The Best Fast Bowler

[irottev]

He plays once a year . How can you judge him ????

Lee the best no doubt.

lol, once a year, thats a ridiculas exageration. The stats tell the tale.

India huh. I remember Bond demolishing you last year.

 

[lukedapuke]

Irottev, why do have a poll? isn't the point to see what others think? Seems like everyone else's opinion is crap in relation to yours.

 

[avk2love]

acoording to me shoab akthar is the best fast bowler
he could rip out any lineup

 

[irottev]

Irottev, why do have a poll? isn't the point to see what others think? Seems like everyone else's opinion is crap in relation to yours.

They can have their opinions. Doesn't worry me. I know who the best is. I'm just trying to challenge them. The proof is in the statistics. If people make stupid comments like he only plays once a year then thats just utter trash. I could say the same for Akhtar at the moment. Bond has a virus problem at the moment becauses hes too fit and more prone to bugs.

And what is this about a poll. I can't understand what your saying. I didn't make this thread.

By the way, where is Akhtar right now? Dropped or injured? He sure was the best quicky at one stage but hasn't been as good recently. Hes definatly behind Bond and Lee in my opinion.

I think Lara has said that Bonds the best fast bowler hes faced and some others also.

 

[Stephen Bailey]

Not saying Flintoff is better than Bond, but surely he must be close to him as one of the top quicks about.

 

[aussie1st]

Lee showed hes back to his best too. It's hard to compare when all the pace men are bowling on different pitches against different opppostions currently.

 

[James_W]

For me it's Lee, he's now got the control to go with the great pace he has got.

 

[surendar]

Generally,Shane Bond was much more better of all!!!! But becos of injuries he was not able to produce at his best!!!!

So currently,Lee has the upper hand over all!!!

 

[puddleduck]

If they were all as fit and dedicated as each other I would probably go with Akhtar. If they were all fit, I'd probably go for Bond. And if I wanted one that could bat and stood the most chance of being fit I'd pick Lee.

They are essentially all devastating quicks on their day, whilst they each have their own negative aspects. Until he begins to show he is past his injuries it is difficult to build an attack around Bond. Akthar has shown tendencies to dissapear when the going gets tough. If Lee's not bowling on the right lines and lengths, he just charges in and goes for more and more runs becomming a liability.

One major plus for Lee is if all 3 have a bad day with the ball, he does at least have some ability with the bat.

 

[irottev]

I agree, Flintoff is right up there. Better than Akhtar currently and possibly even challenging Lee, not for pace but for performance. Hes consistantly economical and wicket taking. The thing I find with Lee, is hes expensive and non-wicket taking one week, then wicket taking the next. Inconsistant. I see he bowled good yeaterday, even though 4 were low-order and tailenders.

Bond is 100% fine now. Jeez. No injuries. His back thing is done. Its just pesky viruses which are keeping him sidelined. Hes played the majority of the matches since hes been back.

The rankings say Bond is the best in both ODI's and Test, the overall career statstics say Bond is the best in both ODIs and Tests. So what other examples are needed?

 

[puddleduck]

I know he's fine now, but until he plays a good year or two without breaking down and missing tests he can hardly be called fit and healthy, you can't argue with that. For New Zealands and indeed World Crickets sake I hope he does, the more top class cricketers about the better.

I definately rate Flintoff right up there. If he was in a poorer attack than the England one he would have a lot more wickets to his name. Whenever he bowls a spell you either feel he will get a breakthrough or the pressure he builds picks one up for the other bowler. His pace is a bit deceiving as well, most bowlers lose a lot of pace on the pitch, Flintoff seems to keep most of his pace as well as picking up good bounce.

 

[surendar]

i think Ntini and Nel are also fast but not the fastest!!! It really doesnt matters who is the fast but it really matters who has the best quality of producing wickets!!!!

 

[nightprowler10]

Mat O R W BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10

50 1718.3 6202 197 5/30 8/123 31.48 3.60 52.3 6 0
42 1248.2 4240 165 6/11 11/78 25.69 3.39 45.3 12 2
13 395 1291 63 6/51 10/99 20.49 3.26 37.6 4 1

Akhtar in bold, Bond in Italics. Bond clearly is the best out of the three statistically. But he has only played 13 tests in all, definitely not enough to tell if he can be consistently good. Lee has played more tests and has a worse average, less 5 and 10 wickets hauls than Akhtar. So IMHO, Akhtar is better than all the ones listed in the poll. Lee is getting better by the day but he still has some catching up to do.

BTW, which one would guys fear most as a batsman?

 

[MohdIrshaad]

Brett Lee has just started doing well in test cricket, in past he was a big dissapointment at test level.He will still have the luxury of not bowling to Australian batsmen in test matches though.

The best i believe is Bond.

 

[irottev]

As a person who has hardly actually played cricket, the faster, the more scary. So them all really.

I agree, 13 tests isn't a lot. Fair point. He does have a way to go yet. But from the current year Bond has been the best.

And ill just mention this point. On their day, they are pretty much inseperatable. They are all soo deadly its hard to pick a best. But on a day by day, consistancy basis, Bond has proven to be the better. Lee has improved, but he still does have off-days and matches.