View Full Version : Brett Lee v Shane Bond - battle for the world's best quick
Crooked Rain
22 Feb 2007, 14:19
Who is best fast bowler out of these two kings?
Both have brilliant stats, bowl with great heat and are regarded by many as the world's best.
You can't go past B.Lee for me.
betterthanu
22 Feb 2007, 14:20
Bond easily
Edit: as long as hes fit
Crooked Rain
22 Feb 2007, 14:21
Bond easily
So you reckon Bond is the best fast bowler in the world, while Lee is the second best?
Cassius_Clay
22 Feb 2007, 14:27
At their best its equal. Bond is rarely injury free so anyone with a sensible knowledge of the game would have Lee in their team.
prettyboy
22 Feb 2007, 14:27
Bond is a close win i reckon as long as he is fit
Bartram_Class
22 Feb 2007, 14:27
Mashrafe Mortaza
betterthanu
22 Feb 2007, 14:36
So you reckon Bond is the best fast bowler in the world, while Lee is the second best?
i think bond is the best i dunno bout lee being second best. Hes Def 2nd in ODI but i dunno bout tests.
ShearMagic9
22 Feb 2007, 14:44
Bond
rooboy_88
22 Feb 2007, 15:08
atm easily bond
Bond > Lee but neither is close to the worlds best fast bowler and Brett Lee doesnt have what i would call great stats averaging 31 in tests is very ordinary, 22 in ODIs but anyone can take wickets in ODIs
musha_13
22 Feb 2007, 15:10
Bond.
World's best ODI quick when not injured and firing.
Lee has the problem that he bowls a brilliant spell, then he'll come back and get carted, happens too often, so I vote Bond.
bombersno1
22 Feb 2007, 15:21
Bond by quite a margin as well.
Bond when fit. However that isn't all that often.
Bombers_Forever
22 Feb 2007, 15:36
Bond, easy..........
Both are not the best fast bowlers in the world.
Bond covers Lee easily in all areas.
crowsarethebest
22 Feb 2007, 16:26
Bond. Still destroyed us when we were going full flight. Always plays well against us. His numbers are amazing.. Lee isn't far behind but Bond.. he is just so good.
Bond he takes wickets and doesn't cost 100 runs a game like Brett Lee does no mater how good he is bowling.
Cooldude
22 Feb 2007, 17:12
Whenever Bond's fit, he has always been ahead of Brett Lee for mine, and quite comfortably
Bond miles ahead, even with 2 broken legs.
Coin_Toss
22 Feb 2007, 17:50
A fit Bond, no doubt, is better than Brett Lee.
He will take the most wickets in the Caribbean, and New Zealand will reap the rewards of his unbelievable talent with the white Kookaburra. He's my favourite bowler to watch, apart from Ben Hilfenhaus, of course. I think he's at the top of his game at the moment.
davey_magik
22 Feb 2007, 17:54
Bond.
Look at the guys stats vs the world's best. Average of something ridiculous like 14 (Bowling that is).
jnash196
22 Feb 2007, 18:20
Having Lee out for the WC is a blessing
Junior55
22 Feb 2007, 18:25
Bond when fit by a mile..
Crooked Rain
22 Feb 2007, 18:27
I'm convinced now that Lee is an overrated hack and that Bond is numero uno.
Lee is about 20th best.
Leg_Spinning_Sensation
22 Feb 2007, 18:33
Bond is clearly the best One day bowler, he has an average of under 20, that's unbelievable and he is known to dominate the best team in the world (well former now) so really Lee has great assets at ODI level, but Bond combines every facet so perfectly that he really can be unstoppable
Gridlock'd
22 Feb 2007, 18:56
Id rather Ntini over both of them.
Cassius_Clay
22 Feb 2007, 19:03
atm easily bond
Wow, ya rekon? LOL
Cassius_Clay
22 Feb 2007, 19:04
Having Lee out for the WC is a blessing
A blessing for this board would be if you ********ed off and got a red card...
Cassius_Clay
22 Feb 2007, 19:04
Are we talking ODI's or both?
