Cheapening the 300 club

Henry wrote:Steyn must be close. I mean come on. We always go on about how pitches around the world are so batsman freindly these days, and yet here's a guy with an average in the low 20's and a strike rate in the mid 40's, and he's played close to 50 tests. He has to at least be considered as a great bowler, considering the times.

Yeah, he's got a decent chance of going down as a great bowler if he keeps it up over the next few years. It was the overall quality of the list I was referring to. A fair number of them have averages in the mid 30s or higher, and it's not as if they are youngsters really.

Ajantha Mendis will probably rise up the list in the next 4-5 years. then there's Broad, if he can become more consistent. It's hard to pick potential great bowlers, compared to potential great batsmen. Guys like Lara, Tendulkar, and Ponting.....From the moment they started, you knew that they were something special. But in regards to bowlers, someone like Warne was written off as a fat slob early on, and Glenn Mcgrath was considered an honest trier until he had played around 20 tests.

Imo, current young bowlers with the potential to be great- Steyn, Ishant, Broad, Mendis, Aamir. Time will tell........

Hopefully some of these will step up over the next few years, the game needs it. The rankings list, while open to debate, does at least offer a snapshot of the current state of the game - over the last few years the top 10 bowlers has just looked more and more ordinary every time another legend retires.

He's done half decent against all countries, he's one of NZ's best players and once he retires he'll be up there with Crowe, Hadlee and Fleming; as one of NZ's Greatest Test players.

Hadlee

........daylight....................more daylight........

Crowe

........daylight...........


Fleming, Vettori

In the context of things Vettori is a fine, fine cricketer. He's statistically been New Zealand's best batsman since 2005, and he's clearly their best bowler, until Bond comes back at least.

I think Vettori's statistics accurately reflect his quality as a cricketer- Good, but not great. Probably on a par with Chris Cairns, and dare one say it, Andrew Flintoff.

I'm sure he's a splendid player- but I'm still thinking Ashley Giles if he was born in NZ.

spangler wrote:Australians would give a Castlemaine XXXX for Vaniel Dettori at the moment.

Especially if they could rewind and play him on that Oval pitch...
He'd even add some backbone to the batting.

Farking word!!

I agree with Spangler, any sooking Aussie must realise Daniel Vettori is a very talented player.


I know if I went to the Sub-continent and I had the option of taking Swannyyyyy and Harry Potter, I'd be all for it.

skully wrote:Well, I say well done to Harry. Single handedly carried the Sheep on his back since he was 18.

Which is somewhat of a deviation from the normal NZ way of 'carrying' a sheep.

Rob I wrote:

He's done half decent against all countries, he's one of NZ's best players and once he retires he'll be up there with Crowe, Hadlee and Fleming; as one of NZ's Greatest Test players.

Hadlee

........daylight....................more daylight........

Crowe

........daylight...........


Fleming, Vettori

That says it fairly succinctly.

spangler wrote:Australians would give a Castlemaine XXXX for Vaniel Dettori at the moment.

Especially if they could rewind and play him on that Oval pitch...
He'd even add some backbone to the batting.

True enough, but hardly a measure of quality.

We would take Eddie Hemmings at the moment

XXXX.

For the benefit of those outside Australia, it's spelled that way because Queenslanders are too dumb to spell 'beer'. And because the rest of Australia wouldn't ever call it beer.

Zat wrote:

skully wrote:Well, I say well done to Harry. Single handedly carried the Sheep on his back since he was 18.

Which is somewhat of a deviation from the normal NZ way of 'carrying' a sheep.

Rob I wrote:

He's done half decent against all countries, he's one of NZ's best players and once he retires he'll be up there with Crowe, Hadlee and Fleming; as one of NZ's Greatest Test players.

Hadlee

........daylight....................more daylight........

Crowe

........daylight...........


Fleming, Vettori

That says it fairly succinctly.

Surely Glenn Turner would be in there beside Vettori.

And for mine Fleming is back in the pack. A 40 average in his era was mediocre and his reputation was enhanced because of some media driven propaganda that he was a great captain.

Aye - Chris Cairns >>>>>> Fleming

Ewan Chatfield was at worst on par

vettori has been a great servant of the modern game ... kudos to him

G.Wood wrote:

Zat wrote:

skully wrote:Well, I say well done to Harry. Single handedly carried the Sheep on his back since he was 18.

Which is somewhat of a deviation from the normal NZ way of 'carrying' a sheep.

Rob I wrote:

He's done half decent against all countries, he's one of NZ's best players and once he retires he'll be up there with Crowe, Hadlee and Fleming; as one of NZ's Greatest Test players.

