After seeing Mathew Hayden in that list - I would like to add Ajit Agarkar, Afridi, Richard Blakey also in this list.
Wasim Bhai the best !!!!!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fair_&_balance: *
So You think Waqar was better than Walsh.
Well ist your opinion.I respect that.In the same way I expect you to respect my view.Dont need to call me young to make your point.
[/QUOTE]
Waqar was a better test/ODI bowler then Walsh.
Walsh was always that attacking test bowler but he was an avg bowler in one dayers, there were times when he was on top of his game bu Waqar was simply amazing bowler.
Had he played as much test matches as Walsh, I am 100% sure, he would have taken 600 wickets with politics aside.
Career Statistics:
Courtney Walsh
TESTS
(including 19/04/2001)
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding **132** 185 61 936 30* 7.54 44.82 0 0 29 0
O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 5003.1 1144 12688 **519** **24.44** 7-37 22 3 **57.8** 2.53
ONE-DAY INTERNATIONALS
(including 11/01/2000)
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding **205** 79 33 321 30 6.97 71.17 0 0 27 0
O M R W Ave BBI 4w 5w SR Econ
Bowling 1803.4 185 6918 227 **30.47]** 5-1 6 1 **47.6 3.83**
WAQAR YOUNIS
TESTS
(including 02/01/2003)
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding **87** 120 21 1010 45 10.20 47.95 0 0 18 0
O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 2704 516 8788 373 **23.56** 7-76 22 5 **43.4** 3.25
ONE-DAY INTERNATIONALS
(including 04/03/2003)
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding **262** 139 45 969 37 10.30 67.05 0 0 35 0
O M R W Ave BBI 4w 5w SR Econ
Bowling 2116.2 143 9919 416 **23.84** 7-36 14 13 **30.5 4.68**
Lets just forget about # of wickets, look at the strike rate in both forms of the game.
Waqar was better in all departments of bowling than Walsh.
stats aside, i think the way waqar impacted cricket around him was far greater than walsh. u know all this reverse swing and toe-crushers stuff, it gives waqar an edge over walsh and whoever comes close to the debated #5 spot on this list. this should settle the debate --well, fair and balanced, isnt it. Peace.
I dont think Walsh was better than Waqar. To me Walsh was an ordinary bowler and I hardly noticed him untill he took 400 wickets. I think Muralitharan should have been replaced by Donald or Mcgrath and Hayden by someone like Mark Waugh or Inzamam ul Haq.
Pretty much agree with the people here. Glad to see Waqar in the list, he really was great in 90s and did dominate batsmen.
Martin Crowe should not be in the list, 90s was end of his career. Instead we could include A Flower, Inzimam, Saeed or Jayasuria.
If you just leave out avg, # of wickets, and economy rates aside, and just look at the strike rate, Waqar is still better then most bowlers.
Arvinda Disilva was by no means a legend neither are Jasuriya and Inzimam-ul-Haq 
I would have prefered Mark Waugh over Hyden.
as much as i hated waqar playing in the world cup.... I have no doubt that at his peak,, he was simply awesome... if the list is considering players to be at their peak..... nothing came close to the 2 W's and yes waqar was deadly. walsh,,, u cant compare him with waqar if ur talking ,, players at their peaks. He was even more lethal than Akram at times.
My rankings would be...
Waqar
Wasim
Murali
Warne
Mcgrath
If we are talking ,,, every1 at their peak. The reason i have mcgrath at 5 is because the guys is so damn consistent,,, he,s always at his peak :p so his peak is pretty average compared to the peaks of waqar and wasim n warne.
In batting its a tough one. and honestly speaking,,, i dont really care...
ofcourse lara and tendulkar are automatic choices... i was pissed off wen ppl mentioned saeed,,, since he wasnt really a great,,, he doesnt have that greatness,,, he is a bit too casual outside the off,,, and i,ve seen him get caught in the slips on simplest of balls,,,sometimes even chasing wide balls.
but then again,,,, there was a time when he was ahead of tendulkar in the number of centuries scored in ODI's ,, he was pretty damn good in those days,,, but then.... tendulkar kept up the good work,, and saeed faded away slowly. martin crowe really was a class act... and i,m not too sure but i think his peak was the 92 world cup,, and after that he started fading away too.
difficult task...
probably...
tendulkar
lara
steve/mark waugh... they were both awesome
hayden... although new,,, this guy is a killing machine.
jayasuriya/gilchrist/crowe/ponting/maybe poor inzi on his day too :p
its just tough to choose 5.