ShearMagic9
22 Feb 2007, 19:11
Shane Bond
Bowling averages
class mat balls runs wkts bbi bbm ave econ sr 4 5 10
Tests 16 2881 1636 74 6/51 10/99 22.10 3.40 38.93 6 4 1
ODIs 59 3028 2203 112 6/19 6/19 19.66 4.36 27.03 6 4 0
mattf83
22 Feb 2007, 19:41
Shane Bond
Bowling averages
class mat balls runs wkts bbi bbm ave econ sr 4 5 10
Tests 16 2881 1636 74 6/51 10/99 22.10 3.40 38.93 6 4 1
ODIs 59 3028 2203 112 6/19 6/19 19.66 4.36 27.03 6 4 0
Not enough matches in either to prove himself, you would have to say Lee in ODI with 22.5 average and 28 SR after 150 games.
Lee's fugures pretty ordinary in tests but Bond has been around since 2001 and has played 16 tests and are as follows
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
v Australia 2 8 8 4.00 0 0 3 1/74 96.33 0 2 0
v Bangladesh 2 4 4* - 0 0 11 4/47 13.63 0 2 0
v India 2 2 2 2.00 0 0 12 4/33 16.33 0 0 0
v Sri Lanka 4 26 10* 8.66 0 0 15 4/63 30.13 0 1 0
v West Indies 4 49 18* 16.33 0 0 20 5/69 21.45 3 1 0
v Zimbabwe 2 49 41* 49.00 0 0 13 6/51 9.23 1 0 0
in Australia 2 8 8 4.00 0 0 3 1/74 96.33 0 2 0
in New Zealand 8 42 18* 8.40 0 0 41 5/69 19.92 1 4 0
in Sri Lanka 2 11 10* - 0 0 5 3/97 38.80 0 0 0
in West Indies 2 28 17 14.00 0 0 12 5/78 18.00 2 0 0
in Zimbabwe 2 49 41* 49.00 0 0 13 6/51 9.23 1 0
Hopless against Australia, good at home, at WI and against Zim thats it.
Marklar_33
22 Feb 2007, 20:00
Shane Bond has got Lee well and truly covered. When Bondy gets it right, those 150kph inswingers give me a semi :thumbsu:
linger_isgod
22 Feb 2007, 20:38
Hopless against Australia, good at home, at WI and against Zim thats it. Bit harsh considering his first two Tests were against Aus IIRC?
crownie
22 Feb 2007, 20:45
Bond
no contest
TorresIsGod
22 Feb 2007, 21:21
Mashrafe Mortaza
Shahadat Hossain
King Kieran
22 Feb 2007, 22:00
Bond by a long way!
mattf83
22 Feb 2007, 22:14
Bit harsh considering his first two Tests were against Aus IIRC?
first and only so how can we judge him? thats the point im making. Lee is proven (ODI) and to an extent tests. Bond is a 31 year old exciting prosprective talent. Injurys permitting he may well have been better, but i dont think that judgement can yet or possible ever be made
metallicamatty
23 Feb 2007, 08:50
Shaun Tait
Shaun Tait
:rolleyes:
Is not even in the same league as these two yet... and Bond eclipses Lee by quite some margin.
Barring injury Bond could have been one of cricket's great quicks.
Pity.
demon21
23 Feb 2007, 09:37
Bond by a mile its that his injuries have cost him a lot of cricket. Could have been the best bowler in the world over the last 5 years or so.
Cooldude
23 Feb 2007, 09:56
Also, strange thread title since Brett Lee ain't anywhere near being the world's best quick so there's not really a battle there
I'd trade Lee for Bond in a heartbeat.
skipper kelly
23 Feb 2007, 10:48
Bond is an exceptional bowler.
jko'neal
23 Feb 2007, 11:14
Both great ODI bowlers but I think Bond is a far better test bowler.
Lets hope we see more of him, he reminds me of Ian Bishop who also had major injury problems.
Browney2006
23 Feb 2007, 12:13
Id rather Ntini over both of them.
Well then you have no clue.
Ntini is terrible away from home
Browney2006
23 Feb 2007, 12:16
Im guessing we are talking ODI, because they are both up there with the best in the world, we couldnt possibly be talking Tests because Lee would barely make top 20.
Im guessing we are talking ODI, because they are both up there with the best in the world, we couldnt possibly be talking Tests because Lee would barely make top 20.
:thumbsu:
Crooked Rain
23 Feb 2007, 14:11
An injured Bond is better than Lee.
Bond..better bowler tactically, can be managed by a captain..
The Reaper
24 Feb 2007, 07:30
I would trade Lee for Bond to open the bowling in Tests and ODI's in an instant
Kane McGoodwin
24 Feb 2007, 20:20
An injured Bond is better than Lee.
