PDA

View Full Version : Best Current Bowling Attacks


James90
April 1, 2006, 08:47 PM
1. Australia (McGrath, Lee, Warne, Clark, MacGill)
2. England (Harmison, Flintoff, Hoggard, Jones, Giles)
3. South Africa (Pollock, Ntini, Nel, Boje, Langeveldt)
4. Pakistan (Shoaib, Rana, Kaneria, Razzaq, Afridi)
5. India (Pathan, Sreesanth, Kumble, Harbhajan, Agarkar)
6. Sri Lanka (Vaas, Malinga, Maharoof, Muralitharan, Bandara)
7. New Zealand (Bond, Martin, Styris, Vettori, Franklin)
8. West Indies (Edwards, Powell, Bradshaw, Bravo, Best)
9. Bangladesh (Mashrafe, Rasel, Rafique, Enamul, Shahadat)

Your thoughts?

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 1:47 AM GMT, by James90.

thebest
April 2, 2006, 12:51 AM
England may have the best pace attack. But overall it is a competition between Pakistan and Australia. Australia have the edge because of McGrath

Donny
April 2, 2006, 02:04 AM
Yes, a fair bit depends on where the match is played but with the emergence of Stuart Clark and Pigeon to come back, it's hard to go past the Oz attack.

I'd include Mohammad Asif in the Pakistan attack, just edging out Rana. That's also a strong and varied lineup.

Steve Harmison is wildly over rated but FF, Jones and Hoggard are very good. Short on a spin option.

I rate the Bangladeshi attack higher than 9th., James. Syed Rasel is a real find and Mortaza and Raffy can trouble anyone.

NZ is strong at home but tested elsewhere. Their tour of SA begins soon. If Martin and Franklin can support Bond and Vettori, it should be an interesting contest.

jayed
April 2, 2006, 05:58 AM
come on, harmison, was once, the highest ranked bowler in the world, higher than b.lee or bracken etc. ever was.

he may bowl the odd wide or not be so accurate, but he deliver.

still, i wouldn't say anyone was better than the england fast bowling quartet in the ashes-at the time-they were the best.

however, if we can develop panesar, we might have an all round spin, medium, fast attack worth noticing, giles ruins it.

Miraz
April 2, 2006, 06:25 AM
Originally posted by James90
1. Australia (McGrath, Lee, Warne, Clark, MacGill)
2. England (Harmison, Flintoff, Hoggard, Jones, Giles)
3. South Africa (Pollock, Ntini, Nel, Boje, Langeveldt)
4. Pakistan (Shoaib, Rana, Kaneria, Razzaq, Afridi)
5. India (Pathan, Sreesanth, Kumble, Harbhajan, Agarkar)
6. Sri Lanka (Vaas, Malinga, Maharoof, Muralitharan, Bandara)
7. New Zealand (Bond, Martin, Styris, Vettori, Franklin)
8. West Indies (Edwards, Powell, Bradshaw, Bravo, Best)
9. Bangladesh (Mashrafe, Rasel, Rafique, Enamul, Shahadat)

Your thoughts?

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 1:47 AM GMT, by James90.

I would be nice to have a poll on this topic.

Anyway I will rank the teams in following order depending on bowling attacks

1. Asutralia
2. England
3. SA
4. NZ
5. Srilanka
6. Pakistan
7. India
8. Bangladesh
9. West Indies

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 11:26 AM GMT, by Miraz.

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 11:26 AM GMT, by Miraz.
Reason: spelling !

Donny
April 2, 2006, 07:47 AM
Originally posted by jayed
come on, harmison, was once, the highest ranked bowler in the world, higher than b.lee or bracken etc. ever was.

"was once" :-/ We're talking current attacks here.

jayed
April 2, 2006, 03:20 PM
no, donny, when u said harmi was overrated , it had an undercurrent of 'he's rubbish' from u,

but you're wrong, so i showed u stats of how good he can be.

