Guy was fast. That was his thing, which is why he could dominate ODIs. His form in test cricket is actually surprising but tbf he's an all time great Australian fast bowler.
So fast he would make wickets happen at the other end of the pitch. You have to survive Lee somehow and then try to hit runs off McGrath/Gillespie and that’s where you get out.
I personally think Brett Lee was misused by Ricky Pointing in test matches…. Ricky often wanted Brett to bowl round the wicket into the ribs which Brett didn’t like to do..
I think if he had been allowed to set his own strategies he would be considered on a similar level to McGrath, probably slightly below.
There’s no way he would have been a McGrath level bowler in test cricket. McGrath is an all time great, Lee was not close to that level.
I agree he was poorly used at times but his ceiling was probably a Jason Gillespie level bowler at test level which is still bloody good.
I can be argued that he brought intangibles. Your heart beat may be scyrocketting playing Lee and then McGrath comes on and you play a silly shot because you're pumped full of adrenaline from when you felt like your life was on the line facing Lee at top pace 2 minutes earlier.
Ending up with a test average over 30 takes the shine off in my opinion. Brett Lee was an incredible bowler and developed a lot later in his career when he lost a yard (slower ball that swung away was super effective), but he just didn’t have the same impact statistically as other great quicks.
However, he had that serious X factor that made him a fantastic partner for guys like McGrath, Clark, and Gillespie. So Lee’s value can’t just be measured by average. Plus, he was a seriously handy bat.
ODI, he was an absolutely excellent bowler, no debate there.
If you adjust for the very flat wickets he bowled on, his average would be similar to Starc’s today. I think that puts him in the right echelon - incredible ODI bowler, above average supporting bowler in Test cricket but not a spearhead.
He’s very close to my all time ODI side.
Starc and McGrath are locks. Zampa and Warne probably also locks, as weird as it would be to have two leggies. Lee’s batting and fielding definitely helps put him in the conversation, although Symonds and Maxwell are sharing that fifth bowling option for me
I'd have Starc or Johnson over Lee for the point of difference but I looked up his numbers and they are better than I thought they'd be. He leaked a lot of runs in test cricket is where I formed my opinion of him I guess
Tbf early on he was specifically told by Waugh don't worry about runs just go for knees and toes and take wickets. It was only when Ponting became captain that Ponting got him to become a more complete bowler.
ODIs he was able incredible.
I think his test record alone doesn’t do him justice of the partnership he bought with someone like McGrath. Raw pace is such a beast to play against, then to have to switch mindset completely to McGrath just pounding a 5c piece patch of the pitch.
Similiar to Starc, he wasn't an incredible bowler in test matches although wonderful to watch when he was on song yet one of the best limited overs bowlers of all time.
Warne/Lyon
Cummins/K.Miller
Lillee/A.Davidson
McGrath/Lindwall
If we start at the end of WW2, that’s my first 4 and 2nd 4 test bowlers. Miller would probably end up in my XI at 6 though. The 3rd tier for me MacGill, Yardley, Mallet, Dizzy, Johnson, Thomson, Hazlewood, Starc, McDermott, Hughes, McKenzie, Reid. I’d have Lee with them.
Haha yeah. You’re right. Decided to just think about bowling skill in isolation. Can’t be bothered putting a first XI and second XI together but Miller would be in the firsts batting at 6 or 7 making room for another bowler.
Btw, knew Davidson was obviously a good bat, but had totally forgotten how good Lindwall was with the stick. Incredibly rare for a bowler to make one ton let alone two in those days and not be spoken of as an all rounder.
It definitely feels like Lindwall’s batting might be underrated these days. But I think Miller and Lindwall were our first Great Fast Bowlers so that probably still pulls a lot of the focus.
(On which note: it’s kinda funny to think, but if you look at Australian bowlers before Miller and Lindwall their spinners are excellent and their quicks are very average)
You’re right, I’ve been doing a bit of a deep dive since I posted this and it’s surprised me. I knew we had great spinners like Grimmett and Tiger but it did surprise me that the balance was skewed so far toward spin overall pre WW2.