Yeah rightio. :rolleyes: The level of stupidity amazes me sometimes.
I rate Bond ahead of Lee, but Lee is still more than handy ODI bowler in his own right ... & will be missed in the WC.
Crooked Rain
25 Feb 2007, 12:50
Yeah rightio. :rolleyes: The level of stupidity amazes me sometimes.
I rate Bond ahead of Lee, but Lee is still more than handy ODI bowler in his own right ... & will be missed in the WC.
Lee's ability to get 3/35 in one game and 1/78 in the next will be missed.
The Reaper
25 Feb 2007, 13:16
Lee's ability to get 3/35 in one game and 1/78 in the next will be missed.
ATM who looks like get 3/35?
Well then you have no clue.
Ntini is terrible away from home
Ntini over Lee anyday.
Bond > daylight > Ntini > daylight > Lee
wce4premiership
28 Feb 2007, 16:52
b. lee for me.
fairly even though when they are both fit.
Bond in retirement would still be a better bowler than Lee.
Cannot believe people would vote BLee except to be parochial or maybe just blind or carried away by something.
Bond in retirement would still be a better bowler than Lee.
Cannot believe people would vote BLee except to be parochial or maybe just blind or carried away by something.
If Shane Bond was Australian, with the ODI career he has had (not his potential) would he have been named in Our Greatest ODI side of all time?
I Think Not
Some people might think Binga shouldnt have made it but i dont think the criteria for selection can be questioned. If you belive your opinion over a majority of 160 ex & current players you have issues.
If Shane Bond was Australian, with the ODI career he has had (not his potential) would he have been named in Our Greatest ODI side of all time?
I Think Not
Some people might think Binga shouldnt have made it but i dont think the criteria for selection can be questioned. If you belive your opinion over a majority of 160 ex & current players you have issues.
That's spin-doctoring tho. The question is simply who's better. IMO, as in many others, Bond is better.
If you want to throw that hypothetical up tho....Lee playing for NZ would get carted around playing for a weaker team against stronger nations, and having to face the likes of Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, etc, who'd tear him a new Bollywood hole to croon from. While Bond playing for Australia, would be helped by the overall strength of the Aussie team supporting him.
That's spin-doctoring tho. The question is simply who's better. IMO, as in many others, Bond is better.
If you want to throw that hypothetical up tho....Lee playing for NZ would get carted around playing for a weaker team against stronger nations, and having to face the likes of Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, etc, who'd tear him a new Bollywood hole to croon from. While Bond playing for Australia, would be helped by the overall strength of the Aussie team supporting him.
The point i was trying to make is that Lee (in ODI) is proven over a long period of time. Bond hasn't played enough to prove himself. And when he has played it has been spread over a long period.
You think playing in a team with McGrath, Warne, Bracken, Gillespie is going to be you more wickets that playing with the fast bowlers of NZ??????:confused:
The only hype is surrounding Bond after everyone saw how well he bowled in Chap-Had. Lee has done that consistently for 5+ years
The point i was trying to make is that Lee (in ODI) is proven over a long period of time. Bond hasn't played enough to prove himself. And when he has played it has been spread over a long period.
You think playing in a team with McGrath, Warne, Bracken, Gillespie is going to be you more wickets that playing with the fast bowlers of NZ??????:confused:
The only hype is surrounding Bond after everyone saw how well he bowled in Chap-Had. Lee has done that consistently for 5+ years
I understand what you mean, but it's still not about a "who would be in the Australian greatest ODI team" or things of that nature. It's just about who's the better bowler. And with that question...what happens is some people will use stats to back Bond, some will use stats to back up Lee, some will use their own vision of either to back either.
But in all that subjectivity there surely must be an objective answer. Just like a consensus opinion or vote - for things like Brownlow, representative football, etc.
Let me ask you this....the thread title says battle for the world's best....suggesting that both are in the running, both probably the best two going around. So whomever beats the other out, you'd have to say they're both perceived very highly or fairly equally. So do you consider Bond and Lee to be the best two pace bowlers?
I understand what you mean, but it's still not about a "who would be in the Australian greatest ODI team" or things of that nature. It's just about who's the better bowler. And with that question...what happens is some people will use stats to back Bond, some will use stats to back up Lee, some will use their own vision of either to back either.