If we are going to pick players on their peak then Alan Donald has to be in the list, though he faded away from mid 90s onwards, but during 1992 WC, he was @ his best.
He consistently bowled in 150ks, him and Waqar were dominant in that era.
I would say Murali, Wasim are obvious choices, Ambrose was a very good bowler, though I regard McGrath as a better bowler then Ambrose, but they both played at different times.
Well Its amazing that we are doscarding Warne just because we wana accommodate someone else. Warne has been part of many all time best XI and here he is not able top make it to top 5 of 90s. Give me a break.
He is the best spinner world has ever seen. He would be my first choice for top 5 bowlers of 90s.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fair_&_balance: *
Well Its amazing that we are doscarding Warne just because we wana accommodate someone else. Warne has been part of many all time best XI and here he is not able top make it to top 5 of 90s. Give me a break.
He is the best spinner world has ever seen. He would be my first choice for top 5 bowlers of 90s.
[/QUOTE]
So we should take in consideration his presence in all time best XI's and notthing else. The discussion is about 5 great bowlers from the 90's. Now thats 5 great *bowlers * not spinners not quickies but it could be any body. Warne has been hyped up a little too much by the English and Aussie media. Go back and look at his ODI record. Its very average. So just because the media has hyped him to be not just great but one of the 5 greats of the last century we should follow them too??
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by LahoriMunda: *
So we should take in consideration his presence in all time best XI's and notthing else. The discussion is about 5 great bowlers from the 90's. Now thats 5 great *bowlers * not spinners not quickies but it could be any body. Warne has been hyped up a little too much by the English and Aussie media. Go back and look at his ODI record. Its very average. So just because the media has hyped him to be not just great but one of the 5 greats of the last century we should follow them too??
[/QUOTE]
There is explanation for warne's poor average in ODI. Its beacause he didnt have to play his 70% matches in tailor-made turning tracks of subcontinent like other GREAT spinners.
Inspite of playiong most of his matches non-spinner friendly wickets he managed to do great.And his test record in just amazing.There is no spinner close to him.He is simply the best spinner world have EVER seen.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fair_&_balance: *
There is explanation for warne's poor average in ODI. Its beacause he didnt have to play his 70% matches in tailor-made turning tracks of subcontinent like other GREAT spinners.
Inspite of playiong most of his matches non-spinner friendly wickets he managed to do great.And his test record in just amazing.There is no spinner close to him.He is simply the best spinner world have EVER seen.
[/QUOTE]
I don't about ever.
By many old cricketers, Jim Laker of England was considered the greatest.
I consider Warne as the attacking test spinner but in one days he is ok.
I think Warne is the best Spinner.He is so attacking and often he got Australia out of such tight situations,he has to be in the top 5.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fair_&_balance: *
There is explanation for warne's poor average in ODI. Its beacause he didnt have to play his 70% matches in tailor-made turning tracks of subcontinent like other GREAT spinners.
Inspite of playiong most of his matches non-spinner friendly wickets he managed to do great.And his test record in just amazing.There is no spinner close to him.He is simply the best spinner world have EVER seen.
[/QUOTE]
Well those are all excuses. One can also argue that he got to bowl to the English team a lot who are not known to be the best players of spin. Then comparing him to any bowler from sub continent you can again argue that when Warne started playing cricket he was a polished player, compared to that sub continent bowlers build thmeselves from scratch after gaining international experience just becuase of sheer raw talent. A great bowler should be able to over come all these things. Waqar & Wasim has a great strike rate. They played a lot of matches on the sub continent pitches, which certainly dont support fast bowlers. Yet they still have a good strike rate and average in both froms of the game.
i'm surprised to see Martin Crowe in it, i would have gone for someone else, Mark Waugh, or Gary Kirsten or so
Just like how Saqi, or Murali have the advantage of playing in spinner friendly conditions.
Warne too has one advantage over any other spinner in the world, he doesn't get to bowl against the Aussie batsmen. :D
Crowe was a great player and well Umair,you are right lol.And have you ever thought how many wickets Wasim & Waqr would have got if they would have got Paki batsmen to play ;)