Chaminda Vaas...

[andyc]

So you're saying that 50% of the time, Vaas was better than McGrath?

 

[Migara]

So you're saying that 50% of the time, Vaas was better than McGrath?

possibly 1o% of times Vaas > McGrath. Otherwise McGrath was better

 

[aussie]

I never made such a contention and those interested in reading what was written rather than what they'd like to have been written realised and realise that. What I said - and yes, maintain - is that Vaas's bowling repetoire was more fulsome than McGrath's, and this meant that when Vaas was on-song - which was generally about half the time - he was better than an on-song McGrath.

In short, Vaas' best > McGrath's best, even though McGrath overall >>>>>> Vaas.

Haa, what did Vaas have in bowling repotoire that was more fulsome than McGrath?. You have never clearly explained this.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haa, what did Vaas have in bowling repotoire that was more fulsome than McGrath?. You have never clearly explained this.

Not that I agree with Richard at all here, but I guess he'll probably say genuine swing. McGrath swung the ball on rare occassions but certainly not like Vaas.

 

[Burgey]

So you're saying that 50% of the time, Vaas was better than McGrath?

Not 50% I think, but many international bowlers (and batsmen for that matter) can produce performances on the odd occasion which usurp those of other players who are generally better than them.

Two examples which spring to mind woud be Butcher's hunderd in the 4th Ashes test in 2001 and Devon Malcolm's 9-for at The Oval v SA. Neither of those guys were generally better than say a Ponting or a Mcgrath (as examples), but on those days they produced efforts which were superlative.

 

[neobuxadmin]

Haa, what did Vaas have in bowling repotoire that was more fulsome than McGrath?. You have never clearly explained this.

You can't possibly explain that and neither can it be said that Vaas was better than MCgrath. Both were good in their own way, not discarding the contribution they made to their respective teams throughout their career.

 

[Jarquis]

He's not saying that Vaas was better than McGrath but that if both performed to their maximum ability Vaas' performance would me marginally better.
Richard already explained that overall McGrath >>>> Vaas.

 

[Mahindinho]

He's not saying that Vaas was better than McGrath but that if both performed to their maximum ability Vaas' performance would me marginally better.
Richard already explained that overall McGrath >>>> Vaas.

McGrath's a strange case, anyway, in that his main asset was his accuracy, rather than his pace, swing or aggression. Every single ball would be 90%+ (where 100% would be the best ball he's ever bowled), whereas most pace bowlers would fire down a few 70%ers every over.

If I had to choose a bowler to bowl just one ball, it wouldn't be McGrath. If I wanted a four-over spell, however, he'd be right up there.

 

[SJS]

Without getting into an argument over This Vaas versus Macgrath argument which reflects Richards obvious love for Vaas (and why not) and unnecessarily digressing from the thread topi, one must emphasise that the Sri Lankan left hander's contribution to Sri Lanka can not be measured purely in terms of his statistics which arent to be scoffed at anyway.

Vaas's most important and often forgotten contribution to Sri Lankan cricket is what he has done by way of providing support to Muralitharan.

I have absolutely no doubt that Murali's effectiveness has been reduced in recent times due to the great career of Vaas coming to its close. With Vaas gone, Sri Lanka will suffer a double blow in the form of reduced 'firepower' from the great offspinner since I do not see another bowler ready to take charge at the other end.

It is virtually impossible to be an effective Test match side against the best sides in the world unless one has two bowlers (minimum) of world class. With one, howsoever great, hardly any side in the history of the game has managed to win Tests regularly.

This is Vaas's greatest legacy and this is why his going is so damaging for Sri Lankan chances at Test level and have been for the last couple of years.

 

[Richard]

So you're saying that 50% of the time, Vaas was better than McGrath?

Nothing close to that neat, but something vaguely along those lines. McGrath was a bowler of astonishing consistency; Vaas was possibly the most inconsistent bowler Test cricket has yet seen. As I say, he's averaged 100 or so in several series; he's also had plenty where he's averaged well under 20.

 

[Richard]

Haa, what did Vaas have in bowling repotoire that was more fulsome than McGrath?. You have never clearly explained this.

Not that I agree with Richard at all here, but I guess he'll probably say genuine swing. McGrath swung the ball on rare occassions but certainly not like Vaas.

Genuine, regular swing is the most obvious example but the other is the ability to cut the ball away from the right-handed batsman. In this respect, it is merely a result of which arm they bowled with - both had as their stock-ball the in-cutter to a like-handed batsman - ie when left-armer Vaas was bowling to a LHB his stock-ball was the off-cutter; ditto when right-armer McGrath was bowling to a RHB.

Vaas also to my mind was a more effective bowler around-the-wicket than McGrath - which makes it all the more odd that Vaas used it so relatively sparingly and McGrath so relatively regularly.

McGrath of course had far more height on his side than Vaas. And - and this is the key thing - he had the ability to utilise his strengths on far more than 50% of occasions.