ALSO, we have SIMON JONES! WAY BETTER THAN CRUMMY KASPA!

jayed
April 2, 2006, 03:22 PM
And u aussies have no bowling allrounder

bharat
April 2, 2006, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by Miraz
Originally posted by James90
1. Australia (McGrath, Lee, Warne, Clark, MacGill)
2. England (Harmison, Flintoff, Hoggard, Jones, Giles)
3. South Africa (Pollock, Ntini, Nel, Boje, Langeveldt)
4. Pakistan (Shoaib, Rana, Kaneria, Razzaq, Afridi)
5. India (Pathan, Sreesanth, Kumble, Harbhajan, Agarkar)
6. Sri Lanka (Vaas, Malinga, Maharoof, Muralitharan, Bandara)
7. New Zealand (Bond, Martin, Styris, Vettori, Franklin)
8. West Indies (Edwards, Powell, Bradshaw, Bravo, Best)
9. Bangladesh (Mashrafe, Rasel, Rafique, Enamul, Shahadat)

Your thoughts?

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 1:47 AM GMT, by James90.

I

1. Asutralia
2. England
3. SA
4. NZ
5. Srilanka
6. Pakistan
7. India
8. Bangladesh
9. West Indies

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 11:26 AM GMT, by Miraz.

Edited on, April 2, 2006, 11:26 AM GMT, by Miraz.
Reason: spelling !

Interesting the team(read India) which is 3rd in both ICC ODI and One Day ( only other country after Aus that is consitent in both the rankings..) and inchingly close to the second spot has the third worst Bowling attack ...

India's batting has to be real good to pull it up.I guess

al Furqaan
April 2, 2006, 04:01 PM
australia
england
south africa
india/new zealand
pakistan
sri lanka
west indies/bangladesh

Donny
April 2, 2006, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by jayed
no, donny, when u said harmi was overrated , it had an undercurrent of 'he's rubbish' from u,

but you're wrong, so i showed u stats of how good he can be.

ALSO, we have SIMON JONES! WAY BETTER THAN CRUMMY KASPA!

No undercurrent at all, jayed. I do think he's rubbish.

Stats ? Where are the stats ?

Kasper is only there because Pigeon is unavailable. I didn't include him in my assessment.

Donny
April 2, 2006, 09:39 PM
Stats, jayed ? I'll give you stats.

You mention that Harmison "was once, the highest ranked bowler in the world, higher than b.lee or bracken etc. ever was."

I don't know how Bracken comes into this as he's not a Test bowler. He's quite useful in ODIs but has only been used in Tests when McGrath was unavailable and, more recently, because Tait was injured.

So let's have a look at comparitive numbers for Harmison and Lee.

Test career. Lee: 51 Tests for 203 wickets @ 31.21 - 3.98 wickets per Test.
Harmison: 41 Test for 159 @ 29.02 - 3.87 wickets per Test.

Very similar. Lee slightly better wickets per Test and Harmy slightly better average.

As this topic is about current attacks, let's look at the last 10 Tests for these two. Lee: 48 wickets @ 25.43 - 4.8 wickets per Test. Harmy: 30 wickets @ 41.13 - 3 per Test.

Big difference.

Bowling to the same batsmen ? Last 5 Tests against Sth. Africa. Lee: 24 wickets @ 30.79 - 4.8 wickets per Test. Harmy: 9 @ 73.2 - 1.8 per Test.

In Australia, Harmy has played 5 Tests and returned 13 wickets @ 42.7 runs per wicket. 1/86 on what is considerered to be one of the best fast bowler's wickets on Earth, the WACA in Perth.

Need I say more ?

thebest
April 2, 2006, 09:47 PM
Donny,
I advised you earlier don't argue with Jayed. He is an arrogant pom. and if you have any opportunity to read sham's signature read it. You would understand actually what I mean. Harmi is good but he is weakest link in Eng pace attack
regarding top of ICC ranking. Ranking always show current status it does not consider whether u can do it day by day. One freak season and any Tom, jack could be top of ranking. But top of ranking does not guarantee you greatness. For example Inzi or Martyn was never topper but they are modern day legend while Flower was. He is a great batsman but not a legend.

