Glenn Mcgrath or Malcolm Marshall?

[The Sean]

Imran, per me, is the greatest cricketer ever in the history of Test cricket (on 183 days of the year...the other 182 it's Sobers).

I've heard of people (occasionally) not placing The Don in top spot, but I'm not sure I've ever heard of someone who doesn't even consider him one of the top two.

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

I've heard of people (occasionally) not placing The Don in top spot, but I'm not sure I've ever heard of someone who doesn't even consider him one of the top two.

There's always the first time to experience things You just had your first experience. To make it even better I don't think I'd have Don Bradman as even in the top 3 undisputedly. He'd be joint third along with Sachin Tendulkar in my book.

I hope this forum ain't too much of a religious place coz you will hear lotsa blasphemous stuff from me.

 

[Jono]

I know many people bring up longevity for Tendulkar for example, but it isn't mentioned here at all for McGrath. Probably where it is more apt (amongst fast bowlers). Not only did McGrath play longer than Marshall time-wise; but he played almost twice as many matches in Tests and ODIs. McGrath's approach may have made him somewhat less dynamic; but it was effective and for a very, very long time. Any one else think the same?

Really? I reckon it is mentioned a lot on CW.

I reckon McGrath gets his rightfully deserved rating here on CW moreso than in other cricketing circules (general fans, cricket experts/analysts, players) where I believe he is underrated.

Whenever former players and cricket analysts talk about the best fast bowler ever McGrath is often mentioned very late, if ever.

 

[The Sean]

There's always the first time to experience things You just had your first experience. To make it even better I don't think I'd have Don Bradman as even in the top 3 undisputedly. He'd be joint third along with Sachin Tendulkar in my book.

I hope this forum ain't too much of a religious place coz you will hear lotsa blasphemous stuff from me.

I welcome blasphemy.

Insanity, on the other hand...

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

I welcome blasphemy.

Insanity, on the other hand...

Gee!
How simple the world
Say aye and you are sane
Say nay and you are insane

 

[The Sean]

Yeah that's pretty much it, though from my point of view I suppose it depends on whether it's the aye or the nay that says Bradman might be the fourth best cricketer of all time.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Bradman is quite clearly the eighth best cricketer of all time.

 

[robelinda]

Interesting stat, Marshall only got 2 wickets in his last 11 odi's.

 

[smash84]

Interesting stat, Marshall only got 2 wickets in his last 11 odi's.

interesting indeed but I think test cricket is being discussed here.

I think it is safe to say that in ODIs Macca>>>>Macko

 

[robelinda]

Just an interesting stat, thats all.

 

[Top_Cat]

I think the key point being missed is that he may have only taken 2 wickets but I bet he looked more street in his ineffectiveness than McGrath ever did.

 

[GotSpin]

There's always the first time to experience things You just had your first experience. To make it even better I don't think I'd have Don Bradman as even in the top 3 undisputedly. He'd be joint third along with Sachin Tendulkar in my book.

I hope this forum ain't too much of a religious place coz you will hear lotsa blasphemous stuff from me.

lol what a clown

 

[weldone]

Really? I reckon it is mentioned a lot on CW.

I reckon McGrath gets his rightfully deserved rating here on CW moreso than in other cricketing circules (general fans, cricket experts/analysts, players) where I believe he is underrated.

Whenever former players and cricket analysts talk about the best fast bowler ever McGrath is often mentioned very late, if ever.

Yeah...

Longevity is 'the' reason why McGrath is rated here ahead of Donald, for example.(by consensus almost, I mean)

 

[Sanz]

The line-ups he faced throughout were really good but hardly anything like the monster line-ups, like India, McGrath had to face. The batting line-ups of several teams were very good in McGrath's era, whereas they were sporadically so for Marshall. Was going to the subcontinent and bowling harder in Marshall's or McGrath's time? I'd say the latter. Not only really flat pitches, but better batsmen in the 90s/00s to boot. I'd say that through SL the depth in International terms had also increased.

And the lineup Mcgrath Bowled to against England, WI, Pakistan, NZ, Is there even a comparison ?

Marshall bowled to the indian batting line up of Sunny Gavaskar, Chauhan, Mohinder Amarnath, Vishwanath, Vengsarkar, Kapil Dev, Kirmani by no means an inferior lineup.

 

[ankitj]

The line-ups he faced throughout were really good but hardly anything like the monster line-ups, like India, McGrath had to face. The batting line-ups of several teams were very good in McGrath's era, whereas they were sporadically so for Marshall. Was going to the subcontinent and bowling harder in Marshall's or McGrath's time? I'd say the latter. Not only really flat pitches, but better batsmen in the 90s/00s to boot. I'd say that through SL the depth in International terms had also increased.

Interesting that you also hold that the bowling attacks were also inferior in 80's. Unless you mean that qualitatively, the two simply cannot be true at the same time judging from stats.

 

[Slifer]

Interesting that you also hold that the bowling attacks were also inferior in 80's. Unless you mean that qualitatively, the two simply cannot be true at the same time judging from stats.

I think what he means is that outside of the WI the other teams had weak bowling and batting line ups. I definitely disagree but good luck to u tryin to convince him otherwise

 

[ankitj]

I think what he means is that outside of the WI the other teams had weak bowling and batting line ups. I definitely disagree but good luck to u tryin to convince him otherwise

Hmm. I see that becoming circular inevitably because quality of non WI bowlers and batsmen will be judged by their performance against WI. Don't think there is really any way to tell which era had superior bowlers and/or batsmen other than judging "qualitatively".

 

[smash84]

Hmm. I see that becoming circular inevitably because quality of non WI bowlers and batsmen will be judged by their performance against WI. Don't think there is really any way to tell which era had superior bowlers and/or batsmen other than judging "qualitatively".

awta

 

[Ikki]

Really? I reckon it is mentioned a lot on CW.

I reckon McGrath gets his rightfully deserved rating here on CW moreso than in other cricketing circules (general fans, cricket experts/analysts, players) where I believe he is underrated.

Whenever former players and cricket analysts talk about the best fast bowler ever McGrath is often mentioned very late, if ever.

I meant in this thread mate.

 

[Ikki]

And the lineup Mcgrath Bowled to against England, WI, Pakistan, NZ, Is there even a comparison ?

Marshall bowled to the indian batting line up of Sunny Gavaskar, Chauhan, Mohinder Amarnath, Vishwanath, Vengsarkar, Kapil Dev, Kirmani by no means an inferior lineup.

McGrath faced a pretty strong WI in the 90s. Pakistan was as good during McGrath's time, if not better. England not much in it either way. NZ I'll give you.

That Indian line-up, compared to the Indian line-up McGrath faced was much inferior. Especially away.

Interesting that you also hold that the bowling attacks were also inferior in 80's. Unless you mean that qualitatively, the two simply cannot be true at the same time judging from stats.

Yeah, I meant quality-wise. There were all-time great bowlers in the 80s, but very few truly great attacks. Mostly an all-time great bowler or a very good one surrounded by very average ones.

I think what he means is that outside of the WI the other teams had weak bowling and batting line ups. I definitely disagree but good luck to u tryin to convince him otherwise

No team faces it's own, obviously. But in terms of attacks the WIndies really only had the strong one bar some Pakistani attacks here and there. In terms of batting, it was a bit less centralised but apart form WI it was also lacking. Not so much during Australia's reign where other teams had good batting attacks/and or bowling attacks.