Better ODI bowler::: McGrath or Wasim

[smash84]

Mate, why do you quote every long post on this forum? It's a pain to scroll, specially when you are browsing on mobile.

lol..........I didn't know you were logging on from your cell phone to check out this forum........dude I just can't stop quoting posts because somebody checks the forum from his/her cell phone.......i am appreciating somebody who has taken out the time to write a wonderfully long and detailed post so maybe it is a good idea to quote it...........

 

[Ikki]

As a pure bowler, I reckon McGrath just shades it. Both walk into the ODI all-time XI though, IMO.

 

[Ramcambrien]

mcgrath in all formats

 

[weldone]

My father still believes that Garner was the best of the West Indian greats of the 80s

Interestingly, that's what my father believes too. He's an avid cricket lover (but not very internet-savvy )

 

[asty80]

McGrath was the gentlest bowler from hell you could ever encounter.
Thinking as a batsman, I doubt if there is anyone who would pick to face McGrath over Wasim, given a choice. Wasim had the wayward deliveries mixed with good ones ala Sampras. McGrath was like Federer/Nadal, in the sense that the batsman had to be on their toes from ball 1 till the last ball.

Both greats, but I would think ppl would prefer facing Sampras than Federer/Nadal.

 

[smash84]

.
Thinking as a batsman, I doubt if there is anyone who would pick to face McGrath over Wasim, given a choice.

Brian Lara says hello

 

[Blaze 18]

I daresay most batsmen would rather face Glenn McGrath than Wasim Akram (doesn't necessarily make the latter better though).

 

[Burgey]

Interestingly, that's what my father believes too. He's an avid cricket lover (but not very internet-savvy )

Garner sure belongs in the argument, IMO.

Wish he'd played more tests. He was a phenomenal bowler.

 

[stephen]

Well statistically there is very little difference between Garner and Marshall.

0.03 difference in average
.2 wpm difference
both had a 10 year career

The major difference is that Marshall played 33 more tests and took more 5/10 wicket hauls. Garner can hardly be faulted for this though as he still took 4.4 wpm which is well and truly all time great territory. He also had less opportunity to take the big hauls as he bowled first change behind Marshall and Holding for a long time.

 

[stephen]

It makes me delerious thinking about how good the WIndies must have been with Marshall and Holding opening the bowling and Garner coming in at first change. Surely the greatest fast bowling attack the world has ever seen or is ever likely to see.

 

[smash84]

It makes me delerious thinking about how good the WIndies must have been with Marshall and Holding opening the bowling and Garner coming in at first change. Surely the greatest fast bowling attack the world has ever seen or is ever likely to see.

True

 

[smash84]

Imran Khan was saying the same thing in the ICC wc countdown in New Delhi where Viv, Kapil, and Ranatunga were also present. He said that there fast bowling was so good Roberts, HOlding, Garner, MArshall, Corft that people like Sylvester Clark, who he said was very nasty, could not find a place in the side...........according to him the WI side of the late 70s and 80s was the greatest side in history...........

 

[The Sean]

Well statistically there is very little difference between Garner and Marshall.

0.03 difference in average
.2 wpm difference
both had a 10 year career

The major difference is that Marshall played 33 more tests and took more 5/10 wicket hauls. Garner can hardly be faulted for this though as he still took 4.4 wpm which is well and truly all time great territory. He also had less opportunity to take the big hauls as he bowled first change behind Marshall and Holding for a long time.

Yeah that's true - the only really significant difference in terms of career statistics is in their S/R, and even then Garner's is still outstanding. Though Marshall, as you say, played a lot more Tests which of course makes a difference.

It makes me delerious thinking about how good the WIndies must have been with Marshall and Holding opening the bowling and Garner coming in at first change. Surely the greatest fast bowling attack the world has ever seen or is ever likely to see.

How often did that actually happen though? Not having a go - genuine question. Without looking it up match-by-match, I'd always thought that Holding opened more often with Roberts in the late-'70s/early-'80s with Garner and Croft as the change bowlers, then by the time Marshall had become top dog Garner was taking the new ball with him and Holding was bowling first change. Could be wrong though.

 

[Ramcambrien]

Best odi ballers 1 murali 2 garner 3 hadlee 4 mcgrath 5 waqar 6 imran 7 kapil 8 donald 9 fleming 10 gough

 

[smash84]

Best odi ballers 1 murali 2 garner 3 hadlee 4 mcgrath 5 waqar 6 imran 7 kapil 8 donald 9 fleming 10 gough

Wasim doesn't even feature in your top 10?

 

[Burgey]

Darren Gough?

 

[smash84]

Fleming??

 

[vcs]

Fleming was a quality ODI bowler TBF. One of the best in the world at his peak. I'd even say he was Australia's best ODI fast bowler till the '99 WC, after which McGrath really came into prominence. Still can't forget how well he bowled in that Sharjah tournament in '98.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Fleming was a quality ODI bowler TBF. One of the best in the world at his peak. I'd even say he was Australia's best ODI fast bowler till the '99 WC, after which McGrath really came into prominence. Still can't forget how well he bowled in that Sharjah tournament in '98.

Bowled the last overs of both the 96 and 99 WC, IIRC. Doesnt get talked up as a big game player unlike some others.

 

[smash84]

true....he was a good bowler but will you really select him in the top 10 of all time??? and ahead of Wasim Akram???