Best fast bowler from your country.

Donaldo

Caf Vigilante
Joined
May 19, 2003
Messages
18,448
Location
Goes it so.
Supports
Arsenal
Ever.

I suppose Indians aren't really spoilt for choice and Kapil Dev seems the only logical choice with most of the others only flattering to deceive.Amar Singh in the 1930's was supposed to be very good but since there are hardly any video evidences to support the claim, thats gone as well.Ramakant Desai, Abid Ali....very little impact on the international scene.The 1980's medium pacers were effective but hardly world class....Srinath in the 90's is probably second IMO.Had to bowl on unresponsive pitches and regularly clocked around 140 kph at one time.Agarkar, Zaheer et al are hardly greats.

New Zealand-Hadlee

Sri Lanka-Vaas.

Pakistan-Wasim, Imran, Waqar.

The Aussies-Spoilt for choice...Lillee, Thomson, Lindwall, Davidson, McGrath, Massie off the top of my head although Massie had his moments and wasn't really an alltime great...

Safrica-Donald, no idea about the teams before apartheid, Pollock.

WI-Too many....Hall, Griffith, Roberts, Holding, Marshall, Garner, Ambrose, Walsh...

England-Not really sure...Larwood, Snow, Botham, Fraser?, Trueman, Tyson, Bedser
 
Mashrafe Mortaza.

If Malinga's career lasts 5 more years before he snaps in half, he could usurp Vaas.
 
I don't think so. Vaas has been ridiculously consistent.

Wasim Akram is the best fast bowler I've seen.
 
Malinga's a threat on any surface and he already has 71 wickets at a strike rate of 50. There's no reason why he can't take 300 test wickets provided he can squeeze them in before he snaps in half.
 
India's never had a fast bowler. Kapil was fast medium at best. As for the WI's, Griffiths was medium pace. . .and Fraser, Bedser and Snow for England weren't proper fast bowlers either. . just medium pacers and all. Oh and the same goes for Vaas and probably McGrath too. That said, Hadlee was only fast medium.

Sorry, I'm just being a pedantic cnut.
 
Everyone knows that a 'fast bowler' is someone who isn't a spinner and has a run up longer than 8 paces.
 
As luck would have it I wasn't alive when New Zealand boasted the best fast bowler of his time in Hadlee. :( From what I've heard Hadlee was very quick when he was young but quite erratic however as his body aged he shortened his run up and became very accurate. His record of 400 odd test wickets speaks for itself and it's even more amazing when you think of our lowly test status at the time, it would be equivalent to Bangladesh producing a test bowler that goes on to get 400 test wickets over the next ten years.

I can however proudly say that I have watched the whole career of our second best pacy Shane Bond and what a bowler he is :drool: Bond is actually a late bloomer on the international scene (he was in the police up until he was about 25) however I remember vividly when he burst on the scene against Australia in Melbourne when he picked up 3 wickets. He too was quite erratic in his early years but had oodles of pace. Two serious injuries has kept him on the sidelines for the best part of two years and he has made it clear if he has another he will seriously consider retirement. He's remodelled his action and doesn't bowl as fast as he used to (however his inswinging yorkers at 145km is not slow by anymeans :D ), but for the pace he has lost he has gained ten fold in accuracy and intelligence, and he is now arguably the best pace bowler in the world in terms of pace and accuracy. If Bond had been discovered earlier and wasn't injury prone he may well be considered better than Hadlee.
 
I'm amazed at how fast Bond bowls considering the injury troubles he's had.
 
Wonder Pigeon said:
Whats a bowler?

I'm going for Jason mcAteer anyway.
Click to expand...

Ahh, now he could have been a fast bowler. Solid build, well co-ordinated and utterly fearless.

There was only one thing Jason McAteer was scared of and that's dandruff.
 
Melbourne Red said:
I'm amazed at how fast Bond bowls considering the injury troubles he's had.
Click to expand...

He probaly doesn't bowl as quick as you think, At the moment he bowls 135-142 on a regular basis and occasionally bowls 145. His full length deliveries tint his real speed somewhat. However I agree that he still bowls very quickly for someone who has spent two years injured.
 
Kiwi_fan said:
He probaly doesn't bowl as quick as you think, At the moment he bowls 135-142 on a regular basis and occasionally bowls 145. His full length deliveries tint his real speed somewhat. However I agree that he still bowls very quickly for someone who has spent two years injured.
Click to expand...
He was bowling at mid-150's before his injuries. A shame about the lost of pace but it has somewhat improved his overall bowling.
 
Justin said:
He was bowling at mid-150's before his injuries. A shame about the lost of pace but it has somewhat improved his overall bowling.
Click to expand...

I agree, he could bowl very quick but quite inconsistent before his injuries. In my opinion those injuries made him a better bowler because he is much more smarter and more accurate than before. He may not pick up 5 wicket bags as regularly anymore but it is a real joy to see him grab a few wickets and go for less than 20 off his ten overs.
 
