Best Test match strike rate QUIZ

[brod]

Name the 13 international cricketers that have a better bowling strike rate (min 100 test wickets) than the best Australian Charlie Turner, who played 17 tests between 1887 and 1895 taking 101 wickets at the srtike rate of 51.2.

[Dogwatcher]

Charlie 'The Terror' Turner.
From Bathurst I reckon.

[rod_rooster]

I'll start it off but i can't name all of them:

Waqar Younis
Shoaib Akhtar
Joel Garner
Michael Holding
Fred Trueman
Colin Croft
Malcolm Marshall
Sid Barnes
Richard Hadlee
Alan Donald

I think they all were better than 51.2.

I think Shane Bond would be far better than 51.2 but i don't think he's taken 100 wickets yet

[Dogwatcher]

I think Shane Bond would be far better than 51.2 but i don't think he's taken 100 wickets yet

He certainly would've if not for injuries eh.

[brod]

43.4 s/r 373 wickets Waqar Younis
44.7 s/r 169 wickets Shoaib Akhtar
50.8 s/r 259 wickets Joel Garner
50.9 s/r 249 wickets Michael Holding
49.4 s/r 307 wickets Fred Trueman
49.3 s/r 125 wickets Colin Croft
46.7 s/r 376 wickets Malcolm Marshall
41.6 s/r 189 wickets Sid Barnes
50.8 s/r 431 wickets Sir Richard Hadlee
47.0 s/r 330 wickets Alan Donald

And yes, Shane Bond does have a strike rate better than 51.2, but yes he has not tkaen 100 test wickets.
Shane Bond has the 3rd best alltime strike rate of 38.9 (79 wickets)

Head of the class Rod

[rod_rooster]

Head of the class Rod

I basically just listed the West Indies bowling attack of the 70's/80's.

Still trying to think of the others but i'm not having any luck. I can think of a few but none of them have taken 100 wickets.

[rogernumber10]

Anyone said George Lohmann. He was the other Pom in the late 1800s who kept bowling out South AFrican sides for about 50 by himself. Took a truckload of wickets in bugger-all tests. He has to qualify.

[rogernumber10]

I'm also going to chuck in two more poms to round out the list. Johnny Briggs (I remember writing about him from my cricket days doing a comparison on how quickly blokes got to 50 Ashes wickets) and his named popped up as a guru wicket taker.

Less confident, because he might not have got to 100, but I'm having a stab at Frank Tyson. If not Tyson, it's either an old Pom from late in the 1800s or maybe an early South AFrican. None of the aussies like spofforth, Saunders, Ferris etc got to 100.

That's actually making me less confident on Tyson, the more I think of it, but I'm logging him as the other guess with Briggs.

[Dogwatcher]

Curtly Ambrose?

And I agree on Lohmann Rog.
Forgotten about him - only a true cricket tragic would remember his name.

[Dogwatcher]

Also from, that era, someone like Bobby Peel maybe?

[rogernumber10]

I think a few of those South African sides in the early days of Test cricket provided about as much opposition to the Poms as a few current day sides manage to put up to Australia.
I didn't think Peel got near 100 wickets, but happy to be corrected.
As for the great Curtly, I thought he actually didn't qualify as Marshall always had him covered for strike rate, but Curtly just gave away absolutely no runs.

[Dogwatcher]

You're probably right about Ambrose.

I'm pretty certain Peel just cracked the town. His extra curricular activities probably hampered his career from what I remember reading.

[brod]

Anyone said George Lohmann. He was the other Pom in the late 1800s who kept bowling out South AFrican sides for about 50 by himself. Took a truckload of wickets in bugger-all tests. He has to qualify.

NUMBER ONE
and by a long way (7.5 balls)

34.1 s/r 112 wickets George Lohmann

[brod]

I'm also going to chuck in two more poms to round out the list. Johnny Briggs (I remember writing about him from my cricket days doing a comparison on how quickly blokes got to 50 Ashes wickets) and his named popped up as a guru wicket taker.

Less confident, because he might not have got to 100, but I'm having a stab at Frank Tyson. If not Tyson, it's either an old Pom from late in the 1800s or maybe an early South AFrican. None of the aussies like spofforth, Saunders, Ferris etc got to 100.

That's actually making me less confident on Tyson, the more I think of it, but I'm logging him as the other guess with Briggs.

s/r 45.1 118 wickets John Briggs
s/r 45.4 76 wickets Frank Tyson

[brod]

Curtly Ambrose?

54.5 s/r 405 wickets Curtley Ambrose

[brod]

Also from, that era, someone like Bobby Peel maybe?

s/r 51.6 101 wickets Bobby Peel

[brod]

One to go!!

[sasquatch]

Colin Blythe. 100 wickets in 19 tests. S/R: 45.4

[brod]

Colin Blythe. 100 wickets in 19 tests. S/R: 45.4

Dont want to suggest anything here, but????

Yes that is correct, and on that note all players have been named.
QUIZ OVER

[sasquatch]

Dont want to suggest anything here, but????

??? Yes???