The Greatest Ever Series! - Top 10 Bowlers

A good bowler can win a game of cricket for you almost on his own. If a great bowler is having a great day, he can rip through the oppositions batting line and set up an easy victory for his team.

There have been many great bowlers over the years and here is a shotlist of 10. Who do you think is the best out of these?
Is there anyone else that should be in the top 10?

Warne. Edges out Murali for his ability to think the batsmen out as well as bowl them out. The best captain never to have skippered his side in a test match IMO.

Would have liked to see Trueman on that list, but not too sure who you could omit...

I went for Warne.

I love both Muri and Shane but Warne takes it due to his character/ personality, the fact he was an excellent batsmen as well and for THAT ball against gatting!

I went for McGrath because I prefe3r to watch a fast bowler compared to a spinner, and he is probably the best quicker bowler on the list. His fifer at Lords in the first test in 05' was so good.

Murali is the leading wicket and by quite a margin. His average was also lower than Warne's, who as a spinner would be the best comparison. For quick bowlers, McGrath was possibly the best for his consistency and accuracy.

Warne is way over hyped purely for the fact he destroyed England for fun. England where hardly World beaters during Warne's career.

Richie Benaud was a better leggie than Warne.

Murali is chucker.

Malcolm Marshall was a genuis. He could figure out a batsman's weakness in 2 deliveries and promptly pick the batsman apart.

No Michael Holding?

Murali's record speaks for itself. He has to be number 1.

Went for Malcolm Marshall. I'm not old enough to have seen him live but from what I've seen he had everything - yorkers, bouncers, pace, swing

Barnes!

A complicated man in a difficult time for cricket! Wilful and stubborn, his career at international level was interrupted because of his refusal to play county cricket. Even so in just 27 test matches he took 189 wickets at an average of under 17, bagging 5 wickets in an innings 24 times and 10 wicket match hauls 7 times.

His bowling apparently was incredibly varied - leg breaks and off breaks (at faster than medium pace) - and he could swing the ball at will in either direction too! It is also reported that he could swing the ball very late in its flight. Reverse swing? Before WWI?

In the same way that Bradman's figures and the universal respect of him by his contemporaries of all nations make him the best bat, Barnes IS the top of the pile as a bowler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Barnes

Wow - thanks for the Wiki - link!

Barnes deserves consideration. Some of his other remarkable feats:

He took 49 first-class wickets for Wales, including seven for 51 and five for 67 in an eight-wicket triumph over the West Indians in 1928, when he was 55 years of age.

Also His record for Staffordshire was 1,441 wickets at a cost of 8.15 runs per wicket, while his average in the Lancashire League was even lower. Sounds as tho' at that level he was completely unplayable.

Ashley Giles.

Warne for me. Scared the hell outta batsmen. I also like Mcgrath, he could hit a 5p piece on the ground every time if you told him too

Murali i think is the greatest ever bowler.

I plumped for Glenn McGrath here. I know others may have a touch of magic that McGrath didn't have, and that others may have more impressive stats, but his wicket taking and run stopping was so valuable to Australia for so long.

I went for Mcgrath. To me he was the best, regardless of the fact that Murali and Warne took more wickets, Mcgrath was simply awesome. He really tied down ends and made life very difficult for batsmen. I am not sure if Warne would have got as many wickets as he did had Mcgrath not been bowling from the other end creating pressure.

murali was simply the greatest he was a real mystery bowler and was always consistent

But his action was always brought into question and no matter how many times he was cleared of it not being illeagal they did change the rules for him.

i hate all this talk about his action, rules are rules, he got tested and was fine

they changed the rules for him though

he had a condition where he couldnt do something with his wrist, he didnt cheat, he was just a extremely good bowler and people need to start talking more about his bowling and less about his action.

i went for warne to, warne could turn it on any surface and didnt have the luxury that murali did of all his home games were on turning wickets.

what about Imran Khan? i think he should be in the top 10.

who would you put him in there for, who would you replace on that list with khan

imran khan?

i mean who would you take out of the list to put him in..

I personally would take out Sydney Barnes and put in Imran Khan.

Although if there was a The greatest ever series-All rounders I would put Khan in there.

yh i think khan belongs in allrounders

I think Sydney Barnes has a legitimate claim to be the best ever bowler....

I think Imran Khan, although a good bowler, is well short of the top 10 of all time - but could always create a space by making it top 10 since WW2

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:I think Sydney Barnes has a legitimate claim to be the best ever bowler....

I think Imran Khan, although a good bowler, is well short of the top 10 of all time - but could always create a space by making it top 10 since WW2

Khan would easily make it into the top 10 all rounders though. Possibly a claim for the greatest all-rounder.

ML wrote:Barnes!

A complicated man in a difficult time for cricket! Wilful and stubborn, his career at international level was interrupted because of his refusal to play county cricket. Even so in just 27 test matches he took 189 wickets at an average of under 17, bagging 5 wickets in an innings 24 times and 10 wicket match hauls 7 times.

His bowling apparently was incredibly varied - leg breaks and off breaks (at faster than medium pace) - and he could swing the ball at will in either direction too! It is also reported that he could swing the ball very late in its flight. Reverse swing? Before WWI?

