The worst England bowling attack since 1993? Or....ever?

Over the last 16 years, even though England have had quite a few periods when they have been complete pap, they've at least always had 1 bowler who was genuinely world class on his day- Darren Gough, Angus Fraser, Andrew Caddick, Andrew Flintoff....Even Dominic Cork for a 2 year period from 95-97. Dean Headley wasn't the worst either.

Now you can look at the current England attack and say that not one of them is world class. Even Flintoff's bowling, as wholehearted and stirring as it is (when he's fit) is starting to be quietly considered over rated in some parts. England's reserve pacemen are in the process of being hammered all around New Zealand. New Zealand FFS.

Are England's current fast bowling stocks the worst they've ever been in over 120 years of test cricket?

I agree with what you're saying between the lines. We need Kabir Ali.

Henry wrote:

Are England's current fast bowling stocks the worst they've ever been in over 120 years of test cricket?

The "attack" that took the field in the last test was the worst in my 27-year memory.

Jimmy and SiBo will do better in England. We might even get SiJo back for a few tests.

Is Kevin Shine still the head bowling coach at the Academy? Or is that now Ottis Gibson's part time job?

Doesn't matter, they are both carp. Bring back White Lightning.

Or better yet, have no bowling coach at all. Sure, maybe the majority of bowlers will have stuffed back by the age of 31, but at least their NATURAL ACTIONS will allow them to SWING the ball. All of this modern front on action crap is complete bullshit.

We had some pretty pathetic attacks in the late 80's, so I'd suggest we've probably had worse but not by that much. I'd expect there were a few Tests (WI 88? Aus 89?) where we had a full line-up of bowlers none of whom managed 100 Test wickets in their career.

Worst since 89.

I'd like to think we're not seriously thinking of continuing with Ohmygod Khan.

I'd like to think we had some better alternatives... does seem ridiculous to pick someone like him for one-day cricket though. If you haven't got decent strike bowlers you need "boring bowlers" who can get you 10-0-40-0 in JAMODI or 4-0-25-0 in T20.

In terms of Tests you have to have at least one bowler with genuine pace, but you might as well play someone young with potential. Someone who's 28 and not up to it is never going to be.

As much as I'd like to agree...I just don't. The first reason is that they increasingly bowl on absolute whores of pitches- almost every bowling attack is getting carted regularly these days. Flintoff isn't a messiah but he's as good as England fast bowlers have come in the past 20 odd years. Jimmikins and Sidebottom can be really quite splendid in the right conditions. Broad could still become excellent and Swann and Panesar compare favourably with every other England spinner of the last 20 odd years (which doesn't say a lot admittedly). Of course if you take Flintoff out, injure Sidebottom and Jimmikins has a bad day the bowling is purest w*nk.

I'd say the 2003 tour to Australia vintage was possibly the worst ever when literally every other bowler got injured and a half-cut Craig White was the spearhead, Harmison was as green as anything and Richard Dawson(!!!) was the spinner.

beamer wrote:I'd expect there were a few Tests (WI 88? Aus 89?) where we had a full line-up of bowlers none of whom managed 100 Test wickets in their career.

No, Embers, Dilley, DeFreitas and Fraser all cleared 100.

Rob I wrote:

beamer wrote:I'd expect there were a few Tests (WI 88? Aus 89?) where we had a full line-up of bowlers none of whom managed 100 Test wickets in their career.

No, Embers, Dilley, DeFreitas and Fraser all cleared 100.

Is it not possible to find a match around that time in which none of those played? Given the random selection policy, rebel SA tours etc. of that era I'd be quite surprised if there wasn't...

Brett Lee wants to play in the Ashes. I'm sure his clearance could be expedited if enough people asked...

beamer wrote:

Rob I wrote:

beamer wrote:I'd expect there were a few Tests (WI 88? Aus 89?) where we had a full line-up of bowlers none of whom managed 100 Test wickets in their career.

No, Embers, Dilley, DeFreitas and Fraser all cleared 100.

Is it not possible to find a match around that time in which none of those played? Given the random selection policy, rebel SA tours etc. of that era I'd be quite surprised if there wasn't...

Small, Igglesden, Pringle, Capel and Cook played the 6th test in 89

Glad was good!

