Dale Steyn

How good is Dale Steyn really. He just played his 50th test match and taken his 260th test wicket. There are the obvious greats, guys who played 80 plus test matches and inscribed their greatness in stone for all to admire.

In my opinion of the players I have seen Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh, Alan Donald and Glen McGrath are a handful of seam bowlers I admired and think of highly.

From records Malcolm Marshall seemed to be the quintessential fast bowler, from reports I am told he had a beautiful action and very effective.

Dale Steyn in my opinion has an easy economical action and should not suffer as much wear and tear as Alan Donald did who did put a lot of strain on his front leg with the way he delivered the ball. It is likely that Dale Steyn should have a much longer career than Donald did, taking his age in consideration I would expect Steyn to have at least another 5 years at international level whilst still at the top of his game, and then maybe another 2 years as first change.

He does have the ability to swing the ball late which gives batsmen little time to adjust their shot when there is swing on offer. He also skids the ball, gets decent bounce and has good pace. I heard something interesting in commentary during the first test vs Sri Lanka that I have never thought of before, but does make a lot of sense when thinking about it.

The taller a bolwer are the more difficult it is for them to hit the good length, and depending on the bounce of the wicket it becomes more difficult for them to adjust their length to the pitch, where as Dale Steyn is only 5 foot 11 inches and will therefor find it easier to adapt to a pitch than Morne Morkel as an example.

So what are his weaknesses?
Not sure, but he does seem to have trouble when there is no swing, Shaun Pollock had the ability to use patience and the waiting game to “bore” batsmen in the corridor of uncertainty, can Dale Steyn do that?

So for some comparisons.

Glen McGrath in his first 50 tests.
2017 overs bowled
234 wickets
22.77 average
51.7 Strike rate
5 wicket hauls 15
10 wicket hauls 1

McGrath’s strike rate remained similar for the rest of his career but did become more economical as a bowler later on in his career.

Alan Donald in his first 50 tests.
1930 overs bowled
251 wickets
22.11 average
46.1 Strike rate
5 wicket hauls 16
10 wicket hauls 2

Donald’s figures did remain very much similar right through his career, although his effectiveness as a strike bowler were not as obvious, he started bowling less overs per match and broke down a few times due to injury. He only completed 656 overs in his last 22 test matches.

Curtly Ambrose in his first 50 tests.
2026 overs bowled
224 wickets
21.11 average
54.2 Strike rate
5 wicket hauls 11
10 wicket hauls 3

I only saw Curtly Ambrose in the latter part of his career, but he always impressed me with the bounce he got from almost any pitch, he obviously had Courtney Walsh on the other side doing much the same and as a combination they were almost incomparable. Perhaps the reason why his 5 and 10 wicket hauls fail in comparison to the others.

Courtney Walsh
1636 overs bowled
174 wickets
24,95 average
56.4 Strike rate
5 wicket hauls 5
10 wicket hauls 1

Perhaps the two west Indian bowlers were more than the sum of their parts, individually they have great records, but as a combination they achieved a reputation few have.

Dale Steyn in his first 50 tests.
1715 overs bowled
260 wickets
22.9 average
39.5 Strike rate
5 wicket hauls 17
10 wicket hauls 4

His comparison in my view is very favourable, he doesn’t seem to be over bowled by Greame Smith, his strike rate is the stand out amongst these top quality bowlers. Perhaps his performances in England has thus far been his biggest disappointments.

He might not end top of the pile in many lists in the future, but he looks certain to be acknowledged as a great once retired.

Steyn is the best of the present lot, and is already one of the best ever fast bowlers to have played the game. Where in that list would he get slotted in, can only be determined by the time he gets done, for me, he should be somewhere among the top ranks.

No question that Steyn is the best of the current bowlers in the world, and its not just a one year thing but consistently through his career. If he keep this up for another 30 tests he has every right to be considered amongst the modern greats, even more so if we use the same rule that dismisses every modern batsmans stats because the game is supposedly loaded in their favour now.