Donny
April 2, 2006, 09:56 PM
Yes, good point about the ratings.

Harmison achieved his #1 ranking with very good performances against The Windies and New Zealand - at the time ranked 8th. and 7th. on the list of Test playing nations.

As he came up against better teams his rating steadily dropped.

Let me clarify something. Steve Harmison has the physique and natural talent to be the best but (it seems) he simply doesn't know how to apply it.

RazabQ
April 3, 2006, 01:33 AM
Bharat, when the India attack with the exception of Kumble starts bowling out oppostion abroad in batter-friendly pitches, then they would he ranked higher. Think about it this way, the only two quality bowlers in SL and India are Murali and Kumble, and since most would rate Murali higher, hence SL would be rated higher than India. Makes sense?

AsifTheManRahman
April 3, 2006, 01:58 AM
plus they have vaas, who i'd argue is better than any of the current indian quickies.

Xavier
April 3, 2006, 08:12 AM
I think you should have added Chris Gayle to Windies attack, as he's been one of the more effective bowlers for the Caribbeans in the last series.

Donny
April 3, 2006, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by jayed
And u aussies have no bowling allrounder

You might have noticed Australia has been dominant at #1 in Tests for quite some time and never had an allrounder.

The point is, a good team needs only 4 bowlers. We've really only used Steve & Mark Waugh, Darren Lehmann and very occasionally, Damien Martyn or Ponting maybe leading up to the new ball or just to give the others a short rest.

Recently, we've tried Shane Watson and Andrew Symonds at #6 to allow the use of 2 spinners on certain wickets. Neither could be considered as Test bowlers but they can do a job in the first hour of the new ball in helping to rotate the two quicks.

Hatebreed
April 3, 2006, 10:33 AM
Shahid Afridi is a great allrounder.. IMO, Pak team has the best bowling attack, but I'd replace Rana with Asif... India is probably the worst in terms of pace, if you take Kumble away who bowls faster than their pacers (lol)... but their batting is too good so they pull it off easily... I'd place BD's bowling in 9th place above India.. We'd bowl better if our batsmen performed at par.

bharat
April 3, 2006, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by RazabQ
Bharat, when the India attack with the exception of Kumble starts bowling out oppostion abroad in batter-friendly pitches, then they would he ranked higher. Think about it this way, the only two quality bowlers in SL and India are Murali and Kumble, and since most would rate Murali higher, hence SL would be rated higher than India. Makes sense?

Not sure ,If I got it this time too:-/

I guess the bowling attack is made up of a complete set of bowlers and not on individual brilliance , I fail to comprehend how India is doing (reasonable) good aginst all oppositions inspite of its (below mediocre attack ..occording to the above post).Remmeber India is the only country to have beaten the Aussies in Aussies (almost gave them a series scare , if not for some unlucky decisions) .

As far as SL and India is concerned , I am sorry but I thing your premise is flawed ...(remember GRE or GMAT :) ).

The recent ODI and Tests in India (good for both teams) with SL prooved that without a iota of doubt .

I would not say that India's attack is as good as Pak ,Auss but I would think India's attack is way ahead of SL both in terms of Tests and ODI's (remmebr the 2003 WC ,it qualifies for both of your parameters ..full of runs and outside India)

According to me India's bowling is very underarted ..as it does not have the (aging) stars as the other teams ..but the good thing abt India's attack is that it is young and has a pool to select from ...Best India had for ages

Cheers ...

bharat
April 3, 2006, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by Hatebreed
Shahid Afridi is a great allrounder.. IMO, Pak team has the best bowling attack, but I'd replace Rana with Asif... India is probably the worst in terms of pace, if you take Kumble away who bowls faster than their pacers (lol)... but their batting is too good so they pull it off easily... I'd place BD's bowling in 9th place above India.. We'd bowl better if our batsmen performed at par.
Oh ..Oh Hatebreed ...India has take 20 wickets to win Tests ...and the bowlers (including the pacers) do it ....
You dont go to Aussies and win with spinners

If you think BD is better than India , good for you !.

