Marshall vs Hadlee - Poll Added

[Hurricane]

Discuss who was the better test bowler - don't care about ODIs.

Hadlee

Avg 22.29
Wickets 431
Matches 86
SR 50.8

Marshall

Avg 20.94
Wickets 376
Matches 81
SR 46.7

I will make a case for Hadlee as I feel the general consensus on CW is that Marshall is the better bowler.

Yes Hadlee had the advantage of bowling more deliveries more often since he had less competition for wickets and hence this assisted him pick up more career wickets than marshall.

But I suspect he also had his stats (avg and SR) more impacted by scores of 500/5 more often than Marshall did as when Hadlee did not fire there was no one to back him up.

Lastly as I will show in later posts Hadlee in games where they bowled the same amount of overs as each other tended to perform better. Hadlee's higher overall SR is due to bowling in more games where the opposition got away on New Zealand compared to the Windies.
For example in 20% of games Hadlee had to bowl more than 200 deliveries in the inning. On these occassions his SR was above his career average.
Marshall only bowled more than 200 deliveries in 3% of his innings.

 

[Athlai]

They're definitely in the same ball park and it's a worthwhile argument. But Marshall was the better bowler all the same.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Can't separate them, tbh. Had everything in their armoury; one man was brutally fast and struck at an amazing rate whilst the other shouldered his nation's attack and did it brilliantly for the best part of a decade and a half.

Probably both of them are right up there as far as post-War fast bowlers go followed very closely by Lillee, Trueman, Lindwall, McGrath, Imran and the others. Very difficult to make a case based purely on merit for rating one of these men ahead of the others. All outstanding fast bowlers and the forumer's personal preference would kick in at some stage. That's my take anyway.

 

[Howe_zat]

Yeah, I really don't think there's much of a fair way to separate them.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I would have either in my all time test XI, so I consider them about equal.

 

[akilana]

I would have both in my ATM XI so I consider them about equal

 

[fredfertang]

I don't think, given Hadlee's comparative lack of support, that you can split them on their Test records

So very close but Hadlee's record in the County Championship is extraordinary - 600 odd wickets at 14 over a decade shades it in his favour, imo

 

[ankitj]

I generally tend to think Marshall is the better bowler and Hadlee the better cricketer overall. But of course, when you take into account the fact that Hadlee had so little support, it is easily possible to argue that Hadlee is the better bowler..

Both will make it to my all time XI, alongside Murali and Barnes to complete the bowling attack, complimented by Imran as the 5th bowler.

 

[The Sean]

I generally tend to think Marshall is the better bowler and Hadlee the better cricketer overall. But of course, when you take into account the fact that Hadlee had so little support, it is easily possible to argue that Hadlee is the better bowler..

Both will make it to my all time XI, alongside Murali and Barnes to complete the bowling attack, and Imran as the 5th bowler.

Would be interested to hear the rest of your XI - does that mean you'd bat Imran at 6 with your 'keeper (whoever it is) at 7? And does that mean you pick Sobers just as a batsman, or don't pick him at all?

 

[ankitj]

Would be interested to hear the rest of your XI - does that mean you'd bat Imran at 6 with your 'keeper (whoever it is) at 7? And does that mean you pick Sobers just as a batsman, or don't pick him at all?

I like to make a democratic XI with representation from all 8 major nations:

Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, G.Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Muralitharan, Barnes

Yes, Sobers is in there as a specialist batsman. Gilchrist certainly deserves to go ahead of Imran at 6.

 

[The Sean]

I like to make a democratic XI with representation from all 8 major nations:

Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, G.Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Muralitharan, Barnes

Yes, Sobers is in there as a specialist batsman. Gilchrist certainly deserves to go ahead of Imran at 6.

Democratic indeed! Great side nonetheless mate - very, very strong, thanks for sharing it.

 

[kyear2]

Well my personal opinion is that Marshall is the GREATEST bolwer of all time, so he is ahead for me, but among fast bowlers Hadlee is in the top five, so not that much to separate them. Great bowlers both, but Marshalls sheer speed, hostility and swing wins it for me.

 

[Teja.]

Would be interested to hear the rest of your XI - does that mean you'd bat Imran at 6 with your 'keeper (whoever it is) at 7? And does that mean you pick Sobers just as a batsman, or don't pick him at all?

Haha, realize It's directed at Ankit but my XI would contain all of Imran, Miller, Hadlee, Pollock and Sobers while playing Sobers as a specialist bat and Murali as the only specialist bowler.

 

[The Sean]

Haha, realize It's directed at Ankit but my XI would contain all of Imran, Miller, Hadlee, Pollock and Sobers while playing Sobers as a specialist bat and Murali as the only specialist bowler.

Ha ha, assuming you've got someone like Gilly at 7, that means you're batting Hadlee at 10. Hard to argue against a side with a bowling line up of

Hadlee
Imran
Pollock
Miller
Murali
Sobers (if needed)

when it also bats as deep as that.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Ha ha, assuming you've got someone like Gilly at 7, that means you're batting Hadlee at 10. Hard to argue against a side with a bowling line up of

Hadlee
Imran
Pollock
Miller
Murali
Sobers (if needed)

when it also bats as deep as that.

Which Pollock is that? The dad was genuinely quick and had a nasty bouncer. While the son was a master of seam and had superb control.

Either way, that bowling attack wouldn't have any trouble getting 20 wickets on most pitches across the globe.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

I like to make a democratic XI with representation from all 8 major nations:

Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, G.Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Hadlee, Marshall, Muralitharan, Barnes

Yes, Sobers is in there as a specialist batsman. Gilchrist certainly deserves to go ahead of Imran at 6.

Great side. One bowler too many but with a top 5 like that, most likely Gilly and the guys below him wouldn't be required to score too many runs.

 

[Zinzan]

In spite of the fact I'm a Kiwi..... Marshall in my no.1 bowler of all-time with Paddles at no.2

 

[Fusion]

The two best bowlers of all-time IMO. I'd have Marshall ahead of Hadlee though.

 

[Flem274*]

Hadlee.

 

[Teja.]

Ha ha, assuming you've got someone like Gilly at 7, that means you're batting Hadlee at 10. Hard to argue against a side with a bowling line up of

Hadlee
Imran
Pollock
Miller
Murali
Sobers (if needed)

when it also bats as deep as that.

Ftr,

Post-1920 XI,

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Bradman
Hammond
Sobers
Gilchrist
Miller
Imran
Pollock
Hadlee
Murali

Sutcliffe, Hammond and Sobers picked by virtue of not only being in the highest tier of ATG bats but being excellent fieldsmen and providing me with two very good part-time options which I hope I won't need to use which is the reason why I'm picking the greatest work-horse spinner of all-time.

Which Pollock is that? The dad was genuinely quick and had a nasty bouncer. While the son was a master of seam and had superb control.

Either way, that bowling attack wouldn't have any trouble getting 20 wickets on most pitches across the globe.

Shaun, for the record.