Who was the better bowler: Glenn Mcgrath or Wasim Akram?

[Top_Cat]

McG. Being able to bowl in the same spot ball after ball is a talent, FFS.

EDIT: Not directed at anyone here, just irks me when I read stuff about McG not being as talented as other bowlers. It's flat-out wrong. If true, it's a damning indictment on the batters who gifted him wickets and a low bowling average in one of the most batter-friendly eras ever.

 

[Top_Cat]

It could be bias on my part, but I have always felt Wasim to be the better bowler. I really think Wasim would’ve had the better stats had he played for a team like Australia, where more than half of his chances weren’t dropped by pathetic fielders. McGrath could also bowl with a different mindset in the Australian team. He was either defending a formidable lead, or he could bowl being assured that no matter what the total he and his bowling mates gave up, his batsman were likely to conquer it. That type of peace of mind and the resulting confidence can do wonders for your performance. I know these are all intangibles that can’t really be measured in stats, and some may even disagree with my assessment of them, but they along with the variety in Wasim’s arsenal edge him over McGrath in my book.

Whilst true, McG showed many times when facing a low Aussie total he could take early wickets too. Against that, you could argue McG would still run in with confidence knowing that the Aussie batters weren't often going to fall in a heap two innings in a row very often. The dropped chances would obviously have impacted on Wasim's record quite a bit too.

That said, they both have the demeanor and mindset of champions. The styles of bowling for both were the product of their teams and environment and if that was different, they'd have adapted. Champions always find a way.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I voted for Wasim, but there isn't much in it. Agree with Fusion that if McGrath had played for Pakistan he would have found a lot of his edges behind going down, would have had less backup at the other end (except for when Waqar was bowling, obviously) and, most importantly, would have had less chance to pad his stats out by bowling at the tail.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

FWIW, here are some test stats:

Wasim Akram: Ave 23.62, SR 54.6
Glenn McGrath: Ave 21.64, SR 51.9

So would playing for Australia have helped McGrath's stats by 10%? Tough call either way.

 

[vcs]

McGrath has an incredibly well-rounded record regardless of venue or opposition, was brilliant against the best opposition batsmen, and always came to the party when it really mattered. I think he only played two full Test series that his team ended up losing (not counting Ashes 2005 where he missed two Tests, perhaps not coincidentally, the ones Australia lost).

 

[Burgey]

I voted for Wasim, but there isn't much in it. Agree with Fusion that if McGrath had played for Pakistan he would have found a lot of his edges behind going down, would have had less backup at the other end (except for when Waqar was bowling, obviously) and, most importantly, would have had less chance to pad his stats out by bowling at the tail.

Doesn't Glenn McGrath have one of the highest ratios of top order wickets of any bowler going around? I CBF checking, but iirc his ratio of batsmen/ tailenders is pretty ****ing good.

 

[Athlai]

Neither have anything on Vaas, a man proud to be a unicorn.

 

[robinjr]

i suppose this for test match cricket so it's McGrath.Wasim although is the greater test cricketer and the better ODI bowler imo.

 

[Xuhaib]

Mcgrath is the greatest fast bowler I have witnessed and this says something since i am one of the biggest Akram fanboy. No shame in being 2nd to Mcgrath just because Sangakarra is not as good as Sachin does not mean he's a bad cricketer, same applies here.

 

[vcs]

Mcgrath is the greatest fast bowler I have witnessed and this says something since i am one of the biggest Akram fanboy. No shame in being 2nd to Mcgrath just because Sangakarra is not as good as Sachin does not mean he's a bad cricketer, same applies here.

Agree. Not old enough to have watched Marshall.

 

[Teja.]

On the days I'm unbiased enough to admit it(Waqar), I think, of the post 90 bowlers, While there are 6-7 pacers where the difference between them is negligible on most practical contexts, 2 are a slight cut above the rest. They are Donald and Mcgrath. If I had to pick one, It's undoubtedly McGrath.

 

[Xuhaib]

Some of Ambrose early 90's spells look breath taking but i had no access to cable television back then.Mcgrath also had the best consistency among ATG bowlers of the 90's. I would rate them in this order.

Mcgrath
Ambrose
Wasim
Donald
Waqar
Walsh
Pollock

In the current times any of these 7 would be the best bowler in the world along with Steyn.

 

[Manee]

McG. Being able to bowl in the same spot ball after ball is a talent, FFS.

EDIT: Not directed at anyone here, just irks me when I read stuff about McG not being as talented as other bowlers. It's flat-out wrong. If true, it's a damning indictment on the batters who gifted him wickets and a low bowling average in one of the most batter-friendly eras ever.

I did make a similar point but was careful not to use the word 'talent'. However, my point was that Mcgrath's accuracy is a less romantic or mystical skill than Wasim's swing and so Wasim can be viewed as better by many, despite having worse results.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I voted for Wasim, but there isn't much in it. Agree with Fusion that if McGrath had played for Pakistan he would have found a lot of his edges behind going down, would have had less backup at the other end (except for when Waqar was bowling, obviously) and, most importantly, would have had less chance to pad his stats out by bowling at the tail.

 

[weldone]

To me, among the retired bowlers I've seen live (this can change depending on my mood):

Muralitharan>McGrath>Imran>Wasim>Ambrose>Warne>Donald>Waqar>Pollock>Walsh>Kapil>Kumble>Bond>Akhtar>Vaas>Saqlain

At present, Steyn can be anywhere between Ambrose and Pollock. His place might change by the time he retires.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Sorry Fusion, but I don't think Wasim would have been Wasim if he played for Australia. He would not have been allowed to do what he did under Imran. The Aussie coaches would drill in line and length and would have tried to turn him into a robot like McGrath.

 

[marc71178]

I voted for Wasim, but there isn't much in it. Agree with Fusion that if McGrath had played for Pakistan he would have found a lot of his edges behind going down, would have had less backup at the other end (except for when Waqar was bowling, obviously) and, most importantly, would have had less chance to pad his stats out by bowling at the tail.

HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Yes, clearly it's the tailenders that make his record so good.

 

[TumTum]

McGrath is the only bowler that consistently troubled the 2 best batsman of his time.

 

[centurymaker]

McGrath was a bowling robot. can't beat that.

 

[archie mac]

McGrath is the most boring bowler I ever watched, so could not vote for him on principal

List of posts to follow the above post

We are not talking about boring but who is the best

Consistency is not boring it is skill

Blah blah blah