Tigers_eye
April 3, 2006, 10:48 AM
I am going to rate them out of 10: (make a change between Afridi and Asif)

1. Australia (McGrath, Lee, Warne, Clark, MacGill)
9,8,10,6,7 = 40
2. England (Harmison, Flintoff, Hoggard, Jones, Giles)
7,8,8,9,5 = 36
3. South Africa (Pollock, Ntini, Nel, Boje, Langeveldt)
8,8,8,7,5 = 36
4. Pakistan (Shoaib, Rana, Kaneria, Razzaq, Asif)
9,7,8,7,8 = 39
5. India (Pathan, Sreesanth, Kumble, Harbhajan, Agarkar)
8,7,8,7,5 = 35
6. Sri Lanka (Vaas, Malinga, Maharoof, Muralitharan, Bandara)
8,6,7,10,7 = 38
7. New Zealand (Bond, Martin, Styris, Vettori, Franklin)
8,7,7,9,7 = 38
8. West Indies (Edwards, Powell, Bradshaw, Bravo, Best)
7,6,8,6,7 = 34
9. Bangladesh (Mashrafe, Rasel, Rafique, Enamul, Shahadat)
7,7,7,7,5 = 33

So, My standing is:
Aus, Pak, SL/NZ, Eng/SA, Ind, WI, BD.
Pak's batting is weak so overall they are not there yet.
Eng, replace giles they will be fine.
India, yes, their batting line is very strong at home. Still don't know how they managed to finish 1-1 against England without Simon Jones.
I say NZ bowlers will trouble the SA'kans.

Edited on, April 3, 2006, 3:53 PM GMT, by Cats_eye.
Reason: wrong calculation

Donny
April 3, 2006, 11:21 AM
Interesting, Cats. :)

Probably the only one I'd question is Sth. Africa. I think Makhaya Ntini is head and shoulders above Pollock and Nel.

Mmm. I also think you've been generous to Bradshaw, rating him equal with Lee, Ntini, Bond, Vaas, Flintoff and Hoggard.

Carte Blanche
April 3, 2006, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by Donny
Interesting, Cats. :)

Probably the only one I'd question is Sth. Africa. I think Makhaya Ntini is head and shoulders above Pollock and Nel.

Mmm. I also think you've been generous to Bradshaw, rating him equal with Lee, Ntini, Bond, Vaas, Flintoff and Hoggard.

Being a longtime Pollock fan, while I hesitate to agree with you, I'm afraid I should accept the reality.

Agreed on Bradshaw there. The only thing intimidating about him is the name he shares with a WWE wrestler :D

Miraz
April 3, 2006, 11:33 AM
More logical approah from cats_eye.

I am in line with Donny and also feel that you over rated Vettori. Rafiq should get at least 8 considering his test record. In my opinion Maharoof is not better compared to Malinga.

Anyway its a good one :up:

Xavier
April 3, 2006, 12:01 PM
Interesting rating cats_eye... but why Simon Jones 9???

and why do you rate Enamul same level with Rafique?

Carte Blanche
April 3, 2006, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Xavier
Interesting rating cats_eye... but why Simon Jones 9???

and why do you rate Enamul same level with Rafique?

Simon Jones is unfairly underrated. He is one of the key factors in England's Ashes triumph. His mastery of the reverse swing is something England missed dearly in their test matches against both Pakistan and England. He also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world.

insideedge
April 3, 2006, 12:43 PM
Good analysis. The only flaw is, The Bangladeshi bowlers have managed to hide their class so well that none of the opposition team batsmen have an inkling that they are facing such a formidable bowling attack. Even number 11 batsmen of the opposition ( like Zaheer Khan) are not aware of this fact.

Xavier
April 3, 2006, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Originally posted by Xavier
Interesting rating cats_eye... but why Simon Jones 9???

and why do you rate Enamul same level with Rafique?

Simon Jones is unfairly underrated. He is one of the key factors in England's Ashes triumph. His mastery of the reverse swing is something England missed dearly in their test matches against both Pakistan and England. He also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world.

