I remember being very much around in Daniel's time, and followed the fortunes of the West Indies very closely, and I also remember that my friends and I were not particularly impressed with Daniel. I didn't realize his bowling figures were that good - I must grant him that - but a very close look at his statistics reminded me why I was not too taken with him.

His 36 test wickets are not really of significant batsmen, and he only took 7 of those against Australia. And I seem to recall that many batsmen got themselves out against his bowling, rather than his sheer skill doing the job...

It is similar, I think to Sobers' comment that Kanhai was as good as Richards because Kanhai had better bowling to face...