Who is the world's best fast bowler?

So, according to this forum Steyn is a "one-year wonder" or a "minnow-basher", Australia can't get close to defending a 400+ target with only Johnson (who nobody seems to rate) taking wickets, and there's a thread discussing the failings of the England attack. So who exactly is the best Test fast bowler around at the moment (taking that to mean anyone who isn't a spinner)? Any serious candidates, or are they all about as mediocre as each other?

There's hardly a stand out is there?

I'll reserve judgement on Steyn until after the series is over.

Flintoff or Ishant for me.

Ignore the stats. These 2 guys consistently look the most threatening pacemen going around.

Flintoff for me.

Ishant has just started. Let him face some adversaties.

Flintoff reverses it at 90 mph and is hard to hit but he doesn't get many batsmen out. He only has two michelles in 75 tests.

Rob I wrote:Flintoff reverses it at 90 mph and is hard to hit but he doesn't get many batsmen out. He only has two michelles in 75 tests.

Yep. If you were looking to build the perfect attack, he'd be the ideal first change bowler - but you wouldn't want someone with only 2 5-fers leading your attack.

I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred. He's by far England's best seamer. How many other teams bowl their leading fast bowler first change?

He's always having to come on and repair the damage, rather than being given the opportunity to shape the game.

Martin Saggers?

Henry wrote:I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred. He's by far England's best seamer. How many other teams bowl their leading fast bowler first change?

He's always having to come on and repair the damage, rather than being given the opportunity to shape the game.

It is strange, he's streets ahead of any of our other bowlers.

Henry wrote:I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred.

Sure, and it would let Harami (as Pakpassion call him ) come on 1st change, bowling long bruising spells under less pressure.

Rob I wrote:

Henry wrote:I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred.

Sure, and it would let Harami (as Pakpassion call him ) come on 1st change, bowling long bruising spells under less pressure.

Though if you're having to 'hide' a player under less pressure it's probably not worth picking them in the first place.

Harami sounds strangely like a kamikaze pilot.

If Harmi ever became grouse, would it be a case of Harmison Ptarmigan?

theres no stand out but a good bunch atm (mostly up and comers):

flintoff
ishant
zaheer
johnson
steyn
morkel
ntini
lee
clark
gul

flintoff is probably the most consistent

vilkrang wrote:

Henry wrote:I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred. He's by far England's best seamer. How many other teams bowl their leading fast bowler first change?

He's always having to come on and repair the damage, rather than being given the opportunity to shape the game.

It is strange, he's streets ahead of any of our other bowlers.

I guess he's never really been a new ball bowler throughout his career. He's more of an impact bowler, used in short bursts when they need a wicket (except when the likes of Jimmy and Harmi are serving up pies in which case he has to bowl for longer spells). Partly down to his injuries I guess but also his ability to get reverse swing with the old ball.

The position of "world's best fast bowler" is vacant due to a lack of quality.

I know that technically someone has to be the best in the world, but whoever it is they sure as hell aren't on the same level as previous holders of the title.

"World's best fast bowler"...well thats NOT saying much these days

My pick
Dale Steyn

Ishant
Munaf
Sreesanth

best fast bowlers IMO.

PeterCS wrote:If Harmi ever became grouse, would it be a case of Harmison Ptarmigan?

Genetic engineer wanted for English test cricket team ... project: 'Turkey to grouse'

Hass wrote:The position of "world's best fast bowler" is vacant due to a lack of quality.

I know that technically someone has to be the best in the world, but whoever it is they sure as hell aren't on the same level as previous holders of the title.

Aye - when Zaheer Khan has claims you know it is less than a golden era for quicks.

Henry wrote:I've long wondered why England don't open the bowling with Fred. He's by far England's best seamer. How many other teams bowl their leading fast bowler first change?

He's always having to come on and repair the damage, rather than being given the opportunity to shape the game.

I think he opened the bowling in India the tour before last.

But then England started to find some reverse swing in English conditions at around the 16 over mark and Flintoff - being the best exponent of the art in the side whose knees aren't made of glass - seemed the ideal bloke to come on fresh and start hooping it from the off.

Been first-change pretty much ever since.

It is weird though. He doesn't even open in ODIs - just gets brought on when a batting side is getting away and the skipper needs to shut them up. Why he wouldn't want to shut them up BEFORE they got away is anyone's guess. That would be proactive thinking - not something England are particularly prone to.

Zaheer has a large claim, Flintoff too.

Amid all the hype about Seaman Steyn and Morkel from Orkel before and during the last Test, the guy that did the most damage, and has a 300+ wicket haul behind him, was Ntini.

Fred Nerk wrote:Amid all the hype about Seaman Steyn and Morkel from Orkel before and during the last Test, the guy that did the most damage, and has a 300+ wicket haul behind him, was Ntini.

TBH, I'd have pushed for one of him and Lee were they not to have had shite series before this one.

Watching Tiny and the others was classic 'age and guile' v 'youth and a bad haircut' stuff.

Lee might be the world's best fast bowler today but nowhere near it tomorrow. His lack of consistency alone makes you think 'somewhere there has to be somebody better'. He's held his rating despite bouts of mediocrity because he hasn't missed much through injury lately, and because logically if he's good some of the time he's better than a whole lot of other blokes who are good practically none of the time.

Incisdentally, I thought he bowled OK without much luck in Perth, so it wasn't near his worst ever effort, and he was a MOM candidate just one Test ago.