One thing to consider is whether batsmen's superiority in the late 00s was based on pitches/laws/equipment which suited them and/or there simply being more good batsmen about, or whether it was due to a lack of good bowlers.
If it were the former, then Steyn's stats are even better than they appear. If it were the latter, then maybe Steyn benefitted from bowling at batsmen who weren't used to facing top quality bowling.
Personally, I think the dominance of batsmen in the late 00s was due to a mix of these factors, meaning Steyn's figures have to be taken as they are. As such he is obviously, at this moment in time, up there with the very best of all-time. And if he maintains such performances (or even improves on them) to the end of his career, he must go down as one of the all-time great fast bowlers.

Slight side issue. Perhaps it's important to have around the Steyns and the Andersons plus the new crop coming through from Australia.
Test batting averages have been edging up and bowling ones also edging up as batsman have played against less-destructive bowlers in recent years and batted on, generally, good wickets.
Just look at how many batsmen now average 50 or better in Test cricket. OK, we've got some all-time greats around, but I reckon anyone averaging 40 in the 80s and 90s would be COMFORTABLY averaging in the 50s now and would have been considered "better" Test players.
Take Mike Atherton, for example - always up against new-ball bowlers such as McGrath and Ambrose and Walsh. Result ? Test average below 38 with plenty of ducks.
Reckon Atherton would be averaging at least 10 points more now. So the Steyns of this world can now set matters right and we can find out just how good some of the current crop of batters are.

Maybe his very impressive strike rate could also be influenced somewhat by the changes in attitude towards batting. Certainly in the 00's it seems that teams are more prepared to risk losing wickets in exchange for quicker scoring rates, thus presenting Steyn with more wicket taking opportunities. For example nowadays 300 - 6 is probably seen as being a better day for the batting team than 200 - 3.

Having said this, I think Steyn would have been successful in any era as he is a top quality bowler.

sirfredperry wrote:Slight side issue. Perhaps it's important to have around the Steyns and the Andersons plus the new crop coming through from Australia.
Test batting averages have been edging up and bowling ones also edging up as batsman have played against less-destructive bowlers in recent years and batted on, generally, good wickets.
Just look at how many batsmen now average 50 or better in Test cricket. OK, we've got some all-time greats around, but I reckon anyone averaging 40 in the 80s and 90s would be COMFORTABLY averaging in the 50s now and would have been considered "better" Test players.
Take Mike Atherton, for example - always up against new-ball bowlers such as McGrath and Ambrose and Walsh. Result ? Test average below 38 with plenty of ducks.
Reckon Atherton would be averaging at least 10 points more now. So the Steyns of this world can now set matters right and we can find out just how good some of the current crop of batters are.

Agreed. I geniunely think that Atherton was a better opening bat than Strauss, but obviously the stats tell a completely different story. I have no doubt he would have averaged 45+ if he were playing now.

You can chuck into the mix Gooch, Gower, Gatting, Lamb et al as I think they would have had far higher Test averages now than they did in the 80s and 90s.
Remember they had to play not five but SIX Tests against the top teams and when they had the chance to play against the, then, weaker sides, they would often get series consisting of JUST ONE Test. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. We weren't that strong then, so what did we do? We packed our Test programme so that we could get anihilated.

I definitely think the modern batsman is more aggressive than the batsmen prior to 2000.

With the invention of T20 and the amount of ODI's being played these days the mindset of batsmen have changed.

I remember thinking back to guys like Gary Kirsten, Darryl Cullinan, they averaged mid forties and yet were class batsmen.

But then again the batsmen' equipmnt is superior now than ever before, the bowler still has virtually the same nut that he bowls with.

So perhaps there is a balance in it all, but class bowlers perhaps have more opportunity to take wickets, but then again there aren't that many with a strike rate under 40, even now.

If Steyn stays fit and motivated, he could break McGrath's record of 500 odd Test wickets.

More importantly he's only 3 5 wicket hauls behind the Great Allan Donald. Steyn could even end up with 40 5 wicket hauls.

Steyn for me is already an All Timer without a shadow of a doubt.A bowler such as Ray Lindwall is called an ATG and rightly so.Mind you,Steyn has a similar record on flatter pitches and has troubled the likes of Sachin.What more can you ask for?
17 fifers in 50 tests pretty much sums it up

Agree with most. Certainly very good already and if he finishes with a similar record (and I don't see why he shouldn't, his action is consistent and he relies on movement and guile as well as pace) then he would have to be considered an all-time great, up there with the very best.

IMO dale steyn is an all time great...as shanky says the amount of 5-fers he has is amazing, and troubles the best on all pitches all the time.