Who was better: Hadlee or McGrath?

[andyc]

Oh yes. It is one of the longer term effects of one day cricket.

• Batsmen become more aggressive. Strikes rates go up
• Bowlers become more defensive. Run checking becomes the first instinct.
• Overall bowling standards decline.
• Batsmen become more adventurous and innovative which pays against mediocre bowling and defensive batting techniques decline.
• The best bowlers exploit this.

But then why do Hadlee and McGrath have remarkably similar stats in terms of ER and SR? If batsmen being aggressive were the reason behind McGrath's success, wouldn't you expect his ER to be considerably higher than Hadlee's, with a better SR?

 

[Perm]

Funny, I never see you get on SS's case WRT his McGrath worship. At least BS worships a real fast bowler.

He doesn't make comments like BS repeatedly does, and that's what annoys me. I sincerely hope that the last sentence wasn't serious.

 

[Craig]

He doesn't make comments like BS repeatedly does, and that's what annoys me. I sincerely hope that the last sentence wasn't serious.

And if he wasn't?

 

[Goughy]

I saw both bowl (though Hadlee only towards the end of his career).

Im certainly not going to say anything against Hadlee as he was brilliant but rather pick up a few points

I think it is a complete misassessment of McGrath as a bowler to suggest he would struggle with the more patient and obdurate of batsmen like Gavaskar and that he relies on false shots for wickets.

McGrath is often misunderstood and actually is more suited to bowling at the defensive player.

a) McGrath likes to settle into a line and length and find his feet. Once he has got going he uses that concistency to dominate the batsman
b) McGrath tries to make the batsman play every ball. To different players that is a different line. However, he pursues a batsman by always being at him
c) As the batsman has to play every ball the small movement McGrath gets either way becomes very dangerous
d) As the batsman has to play every ball McGrath can use this knowledge to pull the batsman into different positions that they may not want to be in.

McGrath is far more suited to bowling at the defensive guys than those that look to lay shots against him and dont allow him to hit his lenths all day.

Consider the batsmen that have been a success against McGrath.

Average from balls bowled by McGrath
Defensive Players
Atherton- 9.89
Kallis- 9.83
Kirsten- 14.00
Dravid- 10
Dippenaar- 2.25

Hoggard- 0.75

Aggressive Players
Cairns- 45.83
Pietersen- 48.8
Lara- 41.4
Trescothick- 35.5
Astle- 39.75

There is a definate pattern

The way McGrath bowls he would have been more successful against the likes of Gavaskar and Boycott than the likes of Richards and Botham

Another point on McGraths record. Whilst he bowled in a fine team he seldom got the opportunity to bowl at the tail compared to other seamers. He was effectively denied a large number of cheap tailend wickets.

Im not going to vote as I think its a toss up, but I think people are doing McGrath a disservice.

 

[nightprowler10]

Well the last sentence was purely SS baiting, but tbh he has been just as annoying as BS in the past with his idol worship.

 

[nightprowler10]

Goughy, where did you get those averages from?

 

[Goughy]

Goughy, where did you get those averages from?

Statsguru. Ask for Career bowling by batsman/fielder

 

[archie mac]

I saw both bowl (though Hadlee only towards the end of his career).

Im certainly not going to say anything against Hadlee as he was brilliant but rather pick up a few points

I think it is a complete misassessment of McGrath as a bowler to suggest he would struggle with the more patient and obdurate of batsmen like Gaveskar and that he relies on false shots for wickets.

McGrath is often misunderstood and actually is more suited to bowling at the defensive player.

a) McGrath likes to settle into a line and length and find his feet. Once he has got going he uses that concistency to dominate the batsman
b) McGrath tries to make the batsman play every ball. To different players that is a different line. However, he pursues a batsman by always being at him
c) As the batsman has to play every ball the small movement McGrath gets either way becomes very dangerous
d) As the batsman has to play every ball McGrath can use this knowledge to pull the batsman into different positions that they may not want to be in.

McGrath is far more suited to bowling at the defensive guys than those that look to lay shots against him and dont allow him to hit his lenths all day.

Consider the batsmen that have been a success against McGrath.

Average from balls bowled by McGrath
Defensive Players
Atherton- 9.89
Kallis- 9.83
Kirsten- 14.00
Dravid- 10
Dippenaar- 2.25

Hoggard- 0.75

Aggressive Players
Cairns- 45.83
Pietersen- 48.8
Lara- 41.4
Trescothick- 35.5
Astle- 39.75

There is a definate pattern

The way McGrath bowls he would have been more successful against the likes of Gaveskar and Boycott than the likes of Richards and Botham

Another point on McGraths record. Whilst he bowled in a fine team he seldom got the opportunity to bowl at the tail compared to other seamers. He was effectively denied a large number of cheap tailend wickets.

Im not going to vote as I think its a toss up, but I think people are doing McGrath a disservice.

I remember in a series, the Kiwis played very negative cricket against McGrath and he struggled quite a bit, I do think Hanif, Gavaskar, Boycott and Barrington would have done well against him, but you never know a fine bowler like McGrath may well have found away to make them play as you suggested

 

[Goughy]

I remember in a series, the Kiwis played very negative cricket against McGrath and he struggled quite a bit

Perception rather than reality, Im afraid

McGrath played 6 series against NZ

In the 2 he had the lowest economy rate in (2.24 and 2.33) he had an average of 15.72 and 22.41.

In the series he had his highest economy rate of 2.79 he averaged 65.4

The others are inbetween.

Simple fact for McGrath (from watching him and analysing him, that the stats back up) the more defensive and negative a team the more they play into his hands.