Kiwi_fan said:
As luck would have it I wasn't alive when New Zealand boasted the best fast bowler of his time in Hadlee. :( From what I've heard Hadlee was very quick when he was young but quite erratic however as his body aged he shortened his run up and became very accurate. His record of 400 odd test wickets speaks for itself
Click to expand...

He was never lightening('very') quick, even as a youngster. His main attribute was his accuracy and his ability to swing the ball both ways. His outswinger was brilliant.
 
Spoony said:
India's never had a fast bowler. Kapil was fast medium at best. As for the WI's, Griffiths was medium pace. . .and Fraser, Bedser and Snow for England weren't proper fast bowlers either. . just medium pacers and all. Oh and the same goes for Vaas and probably McGrath too. That said, Hadlee was only fast medium.

Sorry, I'm just being a pedantic cnut.
Click to expand...

You're not pedantic :)

SA had a few pre-apartheid - Garth Le Roux, Clive Rice,
post aparthei - Fanie de Villiers was just awesome, but came on the scene too late in his career.
 
Larwood has legendary status...and yes I know Fraser doesn't deserve to be there.You lot are just short of some quality recently.

Forgot Statham.
 
Bloxy said:
You're not pedantic :)

SA had a few pre-apartheid - Garth Le Roux, Clive Rice,
post aparthei - Fanie de Villiers was just awesome, but came on the scene too late in his career.
Click to expand...


Rice was medium/slow.

Only SA fast bowler of note was Allan Donald.

Does Pollock count as fast?
 
Pollock used to be very fast, dunno why he slowed down. I agree that De Villers was really good as well, didn't get enough time to show his talent
 
Waqar Younis, 373 wickets at a strike rate of 43. Even Sydney Barnes only had a strike rate 2 balls better. Lillee's was 52, McGrath's 51, and Akram's 54.
 
Bloxy said:
You're not pedantic :)

SA had a few pre-apartheid - Garth Le Roux, Clive Rice,
post aparthei - Fanie de Villiers was just awesome, but came on the scene too late in his career.
Click to expand...

Hehe.
 
Did I not already establish that for the purposes of this debate, medium-fast and fast are the same fecking thing?

Gimps.
 
Melbourne Red said:
Waqar Younis, 373 wickets at a strike rate of 43. Even Sydney Barnes only had a strike rate 2 balls better. Lillee's was 52, McGrath's 51, and Akram's 54.
Click to expand...

I think Younis had a S/R of 36 in his prime, before his second injury that is. Barnes, he was an all rounder wasn't he? Always seems to get a mention by historians.

Another English quicky: Frank Tyson, from Farnworth of all places. Bradman reckons he's the fastest bowler he's ever faced. Faster than the likes of Larwood and Trueman for sure.
 
Apparently there was a guy in the 1920s who was the fastest ever, but had quite limited control over where it was going

He once took 9 wickets in an innings, and only missed out on the 10 because the last batsman locked himself in the loo and wouldn't come out
 
Plechazunga said:
Apparently there was a guy in the 1920s who was the fastest ever, but had quite limited control over where it was going
Click to expand...

I doubt it. As for measuring speeds back in the old days, they actually used to measure the speed from time the ball was released to when it passed over the stumps. Thesedays, it's from release to when it pitches. Akhtar, Thommo, Holding, Waqar, Imran, Lee and possibly Croft are probably the fastest bowlers ever(during their peak).
 
What about Brett Lee ? Not the best but I always love watching him

For us I think u can`t really go past Lillee and Thompson , they where awesome in the day

I`m still a big Merv Hughes fan also , The tache really did it for me
 
AussieJim said:
What about Brett Lee ? Not the best but I always love watching him

For us I think u can`t really go past Lillee and Thompson , they where awesome in the day

I`m still a big Merv Hughes fan also , The tache really did it for me
Click to expand...

Lee on his day scares me shitless. More so than any other of your bowlers. However he isn't as good after his second spell and can be very expensive. I still rate him highly though.
 
Spoony said:
I doubt it. As for measuring speeds back in the old days, they actually used to measure the speed from time the ball was released to when it passed over the stumps. Thesedays, it's from release to when it pitches. Akhtar, Thommo, Holding, Waqar, Imran, Lee and possibly Croft are probably the fastest bowlers ever(during their peak).
Click to expand...

Spoony said:
Patterson too.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think Patterson was quicker than any of the other lot

Anyway, never heard of anyone hiding in the toilets from Brett Lee.
 
Plechazunga said:
Yeah I think Patterson was quicker than any of the other lot

Anyway, never heard of anyone hiding in the toilets from Brett Lee.
Click to expand...

Lee could bowl in the mid to late 90's a couple of years ago. Not very far off Akhtar's pace(who I think is box office, when he can be arsed)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.