillee would have been fine in Asia - but not as quick. He also could be quite robotic like Ambrose or Garner or McGrath, and a batsman could get in against Hadlee in a way in which he couldn't with Lillee because Lillee would try something different like a barrage of bouncers.

The other week we had a thread about the very accurate high speed film cameras of the 1970s. We know from the most precise testing of all (WACA 1975-76) that Dennis Lillee was measured at 154.8K (96.2 mph).

That's significant. Hadlee was nowhere near that pace - the fastest I saw him bowl was the low 140's and he deliberately bowled in the mid-130's most of the time.

Lillee had that extra dimension of raw pace, which tends to be overlooked because the day he was measured at 154.8, Thommo was measured at 160.6 and Roberts at 157.4.

You had Lillee, Thomson and Roberts as contemporaries, and of course the previous year Roberts had been measured at 159.49K. The fact that Lillee was a little less quick has over the years been simplified to his being fast-medium, but of course he wasn't. He was quick. Just not as quick as Thommo and Roberts.
Click to expand...

McGrath opened the bowling and almost always picked top order wickets before Warne even had a chance to bowl.

How did Warne's presence help McGrath? It does not make any sense. In fact it was the other way around.
 
A bit biased, no place for foreign bowlers lol, Akhtar misses out:)

Fazal Mahmood
Sarfraz Nawaz
Imran Khan
Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
 
I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that Wasim is hugely overrated by Pakistanis (in tests). Against some of the best teams of his playing time - Australia, England, India and South Africa he averages 25.76, 30.66, 28.86 and 29.76 respectively. Imran, McGrath, Hadlee and Steyn have much more consistent overall bowling averages compared to Wasim.
 
Harsh Thakor said:
Why Ambrose?Mcgrath had more all round skill and was a mre intelligent bowler with s better record.Trur Ambrose was more hostile than Mcgrath and the most accurate of all but he did. Not possess the armoury of Marshall and could become very predictable.On bad wickets he was the best of al particularly as a match winner but he did not champion the cause on flat wickets.In terms of skill I rank Wasim ahead who had considerably more weaponry.Mgrath was not genuinely quick but could be consistently more lethal than Curtly.Otherwise good choices particularly of Lindwall and Lillee who were Arguably the most complete of al right arm quicks.What about Hadlee and Imran?
Click to expand...


As I have often said, Hadlee's bottle could go when he was getting hit. He stopped attacking and went into his shell.

McGrath vs. Ambrose is very close but I went for the Antiguan because he was more destructive.

Imran was superb, the best to come out of the Subcontinent and certainly in my top ten.
 
Junaids said:
As for Richard Hadlee, he was very similar to Dennis Lillee - which is how we know that Lillee would have been fine in Asia - but not as quick. He also could be quite robotic like Ambrose or Garner or McGrath, and a batsman could get in against Hadlee in a way in which he couldn't with Lillee because Lillee would try something different like a barrage of bouncers.

The other week we had a thread about the very accurate high speed film cameras of the 1970s. We know from the most precise testing of all (WACA 1975-76) that Dennis Lillee was measured at 154.8K (96.2 mph).

That's significant. Hadlee was nowhere near that pace - the fastest I saw him bowl was the low 140's and he deliberately bowled in the mid-130's most of the time.

Lillee had that extra dimension of raw pace, which tends to be overlooked because the day he was measured at 154.8, Thommo was measured at 160.6 and Roberts at 157.4.
Click to expand...

Good analysis of Hadlee, I agree. Basically Lillee Mk2 but not as quick and less aggressive.
 
Junaids said:
I think that Glenn McGrath is massively over-rated.

The thing about McGrath is that he had Shane Warne in the same attack. I can't remember any time in 40-odd years of watching cricket in which 2 bowlers in the same attack were basically impossible to score off without taking unnecessary risks.

And then you have to add in that Jason Gillespie was himself an incredibly fine bowler, only a smidgen short of Dale Steyn's level. He was more dangerous than either McGrath or Warne, but he was not as miserly.

Glenn McGrath's career coincided with a period of fairly poor batsmanship in terms of defensive skills and ability to bat out the day and show more patience than the bowler. Lara and Tendulkar were both hopeless at it and Dravid had the mental strength but a slightly less reliable technique.

I can't see anything in Glenn McGrath which was any better - or even any different - to Curtly Ambrose, Joel Garner and Vince Van Der Bijl. They were four clones of one another. And their records are incredibly similar too - McGrath just lasted longer than Garner and had more opportunities than Van der Bijl.

As for Richard Hadlee, he was very similar to Dennis Lillee - which is how we know that Lillee would have been fine in Asia - but not as quick. He also could be quite robotic like Ambrose or Garner or McGrath, and a batsman could get in against Hadlee in a way in which he couldn't with Lillee because Lillee would try something different like a barrage of bouncers.

The other week we had a thread about the very accurate high speed film cameras of the 1970s. We know from the most precise testing of all (WACA 1975-76) that Dennis Lillee was measured at 154.8K (96.2 mph).

That's significant. Hadlee was nowhere near that pace - the fastest I saw him bowl was the low 140's and he deliberately bowled in the mid-130's most of the time.

Lillee had that extra dimension of raw pace, which tends to be overlooked because the day he was measured at 154.8, Thommo was measured at 160.6 and Roberts at 157.4.

You had Lillee, Thomson and Roberts as contemporaries, and of course the previous year Roberts had been measured at 159.49K. The fact that Lillee was a little less quick has over the years been simplified to his being fast-medium, but of course he wasn't. He was quick. Just not as quick as Thommo and Roberts.
Click to expand...

Brian Lara scored some of the biggest 100s in the history of the game.Tendulkar scored a century or a fifty every 2.5 innings and according to you they couldnot bat out.

Then you say Dravid who according to almost every expert out there had the most copy book technique had a less reliable technique.

Not to mention there were players like Kallis around too.

Mcgrath was better than Ambrose because Mcgrath actually toured the subcontinent and did well.Ambrose didnot bowl to the two greatest batsman of his era.The 3rd ATG of that era was still coming to terms with the game when Ambrose retired.

Lillee has 90% of his wickets in Australia England and NZ.He has no performance worth mentioning in the subcontinent or WI.This is called being a HTB. Hadlee was the far better bowler.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Lillee has 90% of his wickets in Australia England and NZ.He has no performance worth mentioning in the subcontinent or WI.This is called being a HTB. Hadlee was the far better bowler.
Click to expand...

Just curious: did you ever watch either of them?
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] and I did.
 
Robert said:
Just curious: did you ever watch either of them?

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] and I did.
Click to expand...

It's great having a couple of gentlemen here with so much experience.

Who was the best Pakistani bowler, in your opinion? Imran or Wasim? And who had the best peak, Imran or Waqar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
75th anniversary of Vijay Hazare scoring 2 centuries at Adelaide-all-time great ?
Replies
0
Views
327
Harsh Thakor
H
H
Michael Holding - The most talented right-arm fast-bowler of all and most lethal at his best?
Replies
15
Views
3K
PakLFC
P
H
5 most intelligent fast or fast-medium bowlers of all time?
Replies
27
Views
3K
sweep_shot
sweep_shot
MenInG
"If you want to beat Australia, just follow this plan..." : Greg Chappell
Replies
23
Views
2K
Shaheenthefalcon
S
MenInG
Sir Geoffrey Boycott's fantasy all-time Test teams (Imran Khan and Wasim Akram included)
Replies
23
Views
3K
SL_Fan
SL_Fan
Back
Top