Thanks for clearing!

I checked BBC marks on the Ashes and S.jones actually had 9:

Simon Jones - 9: Suffered the heartbreak of injury ruling him out of the final Test after four magnificent matches in which the Welsh wizard was arguably England's best bowler.

Jones mastered the art of reverse swing to mesmerise the Australians, never more so than at Old Trafford and Trent Bridge and had a host of catches not been dropped off his bowling he would have snared more than 18 victims.

Bowling: 18 wickets at 21.00
Batting: 66 runs at 33.00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/ashes_2005/4237306.stm

jayed
April 3, 2006, 01:21 PM
donny,this thread said BOWLING attack, not 1day or test. so i have every right 2 include bracken.

and come on, how much does harmi get 2 bowl? the scene is dominated by flintoff and hoggie these days.

yes, harmison is expensive, but he does provide. lee has express pace on his side, tad 3-4 miles faster than harmison, yes. i admit,
but still, it takes some bowler to beat the likes of warne, murali, mgrath, to bcome 1.

and at the end of the day, it doesnt matter what ranked nation u r.
bd thrashed u aussies and u are nine rankings above them.
eng beat aussies, and u r higher.
and england wasnt exactly the best side in tests when they took on windies were they?

and tell me, how many teams can go 2 the caribean and beat the windies?

let alone whitewash.

its very hard.

Tigers_eye
April 3, 2006, 01:31 PM
thanks everyone for their feedback.
8 and above all are great bowlers. Ntini may be better than pollock but without pollock's pressure from the other end (consistant line and length) ponting, hayden would have broken Ntini's will to bowl against them. Like our Mash suffered in England. Taposh not abling to control from the other end eventually got to Mash.

Rafique, is a container; on the other hand Enam is an adventurer. he is not afraid to give the ball a little flight. he may get belted but he will get you the break through that you may need. Enam is still learning.

Without Vittori, NZ is no better than WI tests and ODIs.

Bradshaw is not with the class of 8, true. But he is tad bit better than Edwards. So a 7.5 may be? lol where lee would get 8.44. rounding up to 8 :)

Edited on, April 3, 2006, 6:31 PM GMT, by Cats_eye.

RazabQ
April 3, 2006, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Simon Jones ... also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world. Cricket isn't the only arena where Mr. Jones is apparently smooth ;);)

Yameen
April 3, 2006, 04:05 PM
if Mohammad Asif was included in the Pakistan line up at the start of the thread, I would say pakistan had the best bowling line up in the world at the moment, but australia as always are class...

bharat
April 3, 2006, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Yameen
if Mohammad Asif was included in the Pakistan line up at the start of the thread, I would say pakistan had the best bowling line up in the world at the moment, but australia as always are class...

This kid (Asif) will sure put the cricket world on fire ...another Akram in the making ...my guess would be he might over take Akram by the time he finishes ...

Carte Blanche
April 3, 2006, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by RazabQ
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Simon Jones ... also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world. Cricket isn't the only arena where Mr. Jones is apparently smooth ;);)

Errmm.. I think I am missing something. Did he pull off a Warney?

Huda
April 4, 2006, 01:04 AM
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Originally posted by RazabQ
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Simon Jones ... also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world. Cricket isn't the only arena where Mr. Jones is apparently smooth ;);)

Errmm.. I think I am missing something. Did he pull off a Warney?

lol he was voted the 9th sexiest amn on earth ;)

Donny
April 4, 2006, 05:44 AM
"lol he was voted the 9th sexiest amn on earth "

By who? The England cricket team? :floor:

Baundule
April 4, 2006, 08:07 AM
With a fit Shoaib and including Asif, Pakistan will have good competition with Australia, given McGrath is available.

jayed
April 4, 2006, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Donny
"lol he was voted the 9th sexiest amn on earth "

By who? The England cricket team? :floor:

donny, i doubt it was s.jones on no.9, it was hoggard, and no, not the eng cricket team, it was a reliable glamour poll from a famous mag.

and, mm. the eng cric team remark. or if u think FAT warne or WEASEL ponting, look better than jones in a girls point of view, well-thats up 2 u.
HOW CUD I 4GET THE GOLLUM GILLY? OR HAGRID FROM HP KASPA?

jayed
April 4, 2006, 03:23 PM
quote-
marshal comes 2 the crease-
warne goes 2 him-
"i've been waitin 2 yrs 2 humiliate u again"
marshall (hamish) replies-
"well, looks like u've spent it eating!"