Hadlee

........daylight....................more daylight........

Crowe

........daylight...........


Fleming, Vettori

That says it fairly succinctly.

Surely Glenn Turner would be in there beside Vettori.

And for mine Fleming is back in the pack. A 40 average in his era was mediocre and his reputation was enhanced because of some media driven propaganda that he was a great captain.

Fleming had to play a lot of his cricket on juiced up Kiwi pitches, though.

and he averaged <34 on them

holcs wrote:

spangler wrote:Australians would give a Castlemaine XXXX for Vaniel Dettori at the moment.

Especially if they could rewind and play him on that Oval pitch...
He'd even add some backbone to the batting.

Farking word!!

Aye, damn straight.

Henry wrote:Steyn must be close. I mean come on. We always go on about how pitches around the world are so batsman freindly these days, and yet here's a guy with an average in the low 20's and a strike rate in the mid 40's, and he's played close to 50 tests. He has to at least be considered as a great bowler, considering the times.

26 is close to 50?

What's the problem - any club with Brett Lee in it can't be 'cheaped'.

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:Steyn must be close. I mean come on. We always go on about how pitches around the world are so batsman freindly these days, and yet here's a guy with an average in the low 20's and a strike rate in the mid 40's, and he's played close to 50 tests. He has to at least be considered as a great bowler, considering the times.

26 is close to 50?

It is if you're rounding to the nearest 50.

beamer wrote:

Batman wrote:Sad part is, we don't have enough bowlers right we can bank on to get past even 300 wickets these days. Barring Steyn and Zaheer when they get fully fit, there aren't too many out there who atm look like they will play that consistantly well and beyond.

Highest wicket-takers among active players:

Murali 777 (age 37)
Ntini 388 (32)
Harbhajan 330 (29)
Lee 310 (32)
Vettori 300 (30)
Kallis 258 (33)
Kaneria 232 (28)
Harmison 226 (30)
Zaheer 210 (30)

Recently retired we have Vaas (355) and Flintoff (226). Most of those on the above list are getting close to the end of their careers, it's going to be a while before we see much movement at the top end of the Test wickets list.

beamer wrote:Going down a bit further:

Steyn 170 (26)
Martin 164 (34)
Anderson 140 (27)
Panesar 126 (27)
Edwards 122 (27)
Johnson 114 (27)

As far as I can tell that's ALL the currently active Test bowlers with over 100 wickets to their name. Not exactly a list of greats or even potential greats is it?

Exactly what I meant. Barring the people who have broken past the 300 mark, the rest either are on the verge of early retirements or breaking down [Flintoff for example] or have a long way to go before they can be considered worthy. A few are not even making their national sides regularly as they aren't good enough [e.g. Panesar, Kaneria]. The only people who look certain to be in their sides once free of injuries and likely to get in to 300-400 mark look like Zaheer and Steyn.

Henry wrote:In the context of things Vettori is a fine, fine cricketer. He's statistically been New Zealand's best batsman since 2005, and he's clearly their best bowler, until Bond comes back at least. I think Vettori's statistics accurately reflect his quality as a cricketer- Good, but not great. Probably on a par with Chris Cairns, and dare one say it, Andrew Flintoff.

Vettori has had to carry the load all on his own. Snoozers have been without a dependable bowling attack, especially good fast bowlers for a while now and Danny boy has had to bowl to contain a lot more than he would have liked, holding one end up to the best of his ability. I am sure he would have had more success if he had one good reliable fast bowler to share his workload. Nevertheless he is in the top 10 in the best all-rounders list currently [I think he is at 8] statistically and stands a realistic chance of getting past Hadlee and Imran where the number of runs and wickets are concerned [barring injury or shortened career]. His average and strike rate as a bowler may or may not get more better, but he will still get past some of the greats in terms of runs scored and wickets taken. That would be most interesting.

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:Steyn must be close. I mean come on. We always go on about how pitches around the world are so batsman freindly these days, and yet here's a guy with an average in the low 20's and a strike rate in the mid 40's, and he's played close to 50 tests. He has to at least be considered as a great bowler, considering the times.

26 is close to 50?

its 33 actually. 26 is his age

well done to the both of you

I think Siddle is easily a 300 candidate barring injury.

MJ should get there too.

I think Hilfenhaus will end up having a better career than both Johnson and Siddle. He seems to have the soundest head on his shoulders, and he's also the least injury prone of the three.

Johnson seems like the kind of guy who could have a mental meltdown and retire in 2-3 years time.