Better ODI bowler::: McGrath or Wasim

[smash84]

You could argue that being forced to play at a faster rate helps to reduce the dismissals from tentative prods and the like, helps to get your eye in quicker, and puts the opposition bowlers back under pressure (it doesn't matter how many runs u got in the bank, if you are getting hit at a reasonable rate you will try something different). Also opposition bowlers are likelier to bowl more "attacking" (bad) deliveries knowing they have more runs to play with.

I don't quite understand what you are trying to point out. Are you trying to say that there is no such thing as scoreboard pressure?

 

[Ikki]

If you are actually going to make the effort of filtering out stats then why not actually do it properly? Unless you want to argue that games against Scotland, Bangladesh and Kenya are big match situations.

Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

That's a good point but, FTR, I just used the same filter Stephan used to compare. Removing those teams improves his SR by 1 point and increases his average about a half a point - basically the same. Doing the same for McGrath makes his record quite a bit worse (about 3 points higher in both SR and average) - actually slightly statistically inferior to Warne.

I think anyone who actually watched Warne in WCs - especially towards the later stages - knows he was an awesome big match player.

 

[stephen]

That's a good point but, FTR, I just used the same filter Stephan used to compare. Removing those teams improves his SR by 1 point and increases his average about a half a point - basically the same. Doing the same for McGrath makes his record quite a bit worse (about 3 points higher in both SR and average) - actually slightly statistically inferior to Warne.

I think anyone who actually watched Warne in WCs - especially towards the later stages - knows he was an awesome big match player.

StephEn btw.

I totally rate Warne as a big game player. I think he's one of the best that the world has ever seen in any discipline. I even love spin bowling. I basically rate Warne's performances in the 99 world cup as some of the best bowling ever (he basically won us the world cup).

However I still rate McGrath higher as an ODI bowler - regardless of match circumstances. McGrath was the reason Australia dominated the 07 WC so much. He just absolutely destroyed teams. In fact McGrath was so good that many cases he would create a blowout just by being so damned good with the ball in his hand.

I also tend to think that every game in a world cup is important, regardless of opposition. I'm extremely hesitant to filter WC results any further due to this (and that it reduces an already small sample size).

As for those who are saying that Bond = Garner, I disagree. Garner only took a relatively small number of wickets due to the frequency with which he played ODI cricket. Bond took almost the same number of wickets but had much more opportunity to play ODIs. Unfortunately I cannot rate him as highly due to his high injury rate. I still rate Bond very highly, but for a bowler to have as long of a career as him in the time that he played and still take under 150 wickets, well that puts a big black mark over his career. I really wish that he was injured less often though as he really lifted New Zealand to a higher level when he played with them.

 

[smash84]

Shane Warne was just awesome as a bowler. Loved watching him bowl. The most exciting bowler ever for me after Wasim Akram.

 

[tooextracool]

So are you telling me that Bangladesh vs India the last World Cup was not a big game situation ? A game which knocked India out?

Or Kenya vs Srilanka in the 2003 WC where Kenya reached the WC semi?

If we start filtering out such teams just who who we filter out for the west indies in the early 15 years of ODI cricket?
Almost every country barring 3/4 were minnows for one period or the other.

No because Warne never played any of he above mentioned world cups. Bangladesh was yet to be a test side in 1999 while Kenya and Scotland in both of the 96 and 99 world cups were for all purposes minnows. Convince me that those are big match situations.

 

[Ikki]

StephEn btw.

Apologies. Ultimately, I agree with you that McGrath was the better ODI bowler. I merely disagreed with him being the best "big game" bowler.

 

[tooextracool]

That's a good point but, FTR, I just used the same filter Stephan used to compare. Removing those teams improves his SR by 1 point and increases his average about a half a point - basically the same. Doing the same for McGrath makes his record quite a bit worse (about 3 points higher in both SR and average) - actually slightly statistically inferior to Warne.

I think anyone who actually watched Warne in WCs - especially towards the later stages - knows he was an awesome big match player.

Im not saying Warne was not a big match player, just pointing out that if you are going to filter stats then filter them out properly.