 

[aussie]

Thats not enough Richard. All he has in that he swings the ball more naturally than McGrath, but so does Hoggard & Anderson. But even that is marginal since McGrath when its swinging i.e Darwin 04, Perth 04 is lethal.

I highly doubt he was a better bowler around the wicket the McGrath as well, since given the way McGrath used to bowl to Lara from that angle, few bowlers could ever be so good.

 

[Richard]

Thats not enough Richard. All he has in that he swings the ball more naturally than McGrath, but so does Hoggard & Anderson. But even that is marginal since McGrath when its swinging i.e Darwin 04, Perth 04 is lethal.

He doesn't swing it more "naturally" than McGrath, he just pitches on the right length much more often. Ergo, he's a far better swing bowler. That is one thing, regardless of anything else, that Vaas has over McGrath.

I highly doubt he was a better bowler around the wicket the McGrath as well, since given the way McGrath used to bowl to Lara from that angle, few bowlers could ever be so good.

How many times did you see Vaas bowl around-the-wicket then?

Thought not.

 

[JBH001]

Vaas's most important and often forgotten contribution to Sri Lankan cricket is what he has done by way of providing support to Muralitharan.

I have absolutely no doubt that Murali's effectiveness has been reduced in recent times due to the great career of Vaas coming to its close.

Good point, SJS. Very good point.

It will be sad to see Vaasy go, I was disappointed he was unable to pick up any wickets in his last innings, but 350+ wickets is enough recompense.

 

[SJS]

Good point, SJS. Very good point.

It will be sad to see Vaasy go, I was disappointed he was unable to pick up any wickets in his last innings, but 350+ wickets is enough recompense.

You know I have always thought about which is the best time to leave the game.

We would all like our favourite players to leave with a bang but I have often wondered if I was a great player when would I like to leave if the choice was with me.

I found myself thinking that but for our obsession with stats and overall impact on career stats of a dragging on after you are well past your best, why should a player want to quit if he was enjoying himself.

In the process you may get a great match or innings or series as your swan song; then again, you may not. So what if you played that last game, that last series because you were still loving that feeling of "putting bat to ball" or turning the old arm over for a few.

I do hope Vaas enjoyed himself in his last game and good luck to him in whatever he does from now on.

 

[nightprowler10]

One of the modern day greats for me, especially as ODIs go. Always hated him when we played him. Bothered us more than Murali.

 

[Richard]

You know I have always thought about which is the best time to leave the game.

We would all like our favourite players to leave with a bang but I have often wondered if I was a great player when would I like to leave if the choice was with me.

I found myself thinking that but for our obsession with stats and overall impact on career stats of a dragging on after you are well past your best, why should a player want to quit if he was enjoying himself.

In the process you may get a great match or innings or series as your swan song; then again, you may not. So what if you played that last game, that last series because you were still loving that feeling of "putting bat to ball" or turning the old arm over for a few.

I do hope Vaas enjoyed himself in his last game and good luck to him in whatever he does from now on.

As a fan (which is notably different from being a player), I never like to see players go on beyond the time they're good enough to play at the level in question. But again, I hate to see someone go out when they obviously still have more to offer at that level. Sadly, it is impossible for anyone to pick the exact moment when they cease to be good enough - the only way is to keep going until it's happened.

On balance I'd prefer someone leave with memories of how great they are, rather than were, instead of knowing they'd given everything they had and had kept playing for a time when there was nothing left.

One thing that I always enjoy is seeing people who have much in common go out together. The triple retirement of Greg Chappell, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee in 1983/84 hence is something of a boon for me. It presents both closure and a chance for a fresh, clean break.

 

[Blackjane]

He is a great bowler who took around 350 wickets in test cricket but the srilanka Cricket is now ignoring vaas for ODI this is really sad thing for a bowler

 

[Noble One]

Fantastic cricketer for Sri Lanka, sad to see him bow out. Was a great sight watching a short left armer (with zinc cream overly layed on) swinging the ball countless times into the batsman.

Outlasted so many other Sri Lankan bowlers by simply keeping things simple and always remaining consistent. Cricketers such as Fernando had pace, Zoysa height, Maharoof accuracy and Gamage a superior first class record; but nobody had the heart of Vaas, to give 100% everytime he had the ball in hand.

The gap between Vaas and any other pace bowler to come from Sri Lanka is huge, great legacy to leave on the game.

 

[honestbharani]

What he said ^^^

Awesome bowler. I'll never forget the time I was slightly late to Headingley for an ODI. Having missed the first four overs of England's innings, on a baking hot day, the scoreboard read 2/0, Vaas having bowled two maidens (I caught the highlights later -- they were brilliant).

Of course, England went on to make a whopping 321/7 and I was considerably less happy. No 5-0 whitewash then. Fortunately, Sanath had other plans...

thirded...



WPUJC Vaas... You will be missed by the cricketing world. Congrats a great career and hopefully better things lie ahead with a wonderful and peaceful retired life. All the best to him