Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
You never seen McGrath's bouncers?
This is one reason why McGrath did so well, I suspect; was under-rated by those who haven't faced him. McGrath's bouncer would still be tough to face even at vastly reduced pace because it's so well directed. When he wanted to be, McGrath was just as nasty as the other blokes.McGrath obv.
With Ambrose, I'd have to worry bout my head.
With Waqar and Wasim, my toes.
With Donald, my ribcage.
With McGrath, it's just my off stump. Not exactly gonna be writhing in agony once that gets knocked back.
Lillee not really a prime example of stump attack, though - was renowned for his absent yorker.It's inaccurate to say McGrath bowls just outside the offstump. The percentage of wickets he took by bowling the batsman isn't significantly less than other bowlers who were seen as more attacking, such as Lillee.
Mcgrath bouncers are vicious ,Mark Ramprakash and KP and plenty of others would agree that .The thing is those mentioned are a touch more dangerous ,not that much ,just .And some of them can damage toes also ,if not head .This is one reason why McGrath did so well, I suspect; was under-rated by those who haven't faced him. McGrath's bouncer would still be tough to face even at vastly reduced pace because it's so well directed. When he wanted to be, McGrath was just as nasty as the other blokes.
McGrath, because getting out first ball is infinitely preferable to losing one's.....well, actually the first body part that springs to mind is one's balls. I was gonna say head, but no, I'd definitely prefer to take a 90mph delivery to the skull than to the gonads.
It was a friendly jibe. Pitt knows I love him (I hope...sighRight... well it makes sense now but still seems a little harsh directed at Pitt nonetheless.![]()