In the same way that Bradman's figures and the universal respect of him by his contemporaries of all nations make him the best bat, Barnes IS the top of the pile as a bowler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Barnes

Completely agree.

Also: Would suggest that Frank Tyson should be on the list. The fastest bowler ever to grace the game. If he were about today with all the fitness advantages today's players have he would be a nightmare for any batsman.

liverbnz wrote:Ashley Giles.

Just noticed this. I like the irony

I think Sydney Barnes has a legitimate claim to be the best ever bowler....

I think Imran Khan, although a good bowler, is well short of the top 10 of all time - but could always create a space by making it top 10 since WW2
==================================================
or a good candidate for top 10 captain.

agree ronny

khan as a captain would be up there but he's no steve waugh

or stephen fleming/michael vaughan

S.F. Barnes for me too.
Bowled off and leg-spin from the front of the hand at fast-medium pace, recorded as having torn lumps out of damp pitches with his spin, and played professionally until he was 67!!!
Awesome.

khan as a captain would be up there but he's no steve waugh
=================================================
I think Waugh was an amazing player and leader, bu you have to look at the team Khan was leading and also try and understand that culture, he led a pakistani cricket team for 10 years, now take in to account this is a team that changes its captain every week, he was also great leader of men always leading from the front.

the ultimate test as a captain is to win though, thats why waugh's up there. your right though he was lucky to have the likes of warne and mcgrath at his disposal.

while not having seen much of him i heard clive llyod was a great captain. and lead one of the greatest teams. these teams surely wouldnt have been so successful unless they had a good captain

khan as a captain would be up there but he's no steve waugh
=================================================
I think Waugh was an amazing player and leader, bu you have to look at the team Khan was leading and also try and understand that culture, he led a pakistani cricket team for 10 years, now take in to account this is a team that changes its captain every week, he was also great leader of men always leading from the front.

Compelling
Lloyd may well be the greatest captain because he was the first to really unify the West Indies into a team (aided by the influx of players from previously minor islands, such as Vviv coming from Antigua) - before and arguably since, they have had almost as much talent, but it was only under Lloyd and Richards subsequently that they dominated.

Anyway, back to the poll - best bowler is always difficult because you are comparing unlike skills - Warne and Murali's ability to use guile to dislodge batsmen, McGrath's accuracy and persistence, Marshall's pace and skill at getting bounce and movement, Hadlee's skill at swinging and seaming the ball.

I would argue that a few of the guys included are there courtesy of longevity and career stats rather than being the best of the best (Garner was a better bowler than Curtley and Holding and Roberts should be ahead of Walsh). I'd also like to suggest Derek Underwood as being one of the hardest bowlers ever to play against if conditions suited his style.

Who to go for overall - Warne as a spinner and Marshall as a quick I think, and I'd say Shane was marginally the better cricketer overall.

No Fred Trueman the first bowler in the history of test cricket to get to 300 wickets?

GBoycs

You are definitely correct, the omission of Trueman from the list is simply wrong. Went from being a world class fast bowler as a young man to a world class swing and seam bowler later on.

At Test level, I'd certainly put him ahead of Akram, Walsh, Ambrose (or Holding and Garner, as should have been listed) and Lillee.

Of course, lists like the one above will inevitably be biased towards more recent players because they are the ones most of us have seen - it's only if someone is a statistical freak (Bradman) or had a major highlight performance in their career (Laker's 19 wickets, Hutton's 364) that they register in the wider consciousness.

dummy_half wrote:GBoycs

You are definitely correct, the omission of Trueman from the list is simply wrong. Went from being a world class fast bowler as a young man to a world class swing and seam bowler later on.

At Test level, I'd certainly put him ahead of Akram, Walsh, Ambrose (or Holding and Garner, as should have been listed) and Lillee.

Of course, lists like the one above will inevitably be biased towards more recent players because they are the ones most of us have seen - it's only if someone is a statistical freak (Bradman) or had a major highlight performance in their career (Laker's 19 wickets, Hutton's 364) that they register in the wider consciousness.

Forgot about Jim Laker. Surely being the only man in the history of test cricket to take 10 wickets in an innings and come just one wicket short of achieving this feat twice in the same test match must surely give him a inclusion in this list of the 10 greatest ever bowlers of all-time.

uncovered pitches had a great effect on some of the early crickertrs though and has to be considered when talking about the likes of jim laker, imagine shane warne on pitch thats been baked and crumbling for two weeks, unplayable.

generally i would say the more modern bowlings have it harder these days, the west indies is no longer a rock hard mine field, all sub continent are low and slow. other than some england swinging places there isnt really any real tough places mostly they are batter friendly

compelling and rich wrote:uncovered pitches had a great effect on some of the early crickertrs though and has to be considered when talking about the likes of jim laker, imagine shane warne on pitch thats been baked and crumbling for two weeks, unplayable.

generally i would say the more modern bowlings have it harder these days, the west indies is no longer a rock hard mine field, all sub continent are low and slow. other than some england swinging places there isnt really any real tough places mostly they are batter friendly

Perth in Australia where the Australian pace quartet of Rhino Harris,Sid Vicious,Mitchell Johnson and Ben Hilfenhaus reign supreme.