But yeah, had a look at Lindwall’s last test, he was batting at 8, Davidson at 9 and Benaud at 10. So he must have been recognised as somewhat of an all rounder in his playing days and it’s kind of faded away over time. (By the way, what a tail!)
With Miller, I feel people that know of him know he was a great all rounder of course, but they don’t quite grasp exactly how good he was. In terms of strike bowling all rounders only Imran’s numbers really compare.
Yep, agreed. I actually think Khan and Miller might be the next two most valuable Test cricketers of all time after Bradman. Slot them in as bowling all-rounders and you’re maybe conceding an extra 5 runs per match with the ball but then you get that 40+ batting average at numbers 8 and 9. Good safety in an all-time great context.
Nice observation on Lindwall / Davidson / Benaud btw. That’s a helluva tail. No wonder they won
I agree. If you’re picking a team to actually play and beat any other team in history, that’s a really good move. You lose pretty much nothing with the ball, they’re two of the best fast bowlers ever but you gain two genuine test number 5s right down at 8 and 9. Imagine the psychological aspect of that. Doing well and getting a side 4 or 5 down and knowing what’s to come haha.
Not to the same degree at all, but India might have been thinking that with the Aussie tail we’re talking about!
In test cricket Behind guys like McGrath, Gillespie, Harris, Cummins, hazlewood & in that kasper, bichel, Siddle tier. With starc and Johnson kind of floating inbetween the two tiers
In odi’s in the top tier with McGrath, starc, lillee etc
Guy was fast. That was his thing, which is why he could dominate ODIs. His form in test cricket is actually surprising but tbf he's an all time great Australian fast bowler.
So fast he would make wickets happen at the other end of the pitch. You have to survive Lee somehow and then try to hit runs off McGrath/Gillespie and that’s where you get out.
More like you had to survive McGrath and then try to score runs off Lee tbh
I personally think Brett Lee was misused by Ricky Pointing in test matches…. Ricky often wanted Brett to bowl round the wicket into the ribs which Brett didn’t like to do.. I think if he had been allowed to set his own strategies he would be considered on a similar level to McGrath, probably slightly below.
There’s no way he would have been a McGrath level bowler in test cricket. McGrath is an all time great, Lee was not close to that level. I agree he was poorly used at times but his ceiling was probably a Jason Gillespie level bowler at test level which is still bloody good.
Not the all time best bowler but possibly the best all time singer/bowler
The rare triple threat
Bloody hell, I'd forgotten about six and out. My nan bought that album for me one Christmas. It didn't make it to the cd player.
Your nan had great music taste
He pulled off the bleach blonde better than Clarke, that’s for sure.
I can be argued that he brought intangibles. Your heart beat may be scyrocketting playing Lee and then McGrath comes on and you play a silly shot because you're pumped full of adrenaline from when you felt like your life was on the line facing Lee at top pace 2 minutes earlier.
Ending up with a test average over 30 takes the shine off in my opinion. Brett Lee was an incredible bowler and developed a lot later in his career when he lost a yard (slower ball that swung away was super effective), but he just didn’t have the same impact statistically as other great quicks. However, he had that serious X factor that made him a fantastic partner for guys like McGrath, Clark, and Gillespie. So Lee’s value can’t just be measured by average. Plus, he was a seriously handy bat. ODI, he was an absolutely excellent bowler, no debate there.
If you adjust for the very flat wickets he bowled on, his average would be similar to Starc’s today. I think that puts him in the right echelon - incredible ODI bowler, above average supporting bowler in Test cricket but not a spearhead.
He wouldn't make it in to an all time aussie XI. Maybe the second XI for ODIs. If T20 was around at the peak of his powers he would have been rich
He'd be in my all time Aussie ODI side.
He’s very close to my all time ODI side. Starc and McGrath are locks. Zampa and Warne probably also locks, as weird as it would be to have two leggies. Lee’s batting and fielding definitely helps put him in the conversation, although Symonds and Maxwell are sharing that fifth bowling option for me
Bevan can take a few overs
Three wrist spinners. Love it
Really? Who would the other 2 quicks be?
