In August Nick wrote a very fine piece lamenting the decline in pace bowling. From the halcyon days of the mid-90s, when opening batsmen were tormented by the likes of Wasim and Waqar, Curtley and Courtney, Donald et al, the quality of quicks has undeniably declined. Moreover, those few opening bowlers who have excelled in the 2000s, principally McGrath and Pollock, have tended to be miserly rather than lethal in pace.

Belatedly, however, the real pacemen seem to be back. A pair of lightning-fast slingers, Shaun Tait and Lasith Malinga, helped make the ODI World Cup more tolerable. Mixing devilish, late-swinging yorkers with inconsistency, they were invariably enthralling to watch: no one knew what was going to happen next. Their actions are so unique that modifying them appears close to impossible, which means they will never become masters of line and length. A good thing too: the more individuality in the game the better.

It has been in recent Tests, however, that the quick-men have reaffirmed their supremacy. Dale Steyn ravaged the admittedly brittle Kiwi battling line-up with consecutive match ten-wicket hauls, indicative of a special talent. His forte is, like so many quicks, the yorker, aided by a terrific bouncer. Although less idiosyncratic than Tait and Malinga, Steyn's action also has a welcome unmodified air, allowing him to generate supremely late swing. Armed with new and old ball alike, he has the ability to create carnage when he gets it right.

For all the exploits of Tait, Malinga, Steyn and the exciting Aussie left-armer Mitchell Johnson, the man who has been most impressive is anything but a new-comer. At 31, Brett Lee should slowly be metamorphosing into a line-and-length merchant. Instead, he has responded magnificently to the task of leading the attack in the post-McGrath era. His joie de vivre and blistering pace have never been in doubt. But now there is more late swing, greater consistency and an improved cricket brain; Lee can work batsmen out as well as blast 'em to the Pavillion. Worryingly for fans hoping Australia's impregnability will be challenged, he seems to be turning into the consummate quick bowler, a fusion of consistency and raw pace, able to be effective even on the least responsive of tracks.

This is not to belittle masters of swing and seam like Stuart Clark and Mohammad Asif, but cricket needs the fast men. Most encouragingly, the West Indies' shock win in South Africa owed much to Jerome Taylor and Fidel Edwards, who could just help to revive the great tradition of West Indian quicks. It has taken too long, but pace really does seem on the up. Just as well, too: watching Lee at his most hostile steaming in to Sangakkara, counter-attacking with audacity and elan, was to witness amongst the most exhilarating sights the game of cricket can provide.


Third Umpire: Lee, Steyn and a most welcome revival

__________________
third-umpire.com

I also agree that a good fast bowler in full cry is a great sight and important tool in internatinal cricket. Brett Lee may not always come up with trumps, but he does give the impression of giving 100% every time he bowls (or fields). Yound Dale Steyn is starting to impress and there are one or two others around. Fidel Edwards also has promise.

I prefer the "classical" side-on actions like those of Lee & Steyn to the open chested bowling action of the Harmison kind.

The best seam bowling sight in world cricket right now would surely be Asif one end and Johnson the other: neither quite as quick as Bond, Akhtar, Lee, Steyn and co... but quick enough, and with actions and capabilities to savour. My second choice pairing (simply to watch, and irrespective of quality) might be Hoggard and Clark

I can recall a few quicks who've been eminently watchable... like Wasim Akram and Curtly Ambrose... but I'd rather watch repeats of Gillespie in his prime than witness the actions of Tait and Malinga...

Bond and Akthar are fine bowlers, but they do not have the fluent action of Lee & Steyn. Bond in particular tends to splay his legs at the point of delivery (almost like Nel) and that makes the action look a bit ugly.

Hoggard's action is simple and excellent, with that slight hip swivel with the outswinger. Stuart Clark is good too, but he opens up a bit at the point of delivery.

Fully agree with Rachael (!!!) that Wasim Akram and Curtley Ambrose had extremely watchable bowling actions.

It is great to watch Lee, Steyn, Johnson, Tait but in Tests I don't think Malinga is consistently quick. By quick I mean over 90mph.

As I've always said pace is always important in test cricket. The teams currently performing well have good pace attacks and England (who are on a bit of a downer at the moment) have lost theirs. As skilfull a bowler as Sidebottom may be he just doesnt have the penetration.

Perhaps now would be a good time to revisit this thread:

http://http://world-a-team.com/inter...eed-speed.html

I think "Erns" attack may be the more effective now than initially thought

Whilst Clark is effective I think he has a very "stiff" action.

If we are talking about genuine fast bowlers that are pleasant to watch, what about Lillee and Holding? Both had lovely rhythmical actions that i could watch all day.....

__________________
Mark.

Without Flintoff in the side we do need to have two 90mph bowlers plus Hoggard. In his last 5 Tests Sidebottom has only taken 7 wickets.

As long as it is not the terrible Sajjid Mahmood! He probably would be unavailable anyway, what with this new Bollywood role and all that.