 

[stephen]

I think that it's clear that Australia won the last three world cups on some fine batting performances and on some awesome bowling performances from both of the great men - Warne (in 99) and McGrath (03 and 07). Both are big game players and both have been integral to our success.

 

[smash84]

yeah.........difficult to choose who was the bigger match winner......I think most people would rate Warne higher.

 

[abmk]

Fleming was a top class bowler in both formats and a cut above the person who eventually went on to replace him - Jason Gillespie who was more of a one trick pony. Could potentially have been right up there with the best if it weren't for injuries. Dont think he gets enough credit for that last over in 99 semifinal as well, would have been a flawless over if the batsman at the other end wasn't Lance Klusener

gillespie was a one-trick pony ? in what world ?

I agree though that fleming was a fantastic ODI bowler and very under-rated

 

[vcs]

Fusion has made his points very well. While I believe that McGrath is better overall as a WC bowler, I don't think the difference is as much as the WC stats alone indicate.

 

[Teja.]

Don't get all the Wasim WC love tbh. Yeah, He bowled 2 amazing deliveries in a WC final, but saying he had a poor fielding side and hence the averages should be taken with a pinch of salt is not on, IMO. Particularly when his fellow opening bowler(Waqar) with the same fielding side and the same conflicts surrounding him averages 21.8 in WC matches.


Wasim was not very good in WC games and McG was ruddy brilliant. It is what it is.

 

[smash84]

Don't get all the Wasim WC love tbh. Yeah, He bowled 2 amazing deliveries in a WC final, but saying he had a poor fielding side and hence the averages should be taken with a pinch of salt is not on, IMO. Particularly when his fellow opening bowler(Waqar) with the same fielding side and the same conflicts surrounding him averages 21.8 in WC matches.


Wasim was not very good in WC games and McG was ruddy brilliant. It is what it is.

It is not only about WCs. It is about the whole career. It is hard to deny that Wasim had to play alongside one of the worst fielding teams of all time. Pakistan fielding still is extremely ordinary.

 

[vcs]

Waqar hasn't done that much in WCs. Most of his best spells are against weaker sides/minnows IIRC. He isn't close to McGrath or Wasim as a WC bowler. Why didn't he play in most of the matches in the '99 WC?

EDIT : Teja, you're seriously saying Wasim was not very good in WC games? Wow.

 

[smash84]

Waqar hasn't done that much in WCs. Most of his best spells are against weaker sides/minnows IIRC. He isn't close to McGrath or Wasim as a WC bowler. Why didn't he play in most of the matches in the '99 WC?

EDIT : Teja, you're seriously saying Wasim hasn't done much in WC games? Wow.

True. Waqar hasn't done anything of note in WC games except get smashed by Jadeja in 96 QF.

Also the fact that Waqar didn't play in 99 b/c of Wasim's politics, Shoaib's good form and pace, and his own lack of ordinariness.

 

[Teja.]

EDIT : Teja, you're seriously saying Wasim hasn't done much in WC games? Wow.

Well, When compared to bowlers like McG, not very much.

 

[smash84]

Well, When compared to bowlers like McG, not very much.

And how many bowlers are there like McGrath????

 

[Blaze 18]

Wasim Akram wasn't good in World Cups ?

 

[Teja.]

And how many bowlers are there like McGrath????

Of the top of my head, Murali & Warne. Will check up later but I reckon most other ATG ODI bowlers also have ATG records in the WC.

I reckon it's alright that Wasim can be considered a better WC bowler than Waqar because he bowled about three times as much though Waqar was of a higher quality.

 

[smash84]

Of the top of my head, Murali & Warne. Will check up later but I reckon most other ATG ODI bowlers also have ATG records in the WC.

I reckon it's alright that Wasim can be considered a better WC bowler than Waqar because he bowled about three times as much though Waqar was of a higher quality.

and you define higher quality by cleaning up the minnows and ending up with a lower average???? The only big match that Waqar played in his WC career was the 96 WC QF against India and his last two overs went for 40 runs which effectively sealed the match and sent Pakistan crashing out. That is some QUALITY.