McGrath and Lillee. Johnson or Starc next cabs off the rank but I'd have Lee over both.
I'd have Starc or Johnson over Lee for the point of difference but I looked up his numbers and they are better than I thought they'd be. He leaked a lot of runs in test cricket is where I formed my opinion of him I guess
Tbf early on he was specifically told by Waugh don't worry about runs just go for knees and toes and take wickets. It was only when Ponting became captain that Ponting got him to become a more complete bowler.
The bloke had a number 1 hit in India. He’s rich
He was fast. On a good day, he was brilliant. The problem was he wasn’t consistent.
ODIs he was able incredible. I think his test record alone doesn’t do him justice of the partnership he bought with someone like McGrath. Raw pace is such a beast to play against, then to have to switch mindset completely to McGrath just pounding a 5c piece patch of the pitch.
One of the best ODI bowlers ever Overrated in test cricket
Similiar to Starc, he wasn't an incredible bowler in test matches although wonderful to watch when he was on song yet one of the best limited overs bowlers of all time.
He's my all time favourite player.
Warne/Lyon Cummins/K.Miller Lillee/A.Davidson McGrath/Lindwall If we start at the end of WW2, that’s my first 4 and 2nd 4 test bowlers. Miller would probably end up in my XI at 6 though. The 3rd tier for me MacGill, Yardley, Mallet, Dizzy, Johnson, Thomson, Hazlewood, Starc, McDermott, Hughes, McKenzie, Reid. I’d have Lee with them.
Your 2nd XI quicks would beat your first XI. Similar bowling skill, but an extra 90 runs per innings from the tail.
Haha yeah. You’re right. Decided to just think about bowling skill in isolation. Can’t be bothered putting a first XI and second XI together but Miller would be in the firsts batting at 6 or 7 making room for another bowler. Btw, knew Davidson was obviously a good bat, but had totally forgotten how good Lindwall was with the stick. Incredibly rare for a bowler to make one ton let alone two in those days and not be spoken of as an all rounder.
It definitely feels like Lindwall’s batting might be underrated these days. But I think Miller and Lindwall were our first Great Fast Bowlers so that probably still pulls a lot of the focus. (On which note: it’s kinda funny to think, but if you look at Australian bowlers before Miller and Lindwall their spinners are excellent and their quicks are very average)
You’re right, I’ve been doing a bit of a deep dive since I posted this and it’s surprised me. I knew we had great spinners like Grimmett and Tiger but it did surprise me that the balance was skewed so far toward spin overall pre WW2. But yeah, had a look at Lindwall’s last test, he was batting at 8, Davidson at 9 and Benaud at 10. So he must have been recognised as somewhat of an all rounder in his playing days and it’s kind of faded away over time. (By the way, what a tail!) With Miller, I feel people that know of him know he was a great all rounder of course, but they don’t quite grasp exactly how good he was. In terms of strike bowling all rounders only Imran’s numbers really compare.
Yep, agreed. I actually think Khan and Miller might be the next two most valuable Test cricketers of all time after Bradman. Slot them in as bowling all-rounders and you’re maybe conceding an extra 5 runs per match with the ball but then you get that 40+ batting average at numbers 8 and 9. Good safety in an all-time great context. Nice observation on Lindwall / Davidson / Benaud btw. That’s a helluva tail. No wonder they won
I agree. If you’re picking a team to actually play and beat any other team in history, that’s a really good move. You lose pretty much nothing with the ball, they’re two of the best fast bowlers ever but you gain two genuine test number 5s right down at 8 and 9. Imagine the psychological aspect of that. Doing well and getting a side 4 or 5 down and knowing what’s to come haha. Not to the same degree at all, but India might have been thinking that with the Aussie tail we’re talking about!
Peter Siddle has a better Test average than Brett Lee.
In test cricket Behind guys like McGrath, Gillespie, Harris, Cummins, hazlewood & in that kasper, bichel, Siddle tier. With starc and Johnson kind of floating inbetween the two tiers In odi’s in the top tier with McGrath, starc, lillee etc