But in all that subjectivity there surely must be an objective answer. Just like a consensus opinion or vote - for things like Brownlow, representative football, etc.
Let me ask you this....the thread title says battle for the world's best....suggesting that both are in the running, both probably the best two going around. So whomever beats the other out, you'd have to say they're both perceived very highly or fairly equally. So do you consider Bond and Lee to be the best two pace bowlers?
I think Lee has probably been the best over the past 5 years (ODI). I think Bond has potential but hasnt proven it yet, go to cricketratings click on their name and look at the graph.
Tests Different Story
I think Lee has probably been the best over the past 5 years (ODI). I think Bond has potential but hasnt proven it yet, go to cricketratings click on their name and look at the graph.
Tests Different Story
Statistically you have a point in ODI. Lee has been blessed etc enough to be consistently available to play. But Bond's ODI figures are comparable. I mean, his figures are just a curtailed version of what he would have kept on doing statistically and probably improving statistically with time.
It's not like he has the potential tho. He IS a great bowler. Potential is like a young'un yet to get a go or still learning the ropes etc but the sky's the limit if they apply. Whereas Bond is just injury prone. But as soon as he comes back, he immediately starts where he left off.
It is in this sense that I make my judgment, that both being healthy, who is just a better bowler, better at his craft. No matter the injuries and statistics (to a certain extent) when watching them Bond always looks the better bowler, smarter, more of a knack, etc. But statistically that great ability is still apparent.
I still put Bond ahead of Lee. Still would rather Bond than Lee. And that call is made with no disrespect towards your pov/judgment.
Statistically you have a point in ODI. Lee has been blessed etc enough to be consistently available to play. But Bond's ODI figures are comparable. I mean, his figures are just a curtailed version of what he would have kept on doing statistically and probably improving statistically with time.
It's not like he has the potential tho. He IS a great bowler. Potential is like a young'un yet to get a go or still learning the ropes etc but the sky's the limit if they apply. Whereas Bond is just injury prone. But as soon as he comes back, he immediately starts where he left off.
It is in this sense that I make my judgment, that both being healthy, who is just a better bowler, better at his craft. No matter the injuries and statistics (to a certain extent) when watching them Bond always looks the better bowler, smarter, more of a knack, etc. But statistically that great ability is still apparent.
I still put Bond ahead of Lee. Still would rather Bond than Lee. And that call is made with no disrespect towards your pov/judgment.
fair enough, i do rate Bond as well. I hope he has better luck with Injurys so the world can see how good he is. It is Ironic that Bond is fit and playing in the WC whilst Lee is injured.
fair enough, i do rate Bond as well. I hope he has better luck with Injurys so the world can see how good he is. It is Ironic that Bond is fit and playing in the WC whilst Lee is injured.
Bond's slowed down a lot too unfortunately. I think that guy is destined to Bruce Reid's fate. But like you said, weird about the WC. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of cricketers go down and struggle to get thru the WC from a variety of nations.
The Reaper
2 Mar 2007, 15:47
The only hype is surrounding Bond after everyone saw how well he bowled in Chap-Had. Lee has done that consistently for 5+ years
Bond has been dominating Australia since the last world cup
linger_isgod
2 Mar 2007, 21:26
Bond has been dominating Australia since the last world cup
Even before that. The VB Series when SA and NZ were over here, and NZ kept on having the wood on Australia, because Bond was running through us.
sendintheclowns
3 Mar 2007, 03:01
He didn't dominate us in the vb series.There was all this hype about how he had got Ponting a few times,and he hardly worried Ponting in the first game.
I would have Lee because the man is a workhorse for Australia.He does not break down every few games.
He didn't dominate us in the vb series.There was all this hype about how he had got Ponting a few times,and he hardly worried Ponting in the first game.
I would have Lee because the man is a workhorse for Australia.He does not break down every few games.
True, but at least Bond doesn't write/sing/record a Bollywood song that has got to be the single worst song ever done by a non-artist.
But....Bond is a far smarter bowler.
The Reaper
3 Mar 2007, 12:26
But....Bond is a far smarter bowler.
exactly, a smart bowler can do as well as a bowler with more talent though Bond and Lee have the same talent
exactly, a smart bowler can do as well as a bowler with more talent though Bond and Lee have the same talent
Bond has far more talent, just a more fragile body.
Bond has been dominating Australia since the last world cup
Bond has been dominating Australia since he started.
....and that's really hard to do, than the other way.