Well, he wasn't at all bad.

Apart from his neck.

G.Wood wrote:

Small, Igglesden, Pringle, Capel and Cook played the 6th test in 89

Ha, I was there. My first 'live' test as it were.

Was like taking candy from a baby.

John Stephenson got the nod ahead of Nasser Hussain for that game if I recall...

Nigglesden, his mates called him.

PeterCS wrote:Glad was good!

Well, he wasn't at all bad.

Apart from his neck.

He had a neck?

Even my wife asked "who's matey no-neck?" the first time she saw him.

Good times.

Eric Air Emu wrote:Flintoff isn't a messiah but he's as good as England fast bowlers have come in the past 20 odd years.

Hmm, he's really only had three good years in the ten he's played. 1998-2002 and 2006-date he's been a stock bowler. I'm not sure why he doesn't run through sides as he seems to have all the tools - pace, accuracy, reverse swing. Maybe he bowls half a yard too short.

Eric Air Emu wrote:
I'd say the 2003 tour to Australia vintage was possibly the worst ever when literally every other bowler got injured and a half-cut Craig White was the spearhead, Harmison was as green as anything and Richard Dawson(!!!) was the spinner.

5-80 odd at Perth and 80 odd with the bat? First choice allrounder for the 2003 WC ahead of Flintoff, despite nasty rib injury. Ahhh Chalky

Daws got Damien Martyn out at Sydney with a beaut. Possibly the only good ball he bowled all tour. And he couldn't do it alone. Stewart took a grand catch off an inside edge (I think. Memory dims somewhat here on the exact nature of it)

Eric Air Emu wrote:As much as I'd like to agree...I just don't. The first reason is that they increasingly bowl on absolute whores of pitches- almost every bowling attack is getting carted regularly these days. Flintoff isn't a messiah but he's as good as England fast bowlers have come in the past 20 odd years. Jimmikins and Sidebottom can be really quite splendid in the right conditions. Broad could still become excellent and Swann and Panesar compare favourably with every other England spinner of the last 20 odd years (which doesn't say a lot admittedly). Of course if you take Flintoff out, injure Sidebottom and Jimmikins has a bad day the bowling is purest w*nk.

That would be my take on it.

I don't think Eng will bowl that badly this summer.

Rob I wrote:

Eric Air Emu wrote:Flintoff isn't a messiah but he's as good as England fast bowlers have come in the past 20 odd years.

Hmm, he's really only had three good years in the ten he's played. 1998-2002 and 2006-date he's been a stock bowler. I'm not sure why he doesn't run through sides as he seems to have all the tools - pace, accuracy, reverse swing. Maybe he bowls half a yard too short.

But it's about the competition- Gough, Caddick, Hoggard, Cork & Fraser were at times either injury stricken, in and out of the side and in and out of form. Freddy's already got more wickets than the latter two and given two years of bowling should pip the others. Were any of the above ever consistently good for more than 3 years at a time? Also in his spasmodic early career he was played as a batting all-rounder.

Yorkie Jill wrote:

Eric Air Emu wrote:
I'd say the 2003 tour to Australia vintage was possibly the worst ever when literally every other bowler got injured and a half-cut Craig White was the spearhead, Harmison was as green as anything and Richard Dawson(!!!) was the spinner.

5-80 odd at Perth and 80 odd with the bat? First choice allrounder for the 2003 WC ahead of Flintoff, despite nasty rib injury. Ahhh Chalky

Daws got Damien Martyn out at Sydney with a beaut. Possibly the only good ball he bowled all tour. And he couldn't do it alone. Stewart took a grand catch off an inside edge (I think. Memory dims somewhat here on the exact nature of it)

I though he had him caught at short-leg and was so sure I looked it up on cricinfo.... to find it was indeed Stewart who took the catch.

For a stroll down memory lane:

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/ENG_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/ENG_AUS_T5_02-06JAN2003.html

Highlight for me was Crawley's 140 odd ball 35 not out. Proper cricket.

Oh and Steve Waugh's ton in that match was scored mainly off the bowling of Richard Dawson. Why people got so excited about the spectacle of a has-been flogging the bowling of an impotent smurf is beyond me.