kyear2
International Coach
Take away both from their teams? Are they still the best ever?
-
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.
Marshall vs Imran (as bowlers)
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No, but then if you replace them with Steyn and Ambrose and then they are the best ever again.
Let's ignore the fact that the WI team before Marshall from 79/80 with Holding/Roberts/Garner/Croft and a different batting lineup could have a case for being the best ever, you are simply rewarding Marshall and McGrath for being in the right team at the right time.
kyear2
International Coach
Who says, you're creating alternate realities. Steyn had great team mates and his team never reached those heights.
McGrath was the reason that team was no. 1, without him it wasn't. Why is that so hard to grasp, why is it impossible to acknowledge.
As I've said multiple times and you refuse to listen, it's not the reason they are no 1 & 2, they are because they were the best. The recent poll had them clear of everyone else as the best two bowlers ever. Being champions is just validation of that, and the icing on top.
Why does that bother you?
And re your first point, Roberts retired, Croft took the money and ran, Holding couldn't stay healthy and Garner was, according to you not an ATG and a clear no. 2. Richards and Greenidge quickly fell.off of their respective cliffs, Sir Gordon's way quicker, Lloyd and Kallicharran retired. Just stop.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Just because Marshall and McGrath played in better teams is irrelevant to how good they were. All ATG pacers make their side better.
Huh? So WI of the early 80s before Marshall wasnt an ATG side?
shortpitched713
International Captain
Well actually *adjusts glasses*. If the first opener to take strike simply scores in even multiples and odd numbered runs on the last balls of every over, and then declare, they can theoretically score all the runs for their team without any other batsman's input.
For evidence: See my stick cricket scorecards, where I used to do this for "fun".
Last edited:
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Players don't win games. Teams win games. Players obviously contribute to wins but when there are 20+ other players out there every game the results are often way out of the control of one individual player.
It's true in other sports too but because contributions are harder to quantify in those than cricket, people nonsensically overrate players in good teams all the time.
"They stupidly do it in this other inferior sport" is not a good argument.
It's true in other sports too but because contributions are harder to quantify in those than cricket, people nonsensically overrate players in good teams all the time.
"They stupidly do it in this other inferior sport" is not a good argument.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
I am one who puts them in different tiers.
In terms of averages for bowlers with 100+ wickets away from home (including neutral venues):
Under 20
Barnes and Garner
20-21
Davidson, Ambrose, & McGrath
21-22
MARSHALL (21.57) , Hadlee, Bumrah
22-23
Donald
23-24
Holding, Grimmett, Roberts, Lindwall
24-25
Lillee, Benaud, Wasim, Warne, Steyn
25-26
Alderman, Pollock, IMRAN (25.76)
26-27
Waqar, Cummins, Hall, Ramadhin, Gough
I still put Imran in the top 10 pacers (although not as high as 6), but think he is a tier below.
In terms of averages for bowlers with 100+ wickets away from home (including neutral venues):
Under 20
Barnes and Garner
20-21
Davidson, Ambrose, & McGrath
21-22
MARSHALL (21.57) , Hadlee, Bumrah
22-23
Donald
23-24
Holding, Grimmett, Roberts, Lindwall
24-25
Lillee, Benaud, Wasim, Warne, Steyn
25-26
Alderman, Pollock, IMRAN (25.76)
26-27
Waqar, Cummins, Hall, Ramadhin, Gough
I still put Imran in the top 10 pacers (although not as high as 6), but think he is a tier below.
ataraxia
International Coach
Imran averaged 22.2 away from 1980.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
FWIW, I do think Marshall is a tier above Imran as a bowler. Not that Imran is not great, but Marshall is just so much better from everything I have read.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Marshall averaged 20.65 away from 1980.
Hadlee averaged 18.51.
ataraxia
International Coach
That's when Immy K's 1980-onwards home bowling average of 16.80 comes in.
kyear2
International Coach
This is my point when persons back a player and then consistently have to move the goal posts to accommodate their argument.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yours is the opposite. Your entire shifting lines of argument is built around Imran.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Better for them to define their tier
Coronis
International Coach
I agree, Richards sucks. Nice to see it admitted.
kyear2
International Coach
Do you think I care about Imran?
The entire premise of this poll is a joke, because you yourself has repeatedly said that the only person who is in a separate tier is Marshall, but then changed your tune to suit the argument.
Your first post was even to define tiers.
There's about 10 people among those in that bote than would find a reason to rationalize the vote even if it were against Jesus, so carry on smartly.
Coronis
International Coach
If we don’t care about Imran (or any other ATG player) then this whole forum becomes very sad.