Who was better: Hadlee or McGrath?

[The Sean]

I don't think he's said anything particularly outlandish - and while I know adharcric can certainly speak for himself and doesn't need me defending him, I'm sure he also wasn't implying a detailed country-by-country analysis. Rather the fact that, as is noted so often on here when marking down batsmen of the modern era, runscoring is indeed much higher and seemingly much easier than it was 20 years ago, as evidenced by the prodigous batting averages and team scores that abound in international cricket today. That pitches of the modern era are - on the whole - flatter and easier to negotiate than they were in the 70s and 80s isn't a huge generalisation at all IMO, it's what just about all of us acknowledge as fact.

 

[Engle]

McGrath chased team victories
Hadlee chased personal records

McGrath stood head and shoulders over other pacers of his time.
Hadlee, well, hardly

 

[funnygirl]

Having seen both of them at their prime ,i can safely say that the difference is not that huge as some one is making out to be .For me both are almost similar with metronomic accuracy with Hadlee having more swing .

I choose Hadlee for having more variety(slightly) than Mcgrath.Mcgrath would have been successful had he played in that era as well . He had this ability to ''make the batsmen play'' .U just can't leave .Thats his strength. Quite boring though . Still ...

 

[The Sean]

It's nice to see that there are a few of us who saw both men in action. Makes me feel a little less old...

 

[Sanz]

I don't think he's said anything particularly outlandish - and while I know adharcric can certainly speak for himself and doesn't need me defending him, I'm sure he also wasn't implying a detailed country-by-country analysis. Rather the fact that, as is noted so often on here when marking down batsmen of the modern era, runscoring is indeed much higher and seemingly much easier than it was 20 years ago, as evidenced by the prodigous batting averages and team scores that abound in international cricket today. That pitches of the modern era are - on the whole - flatter and easier to negotiate than they were in the 70s and 80s isn't a huge generalisation at all IMO, it's what just about all of us acknowledge as fact.

May be that is a fact for 2000s, but It is not a fact for 90s. Pitches in 90s were much more bowler friendly than they were in 80s atleast in the parts of the world where I watched cricket.

 

[Sanz]

Seriously? NZ purposefully prepared the greenest tracks you can think of when Hadlee was playing (and rightfully so, why wouldnt they?)

They still do. India-NZ series 2001-02.

 

[Sanz]

McGrath chased team victories
Hadlee chased personal records

McGrath stood head and shoulders over other pacers of his time.
Hadlee, well, hardly

I hate it when people cant pick one without demeaning the other. I mean so far we have already established that :-

a. Hadlee's wickets came on greentops
b. Hadlee chased personal records

 

[Swervy]

Paddles for me

 

[silentstriker]

I hate it when people cant pick one without demeaning the other. I mean so far we have already established that :-

a. Hadlee's wickets came on greentops
b. Hadlee chased personal records

Except both are obviously true. The first one is obvious and the NZ groundskeepers should have been fired if they did not make pitches that helped their only world class player. And second has been admitted by Hadlee himself, but that does not make him in any way an inferior player or team man. If anything, it drove him to be better. I don't think you can overstate how much he did for New Zealand.

And I am sure McGrath was after personal records too. Most great players are; they want to do well personally. That devotion and drive is why they become elite players in the first place.

 

[Dissector]

Silentstriker,
How would you explain that Hadlee has a better record outside New Zealand? In fact he has a slightly better record in his six tests in India than in New Zealand. Hadlee was amazingly consistent wherever he bowled apart from one relatively poor series in Pakistan which was before he hit his prime.

Having said that I am personally in the "too close to call" camp myself. However it's incorrect to say that Hadlee did well primarily because of green wickets in New Zealand.

 

[Sanz]

Except both are obviously true. The first one is obvious and the NZ groundskeepers should have been fired if they did not make pitches that helped their only world class player. And second has been admitted by Hadlee himself, but that does not make him in any way an inferior player or team man. If anything, it drove him to be better. I don't think you can overstate how much he did for New Zealand.

No, neither are obviously true. It is just ridiculous that people post such rubbish without a touch of evidence.

 

[silentstriker]

Silentstriker,
How would you explain that Hadlee has a better record outside New Zealand?

Whoa there, I did not say he could not bowl on flat tracks. I said that NZ prepared seaming tracks for him (as they should have). And he had to bowl on them much less than McGrath.

 

[silentstriker]

No, neither are obviously true. It is just ridiculous that people post such rubbish without a touch of evidence.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that Hadlee didn't love his personal stats? Because that would be a first.

 

[Sanz]

Are you going to sit there and tell me that Hadlee didn't love his personal stats? Because that would be a first.

That's quite a shift from the original position, I must say.

Loving personal stats is different from 'Hadlee chased personal records' in the original post (which you defended) that implied that Hadlee played for personal records and Mcgrath played for team wins.

 

[The Baconator]

Nothing to add to this really, but it feels really weird to be discussing McGrath in the past tense.

 

[Days of Grace]

Well, I would like to add this:

Yes, Hadlee was bordering on being obsessive with his personal records. But he was still a team man IMO.

I mean, during his 9 wicket haul in the 1st innings of the 1st test back in 1985, he took the catch to off the only other bowler to get a wicket. If he was so much after personal records, he would have dropped it. Hell, even I would have been tempted to drop it ;-)

 

[Ikki]

Corrected

For the first four or five he was indomitable. Then he did neither particularly well.

Corrected.

 

[Ikki]

McGrath chased team victories
Hadlee chased personal records

That's a terrible statement to say about the man. Hadlee did not have that kind of character at all. A very selfless man. In fact, when they asked him jokingly why he caught Brown's ball when he should have went for the 10 wickets himself and he sternly says that "the game of cricket is not like that".

McGrath stood head and shoulders over other pacers of his time.
Hadlee, well, hardly

Although I voted for McGrath here those 2 statements are highly debatable. McGrath was not head and shoulders above Donald or Ambrose or Wasim or Pollock...and Hadlee not being head and shoulders higher than his contemporaries - I think we know them well - doesn't say much at all.

 

[aussie]

I would say they are about even TBH, they are the games two great metronomes don't think you can convievably come up with a solid argument to say one was better than the other.

 

[Athlai]

I would say they are about even TBH, they are the games two great metronomes don't think you can convievably come up with a solid argument to say one was better than the other.

If you disclude batting anyway.