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

[Arachnodouche]

Soi what you are saying is that it is actually a pretty silly idea to try and compare two cricketers who played under completely different circumstances and say one is better than the other? I am prepared to go with that but you have just killed off half the threads on this site.

heh something to to that effect. You can't judge somebody in a cocoon. Any team sport, but especially one like cricket that depends on so many contingencies and intangible..but yeah, that does suck the life out of random debates so carry on.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think the point r3alist is trying to make is that Wasim was a more skillful bowler than McGrath, and I think the point everyone else is trying to make is that it's not really relevant in deciding who was 'better' if what McGrath did - less skillful in a majestic sense or not - was more effective in taking wickets.

I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here, which makes it extremely frustrating to read.

You might have a point

 

[r3alist]

There are two parallel arguments occurring here.

1.is wasim akram a more skilful/all round bowler?
2.given that the McGrath has the better record does it even matter?

 

[BlazeDragon]

Viv Richards?

Yes, Viv Richards.

Even considering the bowling friendly era he was batting in back then it was pointed out on another thread that most of the good attacks back then were in his own team.

 

[BlazeDragon]

There are two parallel arguments occurring here.

1.is wasim akram a more skilful/all round bowler?
2.given that the McGrath has the better record does it even matter?

People don't seem to think so since being more useful to the team is the ultimate skill which Mcgrath was. Wasim was just more stylish.

 

[kyear2]

Yes, Viv Richards.

Even considering the bowling friendly era he was batting in back then it was pointed out on another thread that most of the good attacks back then were in his own team.

Lillee, THompson, Mcdermott, Botham, Snow, Willis, Underwood, Khan, Hadlee, Venkat, Prasanna, Bedi, Chandrasekhar ect.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Lillee, THompson, Mcdermott, Botham, Snow, Willis, Underwood, Khan, Hadlee, Venkat, Prasanna, Bedi, Chandrasekhar ect.

Your great at naming WI greats. You don't add all the WI great bowlers to that list. That's what the other batsmen in his era had to deal with.

I'm not in anyway suggesting that Viv didn't face great bowlers. But others in his era did face greater ones.

 

[akilana]

Your great at naming WI greats. You don't add all the WI great bowlers to that list. That's what the other batsmen in his era had to deal with.

I'm not in anyway suggesting that Viv didn't face great bowlers. But others in his era did face greater ones.

then how do you rate McGrath who didn't face the best batting line up? How do you rate Ponting who didn't face the best bowling attack?

 

[centurymaker]

then how do you rate McGrath who didn't face the best batting line up? How do you rate Ponting who didn't face the best bowling attack?

nice one.

 

[Prince EWS]

Your great at naming WI greats. You don't add all the WI great bowlers to that list. That's what the other batsmen in his era had to deal with.

I'm not in anyway suggesting that Viv didn't face great bowlers. But others in his era did face greater ones.

Yeah, there's good evidence to suggest that Richards did, on average, face a weaker combination of bowling attacks and conditions on average than most great batsmen, however there's also good evidence to suggest that when he did face a good attack, he invariably scored well off it. When I did my analysis just recently his standardised opposition bowling average was quite high but his standardised career batting average didn't take much of a hit from his actual career batting average, suggesting he scored heavily against the better attacks he faced.

 

[BlazeDragon]

then how do you rate McGrath who didn't face the best batting line up? How do you rate Ponting who didn't face the best bowling attack?

Nice try but Mcgrath and Ponting's case is nowhere near that level. For every Ponting, Waugh that Mcgrath didn't face there was a Tendulkar, Lara etc. For every Mcgrath, Warne that Ponting didn't face there was a Donald, Murali etc.

You can't say there was an equivalent to Marshall, Amborse etc at least certainly not in Viv's era. Its because WI were dominant during those day almost pretty much all due to their bowling.

 

[robelinda]

then how do you rate McGrath who didn't face the best batting line up? How do you rate Ponting who didn't face the best bowling attack?

Yawn

 

[centurymaker]

Nice try but Mcgrath and Ponting's case is nowhere near that level. For every Ponting, Waugh that Mcgrath didn't face there was a Tendulkar, Lara etc. For every Mcgrath, Warne that Ponting didn't face there was a Donald, Murali etc.

You can't say there was an equivalent to Marshall, Amborse etc at least certainly not in Viv's era. Its because WI were dominant during those day almost pretty much all due to their bowling.

yea there wasn't imran khan, wasim akram. there wasn't lillee and thompson....

 

[BlazeDragon]

yea there wasn't imran khan, wasim akram. there wasn't lillee and thompson....

And they were equivalent the great WI attack that people praise so much then.....

Aussies in their era dominated because of their all round performance with the both bat and bowl. WI mainly did it because of their bowling.

In the 80's they weren't the best team with the bat even back then.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=team;orderby=batting_average;spanmax1=31+Dec+1989;spanmin1=01+Jan+1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

 

[Prince EWS]

 

[smash84]

.........PEWS WAG

 

[BlazeDragon]

Yeah, there's good evidence to suggest that Richards did, on average, face a weaker combination of bowling attacks and conditions on average than most great batsmen, however there's also good evidence to suggest that when he did face a good attack, he invariably scored well off it. When I did my analysis just recently his standardised opposition bowling average was quite high but his standardised career batting average didn't take much of a hit from his actual career batting average, suggesting he scored heavily against the better attacks he faced.

Oh yeah don't get me wrong here I think Viv is great. You can only do well against what you played with which he did. I'm just trying to say that there are others whom I think are better candidates better for a spot in an All Time XI even after an era adjustment.

As a WI player alone I would rank Lara above him.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Btw, is there a Lara vs Richards thread in this place? I just did a search and couldn't find one.

 

[Howe_zat]

Bravissimo.

(I'd like to think that I had a hand in its creation.)

 

[akilana]

Nice try but Mcgrath and Ponting's case is nowhere near that level. For every Ponting, Waugh that Mcgrath didn't face there was a Tendulkar, Lara etc. For every Mcgrath, Warne that Ponting didn't face there was a Donald, Murali etc.

You can't say there was an equivalent to Marshall, Amborse etc at least certainly not in Viv's era. Its because WI were dominant during those day almost pretty much all due to their bowling.

ya like you mentioned for Ponting and McGrath, Richards faced khan, hadlee, lillee etc. I dont' see your point.

There wasn't an attack equivalent to WI but there were bowlers equivalent to marshal, ambrose etc and Richards faced them all.