Sport Today

by **Joshua Saunde** » Fri, 14 Oct 1994 17:12:58

And for good measure...

1. Barnes
2. O'Reilly
3. Lillee
4. Lohmann
5. Lindwall
6. Grimmett
7. Hadlee
8. Rhodes
9. Chandresekhar
10. Holding

Waqar will make this list one day (when he retires)

Akram and Warne could make it.

--
Joshua Saunders, University of Sydney

Do Grahame and the Colonel know you've stolen their jacket?

by **Chris Stri** » Sat, 15 Oct 1994 06:02:22

But but....what about Chris Harris and Gavin Larsen.
And Heath Davis for that matter?

:)

Chris

--

by **Spaceman Spif** » Sat, 15 Oct 1994 18:30:33

Arunkundram) says:

Quote:

>>7. Hadlee >>>>>>>>/ kapil Dev

>Between Hadlee and kapil is a toughie, I'd vote for Kapil considering
>he played half his games on Indian wickets.

sorry. i cannot agree with this substitution. i'm second to noone in my
admiration for kapildev, but richard hadlee was a far better bowler than
kapil- the most impressive fact being that he maintained a high level of
performance even till the end of his career. even the most diehard kapil
fan must admit that kapil's performance has, um, dropped off in the last 5
years or so.
kapil would not make any knowledgable person's list of top 10 bowlers.
top 10 all-rounders- yes.
but this is all MHO, of course. you are free to heap scorn upon it.

Stay cool,
Spaceman Spiff

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I had a steady job hauling items for the mob.
I had a steady job hauling items for the mob.
You know the pay was pathetic,
It's a shame those boys couldn't be more copacetic.

by **Ahsan Jame** » Fri, 14 Oct 1994 23:51:52

Quote:

>And for good measure...

>1. Barnes
>2. O'Reilly
>3. Lillee
>4. Lohmann
>5. Lindwall
>6. Grimmett
>7. Hadlee
>8. Rhodes
>9. Chandresekhar
>10. Holding

>Waqar will make this list one day (when he retires)

>Akram and Warne could make it.

Imran Khan!!

by **David Liverm** » Sun, 16 Oct 1994 06:02:20

Quote:

>>And for good measure...
>>1. Barnes
>>2. O'Reilly
>>3. Lillee
>>4. Lohmann
>>5. Lindwall
>>6. Grimmett
>>7. Hadlee
>>8. Rhodes
>>9. Chandresekhar
>>10. Holding
>>Waqar will make this list one day (when he retires)
>>Akram and Warne could make it.
>It seems that spinners, esp. recent ones, are given too little credit. They
>tend to be unfairly judged vis-a-vis the fast men. Gibbs surely should be
>considered.
> >Joshua Saunders, University of Sydney

>>Do Grahame and the Colonel know you've stolen their jacket?
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Educ. & Psych, Phone: (509)527-2771
> Walla Walla College Fax: (509)527-2253
> Christ is ALL!

by **Ariel_Chaim ZAU** » Sat, 15 Oct 1994 10:08:50

: But but....what about Chris Harris and Gavin Larsen.
: And Heath Davis for that matter?

Joel Garner with an average of around 20, almost 3 runs better than Lillee
would have to make this list.

A.C.ZAUER

by **Ravi N Arunkundr** » Sat, 15 Oct 1994 08:23:41

Quote:

>And for good measure...

>1. Barnes
>2. O'Reilly >>>>>>/ Andy Roberts / Laker
>3. Lillee
>4. Lohmann >>>>>>>/ Imran Khan
>5. Lindwall
>6. Grimmett
>7. Hadlee >>>>>>>>/ kapil Dev
>8. Rhodes >>>>>>>>>/ Tyson / Truman
>9. Chandresekhar >>>>>>>/ Lance Gibbs
>10. Holding
>Joshua Saunders, University of Sydney

O'Reilly I think should yeild to Andy roberts (or Laker if it must be
a spinner) and the Great Khan (Imran) certainly deserves to be there.
Between Hadlee and kapil is a toughie, I'd vote for Kapil considering
he played half his games on Indian wickets. Chandrasekhar was not half
as consistent as Lance Gibbs and took fewer wickets, but was a more
dangerous bowler when he got going. On the balance though I'd rather
have Gibbs playing for me.

ravi (who thinks Alan Davidson was a paceman and gentleman, the last
of his kind perhaps)

by ff » Sat, 15 Oct 1994 12:25:00

Quote:

> And for good measure...

> 1. Barnes
> 2. O'Reilly
> 3. Lillee
> 4. Lohmann
> 5. Lindwall
> 6. Grimmett
> 7. Hadlee
> 8. Rhodes
> 9. Chandresekhar
> 10. Holding

I'm dubious about Lohman considering a very large percentage of his wickets
are against SA when they weren't that good.
I personally rate Lindwall and Hadlee better than Lillee, consider the
averages of Hadlee and Lillee and also remeber that, when Hadlee had played
the same number of tests as Lillee he had the same number of wickets.
I'd also consider dropping Rhodes for Wardle - who had a much better
average, higher strike rate and could bowl both Chinamen and left arm
orthodox.
Chandreskekhar??

Also Maurice Tate and Alec Bedser deserve some thought.

by **J.Wats** » Tue, 18 Oct 1994 01:50:48

Quote:

>And for good measure...

>1. Barnes
>2. O'Reilly
>3. Lillee

You cant include Lillee without Thommo.

Quote:

>4. Lohmann
>5. Lindwall
>6. Grimmett
>7. Hadlee
>8. Rhodes
>9. Chandresekhar
>10. Holding

>Waqar will make this list one day (when he retires)

Maybe not I think Waqar is a very good bowler but should not be included
with the names on this list.

Quote:

>Akram and Warne could make it.

I would rate Akram a better player than WY, Warne might make it provideing
he doesent lose his bottle, and no one comes up with a soloution to his turn.

One to watch IMHO is Gough I have a strange feeling that he might become a
very major force to be reckoned with.

Goochie

Quote:

>--
>Joshua Saunders, University of Sydney

>Do Grahame and the Colonel know you've stolen their jacket?

by **J.Wats** » Tue, 18 Oct 1994 01:52:52

Quote:

>Between Hadlee and kapil is a toughie, I'd vote for Kapil considering
>he played half his games on Indian wickets.

Nots not a toughie, Hadlee played 86 tests to take his wickets, Kapil 130odd
Tests. Hadlee was a far superior bowler.

Goochie

Sport Today

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers

Top ten all time bowlers