To be overly watchful against a fit McGrath is suicide for a batsman

 

[The Sean]

I've been lucky enough to see both men in their prime, though being Australian I've obviously seen more of Pidge. I did, however, see Hadlee give one of the greatest bowling displays ever seen in Australia when he toured in 85/86 - opening the series with 9/52 in the first innings at the 'Gabba and then not letting up on his way to 33 wickets for the three Tests. Even taking into account the general direness of Australian batsmanship at the time (not you, AB) his bowling was astonishing.

As bowlers, there's so very little in it in my book, though I've got Hadlee ever so slightly ahead. As a skipper you'd consider yourself blessed to have either of them bowling for you.

 

[nightprowler10]

Statsguru. Ask for Career bowling by batsman/fielder

I thought as much. The averages in that list are very misleading. It is basically the average of a batsman in matches McGrath played in and dismissed him, not necessarily their averages against McGrath. Just look at ABdV, averages 61 against Pidge because he scored 61 in the one match McGrath dismissed him in.

 

[Prince EWS]

In the 2 he had the lowest economy rate in (2.24 and 2.33) he had an average of 15.72 and 22.41.

In the series he had his highest economy rate of 2.79 he averaged 65.4

That doesn't mean they actually played more negative cricket against him in the series he had low economy rates in, though. From what I remember, the batsmen left McGrath wherever possible, and this forced him to bowl straighter - then they picked him off on the on side.

However, I'd say McGrath finished his career a much better bowler because of it. He learnt a lot in that series. The tactic certainly hasn't worked since.

 

[Goughy]

I've been lucky enough to see both men in their prime, though being Australian I've obviously seen more of Pidge. I did, however, see Hadlee give one of the greatest bowling displays ever seen in Australia when he toured in 85/86 - opening the series with 9/52 in the first innings at the 'Gabba and then not letting up on his way to 33 wickets for the three Tests. Even taking into account the general direness of Australian batsmanship at the time (not you, AB) his bowling was astonishing.

As bowlers, there's so very little in it in my book, though I've got Hadlee ever so slightly ahead. As a skipper you'd consider yourself blessed to have either of them bowling for you.

The 85/86 tour was as close to peerless as you could find.

An absolute triumph for Hadlee

 

[silentstriker]

McGrath , as I have said before, was the fast bowler in a crafty spinner's body. He waited the batsman out.

Is that why his S/R is the same as these supposedly unplayable guys?

I think McGrath verusus Gavaskar or Haneef would have been very boring to watch for most of todays fans and I daresay these two batsmen at their peaks would have come out on top more often than one has seen from modern batsmen facing McGrath.

That would be great, except its completely wrong.

He loves defensive players, and does extremely well against them. Kallis is pretty much McGrath's bunny, and struggles mightily against him. Same with Dravid. Akash Chopra had a fantastic article on why you couldn't just leave him. He locks you down and all it takes is one delivery misjudged (which happens a lot, as its almost impossible to read his length due to his action) and you're cought behind or bowled. The rare times he has struggled, it's been with aggressive players who don't leave him alone (because you can't leave him for any length of time). If anything, only players like Viv Richards would have done well against him (eg more aggressive one day type players). And considering there are plenty of those around, and McGrath still wins those battles a lot more than he loses them (see Lara, Brian), I'd be pretty much confident of putting him up against Gavaskar, or Hanif or whoever else and giving McGrath new bunnies.

With McGrath bowling to Tendulkar you feel oh why couldnt he have left it alone.

The problem with that is if he was sure it was going to miss off stump, he probably would have.

I can't believe McGrath is penalized for turning his art into its simplest basics and being perfect with it.

Well the last sentence was purely SS baiting, but tbh he has been just as annoying as BS in the past with his idol worship.

I have long long posts in the pasts explaining my position, and I don't really feel like I need to say that over and over. You don't agree with me, and that's fair enough.

 

[Prince EWS]

Random, but I'm sure you'll be reading this thread - SS, can you please fix the typo in your signature. "Goodbye".

Sorry for being pedantic, but it has bugged me for some time now an I can't resist bringing it up any longer.

 

[silentstriker]

Random, but I'm sure you'll be reading this thread - SS, can you please fix the typo in your signature. "Goodbye".

Sorry for being pedantic, but it has bugged me for some time now an I can't resist bringing it up any longer.

Whoops.

 

[SJS]

I said players like Gavaskar and Hanif would do well against him. I dont see any player like those in the names mentioned.

Of course his strike rate is good. He is a fabulous bowler and as I said The best bowlers exploit this. refering to the poorer defensive techniques of modern batsmen.

Modern day batsmen are NOT equipped to handle someone like him. So he will have a great strike rate.

I agree with the poster who said that being the great bowler he was, he would, in all probability, have adjusted if the batsmen like Hanif and Gavaskar were facing him. And that would have made him a better bowler too.

 

[grecian]

Hadlee, different class, imo.

 

[silentstriker]

Of course his strike rate is good. He is a fabulous bowler and as I said The best bowlers exploit this. refering to the poorer defensive techniques of modern batsmen.

If you can't figure out when to play with the bat and when to leave, the best defensive technique won't do you any good.

 

[archie mac]

That doesn't mean they actually played more negative cricket against him in the series he had low economy rates in, though. From what I remember, the batsmen left McGrath wherever possible, and this forced him to bowl straighter - then they picked him off on the on side.

However, I'd say McGrath finished his career a much better bowler because of it. He learnt a lot in that series. The tactic certainly hasn't worked since.

Yes, agreed I watched every ball in that series (well pretty close) and that was the impression, as McGrath became more frustrated he changed his line and was easy meat for the Kiwis

He had a good record against Lara and he did not block a great deal and I hardly think that Kallis was his bunny, was certainly the best batsman to tour here from SA imo (since they have made their return)