Brett Lee vs Shane Bond: who is the better bowler?

[Sartaj]

who among these two greats do you think is the better bowler?
its a bit easy to compare them as both are similar type of bowlers who swing the ball at very high pace.
while lee is about 5 kmph quicker than bond,bond swings the ball slightly more than lee(when fit ofcourse)
so,it must be a very interesting contest.
let me know your opinions and the reasons as well.

 

[jazz]

who among these two greats do you think is the better bowler?
its a bit easy to compare them as both are similar type of bowlers who swing the ball at very high pace.
while lee is about 5 kmph quicker than bond,bond swings the ball slightly more than lee(when fit ofcourse)
so,it must be a very interesting contest.
let me know your opinions and the reasons as well.

Brett Lee is the better bowler. Bond hasn’t played international cricket for over a year

But in their prime Bond was the better bowler with his lethal in swinging Yorkers, but both bowlers look like there best years have gone.

 

[Sartaj]

that remains to be seen when bond returns soon.

 

[Howsie]

I wouldn't expect too much from Bond when he comes back, but in his prime Shane Bond was the better bowler. Bond had a ODI average of 19, Lee's is around 30.

 

[King Cricket]

When they were at their prime, Bond and Lee, both were equal. I can't say whose the better bowler between these two, - as in my eyes, both were/are equally lethal, dangerous, talented and sexy.

 

[mattfb]

Yep, when Bond and Lee were in their prime they were both very fearful. I don't think anyone would want to face them at their best. But the fact that Lee could stay at his peak for longer (arguably) and could stay uninjured more often really gives him that extra edge. No point having your strike bowler sitting on his ass for half the year.

and sexy.

oh my. :o

 

[Raj_Aryan]

When they were at their prime, Bond and Lee, both were equal. I can't say whose the better bowler between these two, - as in my eyes, both were/are equally lethal, dangerous, talented and sexy.

Yes,they both are great bowlers...no doubt; Lee has more experience certainly,but i personally feel that Lee is just marginal ahead...

 

[King Cricket]

I wouldn't expect too much from Bond when he comes back, but in his prime Shane Bond was the better bowler. Bond had a ODI average of 19, Lee's is around 30.

Compare Bond at his prime with Lee at his prime. You'll find no difference. I still remember those "Lee"ly years, that pace, those balls...! Lee's avg is around 30 because his form has heavily detoriated in the recent years, whereas Bond played ODI cricket when he was at his prime and made a temporary stop when he was at his prime But Lee is a different case.

 

[Howsie]

When they were at their prime, Bond and Lee, both were equal. I can't say whose the better bowler between these two, - as in my eyes, both were/are equally lethal, dangerous, talented and sexy.

The thing is Lee played for a lot longer and was really only world class for about 18 months.

Howsie added 2 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

Compare Bond at his prime with Lee at his prime. You'll find no difference. I still remember those "Lee"ly years, that pace, those balls...! Lee's avg is around 30 because his form has heavily detoriated in the recent years, whereas Bond played ODI cricket when he was at his prime and made a temporary halt when he was at his prime. But Lee is a different case.

No that isn't right, Brett Lee was very average for most of his carer. He got a lot better with age.

 

[King Cricket]

And wait a minute. Lee's ODI avg is around 30!! From which site did you get this stat?

 

[Yogy]

I am a Bond fan from the time he made his debut in the VB series. Fitness is his main problem.

 

[Howsie]

And wait a minute. Lee's ODI avg is around 30!! From which site did you get this stat?

Ooops, that's is Test average isn't it.

 

[Abhas]

Bond for me. He has that McGrath like accuracy and consistency, which Lee lacks.
Even though Lee is the fitter of the two, and faster, but in a situation of say 10 runs needed from the last over, Bond is more likely to win the game for his side than Lee. (Talking about bowling ofcourse )

Looking forward to his comeback, but I think he would have lost a lot of pace. I don't see him getting to 150 kmph, rather he would peak at 143-145.

 

[Howsie]

Bond for me. He has that McGrath like accuracy and consistency, which Lee lacks.
Even though Lee is the fitter of the two, and faster, but in a situation of say 10 runs needed from the last over, Bond is more likely to win the game for his side than Lee. (Talking about bowling ofcourse )

Looking forward to his comeback, but I think he would have lost a lot of pace. I don't see him getting to 150 kmph, rather he would peak at 143-145.

Bond was usually around the 142-145 anyway. He is still suppose to be pretty quick, I saw him in the Domestic 20/20 comp and he was easily the quickest bowler.

 

[iridescentt]

People usually smash Lee when the pressure is on.

In their prime, I reckon' Bond would've been on top by a hairline. I'm only giving him that because Lee seemed to be too expensive when it mattered.