Dale Steyn has a 3-word reaction to Harry Brook vs Marco Jansen 'best cricketer right now' debate

South African legend Dale Steyn weighed in on a Harry Brook versus Marco Jansen debate with three words.

Nasser Hussain had called Brook the best cricketer in the world right now.

Steyn had made the same claim about Jansen a day later.

Dale Steyn doubles down in support of Marco Jansen as 'best cricketer' over Harry Brook

Dale Steyn needed only three words to make his case for Marco Jansen over Harry Brook after a fan put the two players side by side and asked which of them deserved to be called the best cricketer in the world right now.

The question arose because two respected voices had made competing claims within 24 hours of each other. Nasser Hussain had given the title to Brook, and Steyn had given it to Jansen the following day, which left supporters of both players arguing over who had the stronger claim.

One fan laid the contradiction out on X and invited people to pick a side. He wrote: "Yesterday – Nasser Hussain called Harry Brook the best cricketer right now. Today - Dale Steyn called Marco Jansen the best cricketer right now. - WHO DESERVES THE TITLE?"

Steyn saw the post and answered it himself, declining to make any sort of extended argument and instead offering a reply that ran to three words. He wrote , "Harry don't bowl."

Steyn believes Jansen's all-round value trumps Brook's batting

The logic behind the reply is straightforward enough. Brook is a specialist batter who does not bowl regularly, while Jansen is a genuine all-rounder who opens the bowling for South Africa and bats in the lower middle order, which means he contributes in two disciplines rather than one.

Steyn has long been an admirer, having worked closely with Jansen at Sunrisers Eastern Cape, and he has previously said the left-armer had not yet come close to realising his full potential.

At 2.06m, Jansen extracts bounce from almost any surface, and he is currently part of the South Africa squad facing Australia.

Brook's credentials are not in question either. He has spent much of the past two years at or near the top of the ICC Test batting rankings and has been England's most dependable batter across formats, which is why Hussain was willing to hand him the title in the first place.

Steyn's point is fair but it doesn't mean the debate is settled

There is something appealing about the brevity, and the underlying argument holds up. A cricketer who takes wickets and scores runs influences more of a match than one who only bats, and if the title is meant to recognise total contribution then an all-rounder of Jansen's standing will usually win that comparison.

The trouble is that "best cricketer" rarely means "most useful across disciplines" when people say it. Hussain was almost certainly talking about quality rather than breadth, and on that measure, Brook's batting record stands in comparison with anyone currently playing, Jansen included.

Both men are also being judged by people with a stake in the answer, which is worth remembering.

Steyn has mentored Jansen directly, and Hussain has watched Brook develop in the England setup, so neither verdict is quite the neutral assessment it might appear. The debate is fun, but it was never going to be settled in three words.

For all the latest cricket news, opinion, and commentary, and to share your voice, head to our Facebook , Instagram , and X (Twitter) pages.