Carte Blanche
April 4, 2006, 03:26 PM
Quote from Wiki:

In February 2006 Simon Jones was placed 9th in a poll of the world's sexiest men, voted for by readers of New Woman magazine. He was the highest placed sportsman in the poll.

That is quite a feat for a guy who hasn't been in the limelight too long.

RazabQ
April 4, 2006, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Originally posted by RazabQ
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Simon Jones ... also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world. Cricket isn't the only arena where Mr. Jones is apparently smooth ;);) Errmm.. I think I am missing something. Did he pull off a Warney? Actually yes. During the Ashes there was a story circulating that Jonesey was tomcatting around his then GF. His alleged pick up line was "how about some pringles and a pint" or something like that :)

James90
April 4, 2006, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by Carte Blanche
Simon Jones is unfairly underrated. He is one of the key factors in England's Ashes triumph. His mastery of the reverse swing is something England missed dearly in their test matches against both Pakistan and England. He also has one of the smoothest actions in the cricket world.
When did England play England? Not that I'm an expert on the subject but I can kind of understand the "sexiest man" polls. It's the chiselled features.

Carte Blanche
April 4, 2006, 08:07 PM
I meant to say India. Mea Culpa :)

insideedge
April 20, 2006, 11:19 PM
Any changes in the rankings ?

Darwin
April 21, 2006, 05:37 AM
Styris shouldnt be considered a bowler - more like Oram!

Darwin
April 21, 2006, 05:38 AM
Tapash Baisya should be up there!

insideedge
April 22, 2006, 10:47 AM
HOW THE WORLD'S BOWLERS RATE
(Runs conceded per wicket by each nation's bowlers in Test matches over the past five years.)
Australia <QM />27.7
Sri Lanka <QM />29.0
South Africa <QM />32.7
Pakistan <QM />33.5
England <QM />33.9
New Zealand <QM />34.9
India <QM />35.4
West Indies <QM />38.5
Zimbabwe <QM />45.1
Bangladesh <QM />51.8
SMH article (http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/deconstruction-of-a-drab-and-debilitating-double-ton/2006/04/21/1145344277750.html?page=2)

bharat
April 22, 2006, 05:50 PM
HOW THE WORLD'S BOWLERS RATE
(Runs conceded per wicket by each nation's bowlers in Test matches over the past five years.)
Australia <qm>27.7
Sri Lanka <qm>29.0
South Africa <qm>32.7
Pakistan <qm>33.5
England <qm>33.9
New Zealand <qm>34.9
India <qm>35.4
West Indies <qm>38.5
Zimbabwe <qm>45.1
Bangladesh <qm>51.8
SMH article (http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/deconstruction-of-a-drab-and-debilitating-double-ton/2006/04/21/1145344277750.html?page=2)

Hmm ..interesting .. a perfect case where stats dont tell the right story ...
SL bening the second best in terms of bowling in the last 5 years !! To think of it SL has been struggling in the last 5 years ..donnoo:confused:
</qm></qm></qm></qm></qm></qm></qm></qm></qm></qm>

Tigers_eye
April 24, 2006, 08:57 AM
Both India and Pakistani Bowlers had to live through the two "joke tests" at pakistan. Those stats would skew any bowling attack towards a downward spiral even if that is 5 year stat :).

bharat
April 24, 2006, 10:26 AM
Both India and Pakistani Bowlers had to live through the two "joke tests" at pakistan. Those stats would skew any bowling attack towards a downward spiral even if that is 5 year stat :).

Man , sure you do have "Cat eyes" ..I never thought of this :up: