-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Malcolm Marshall vs Glen McGrath
- Thread starter Ilovecric
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
The only really strong argument for McGrath over Marshall is longevity.
Nope the era in which the second half of McGrath’s career was in, and top order wickets as well(McGrath is really ahead here). Plus some metrics in which Marshall is better are marginal, like average(0.69 diff) and WPM(0.06 diff).
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
None of those are particularly strong arguments.
The era for McGrath is pretty overplayed and nebulous. Any ATG bowler in their prime would have succeeded in the 2000s with maybe a 1 point bump in their average at most.
Top order share can be offset by Marshall have ATG level guys competing with him for top order wickets. By the time Marshall comes for a second spell, half the side would already be out.
Marshall was faster, better in the SC, and had a peak of 6 wickets a test for 40 tests that outdoes anything that McGrath achieved.
Last edited:
Marshall was only better in Pak in SC. Both were equally good in Ind. Marshall never played in SL. And McGrath also had Warne and Gillespie(along with some other decent bowlers to compete with) to compete with. Maybe any ATG could have done well in 2000s with a one point bump, but McGrath should be given credit for actually doing it( nearly 200 wickets@21 from 2002-7), and without any bump in average. Marshall’s peak is better sure, but in some metrics like average and WPM, he is barely leading, but for McGrath in top order wickets and longevity, he is far ahead. Likewise Marshall is far ahead in SR and % of fifers:
Last edited:
Coronis
International Coach
Does this mean people will finally stop whinging about 00’s batting, or does it not work both ways?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Marshall's tour of fire in India in 83 far outdid anything McGrath did in India. Marshall did well in Pakistan, while McGrath was average in SL and Pakistan. McGrath, by his own standards, wasnt that great against SA too.
McGrath shouldnt get credit for doing what we acknowledge any top tier ATG could do, which is succeed in the 2000s.
Warne and Gillespie were less likely to gobble up top order wickets than a combo of Holding/Garner/Walsh/Ambrose/Bishop. Plus Marshall towards the end of his career was first change.
On raw stats, Marshall leads in almost all areas, plus had a better peak.
Marshall is the best.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No because 80 percent of why the 2000s was easier for batting was because there were less worldclass bowlers, while 20 percent has to do with flatter pitches.
may not necessarily agree on the 2000s argument, but I take the top order wickets argument, virtue which Marshall comes slightly in ahead.
Calm_profit
State Vice-Captain
In McGrath's defence
stats.espncricinfo.com
As you can see McGrath hit that peak in that historic Windies tour, prior to that he was average
stats.espncricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
As you can see McGrath hit that peak in that historic Windies tour, prior to that he was average
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Marshall was also average for a couple of years before peaking. And he averaged a lot better than McGrath in his peak.In McGrath's defence
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
As you can see McGrath hit that peak in that historic Windies tour, prior to that he was average
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
McGraths longevity of excellence is his biggest strength.
Calm_profit
State Vice-Captain
Nah Marshall wasn't that average apart from India tour which was his debut tour.He did well in Pakistan, England before his peak started.
Whereas McGrath was totally average, Warne was leading the attack until that Windies tour came up,luckily he got a chance due to McDermott got injured and he never looked back.
Slifer
International Captain
Marshall's peak began in 1983 with the Indian tour to the WI. He had very good numbers before that but starting in '83 he had that sequence of 7 series where he took 20 plus wickets.
Marshall is the best I've ever seen - he was simply brilliant. He had pace but superb control, had a top notch bouncer, could swing the ball and get movement off the seam.
McGrath is obviously a truly great bowler but didn't have the menace or pace that Marshall had and that gives him the edge.
smash84
The Tiger King
So basically Marshall could do everything that McGrath could and do it 10 miles quicker
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well indeed.
It does say something about the WI team of Marshall's early career that he spent a few years as a reserve.
Last edited: