Marshall Vs Sobers

[The_CricketUmpire]

Sobers. Probably better in his primary discipline too. Marshall a tad overrated on this board.

Overrated? As a bowler? Nonsense. Marshall is an All Time Great fast bowler. Period.

 

[kyear2]

I believe he is the best bowler ever. But I also believe his career was pretty short by ATG standards and that should be hold accountable. When I talk about Great players, I don't simply mean how good they were, longevity isn't just a measure of goodness for me. More so, longevity means contributing for a much greater period of time. Sobers for example hit the field for 20 years straight. That's a deciding factor for me right there, as I don't believe how good you were for 6-7 years, you can overcome one who had such a level of output for 20+. And of course, another thing I think Marshall has a huge advantage from is being shielded in his formative years unlike Hadlee or Sobers.

Wasim was on the field for how many years straight, but was poor to start and disadvantaged to end. Was he helpful to the team during those periods?

I rate Viv and Ponting pre slump, that's when they were impactful. Both could have retired with better numbers and would have none of the discussion that exists about either.

 

[subshakerz]

The only tough opponents that Hadlee and Imran faced that Marshall didn't was the WI one. Hadlee averaged 22 against them, and Imran had by far his best numbers against them as well. So let's get that out of the way.

If Australia and India were so easy, why did Imran averaged 28 in both countries? Yes, they weren't the strongest teams, but they fought hard at home and both had challenging conditions for touring bowlers.

Bro, lets not discuss Imran for once and keep it on Marshall. Imran's average is irrelevant to whether the sides were strong.

Australia from the mid-70s to early 80s were a strong batting lineup with the Chappell bros and other. Marshall never played that side, only after Chappell and all retired. The 84 and 88 teams he faced were poor.

India were a strong batting side in the mid-80s but Marshall only played them in a single series.

Bradman faced absolute nonsense compared to who Maco faced, Hobbs didn't exactly face an AT XI either. In the 2000's Tendulkar had his share of record correction as well. The names listed were all competent, who in the 2000's would have cleaned shop. Stat padding is playing minnows and cleaning up tails, he did neither.

I dont rate Hobbs as highly. Bradman has the super high average. I am saying that Marshall's statistical supremacy compared to other ATGs isnt as pronounced once you factor and entire career of low batting standards with some exceptions.

Marshall has a good a case as anyone to be seen as a top 3 cricketer.

From the Wisden voting it was Richards, Hobbs and Warne. From the Cricinfo team voting the said it was Warne or Tendulkar.
Marshall has as good a case as any of them, if not better.

This is thee Imran fallacy. Marshall was rated the best pacer of his time but objetively he wasnt seen that far ahead of the pack.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Wasim was on the field for how many years straight, but was poor to start and disadvantaged to end. Was he helpful to the team during those periods?

I rate Viv and Ponting pre slump, that's when they were impactful. Both could have retired with better numbers and would have none of the discussion that exists about either.

Was Wasim better than his replacements? Mostly yes, so he was definitely helpful to the team during those years. As I said previously, it's not about just how good they were, I have not much doubt that Marshall was better than any bowler. But greatness to me is something more. It's being able to hit the field accross generations and providing World Class numbers.

 

[subshakerz]

Wasim was on the field for how many years straight, but was poor to start and disadvantaged to end. Was he helpful to the team during those periods?

Marshall clearly could have been a 3rd/4th seam for a couple more years. It would have affected his number but he would have been better than the other options.

 

[subshakerz]

Was Wasim better than his replacements? Mostly yes, so he was definitely helpful to the team during those years. As I said previously, it's not about just how good they were, I have not much doubt that Marshall was better than any bowler. But greatness to me is something more. It's being able to hit the field accross generations and providing World Class numbers.

Marshall was in an exceptional situation. Post-peak his numbers would have suffered worse if he didnt have Ambrose, Bishop and Walsh doing much of the heavy lifting so he would do smash and grabs at a neat average.

Marshall is lucky to not average a couple points higher frankly.

 

[kyear2]

Was Wasim better than his replacements? Mostly yes, so he was definitely helpful to the team during those years. As I said previously, it's not about just how good they were, I have not much doubt that Marshall was better than any bowler. But greatness to me is something more. It's being able to hit the field accross generations and providing World Class numbers.

Was he better? In the early years it was about potential. Later years (and this is more speculative) respect?

Greatness for me is
Record
Impact
Home and away consistency
Consistency, over time and against opponents
Peer rating

And for batting (and I guess bowling) s/r

 

[capt_Luffy]

Marshall was in an exceptional situation. Post-peak his numbers would have suffered worse if he didnt have Ambrose, Bishop and Walsh doing much of the heavy lifting so he would do smash and grabs at a neat average.

Marshall is lucky to not average a couple points higher.

He is, but that's really a double edged sword. For a weaker team he definitely would had played notably more matches, especially between 78 and 83.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Was he better? In the early years it was about potential. Later years (and this is more speculative) respect?

Greatness for me is
Record
Impact
Home and away consistency
Consistency, over time and against opponents
Peer rating

And for batting (and I guess bowling) s/r

Tough to say really. I believe he was better than most still. Greatness for me is also all those, but consistency over time I feel has special importance.

 

[subshakerz]

He is, but that's really a double edged sword. For a weaker team he definitely would had played notably more matches, especially between 78 and 83.

Played more matches, taken more load, taken maybe more wickets but with a plumper average because he wouldnt be scavenging off the remains left by Holding, Garner and Croft.

 

[subshakerz]

Overrated? As a bowler? Nonsense. Marshall is an All Time Great fast bowler. Period.

I say the same. The best ever bowler. But still a bit overrated in terms of how CW looks at him.

 

[kyear2]

Marshall clearly could have been a 3rd/4th seam for a couple more years. It would have affected his number but he would have been better than the other options.

This is the argument we're coming with?

I guess if the best argument against him is, he could have played longer and been worse, it's a compliment.

A few days ago I said that coronis's lost helped me see a bowler in a slightly better light. You asked who, it was (I thought) obviously Wasim.

I don't rate him higher than McGrath, Ambrose or Steyn, but he's closer.

Right now it's a 3 man completion in my head for my 3rd seamer, but Wasim (skill, variety, peer rating) is leading over Steyn (wpm, s/r, aggression) and Imran (batting).

Marshall's, skill set, impact, and home and away peak combination is unmatched. Nothing would have changed his place in the game.

 

[kyear2]

He is, but that's really a double edged sword. For a weaker team he definitely would had played notably more matches, especially between 78 and 83.

Between 80 and 83. But he was also ready at that point.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

I say the same. The best ever bowler. But still a bit overrated in terms of how CW looks at him.

No I don't think so. He deserves all the accolades and praise on here and anywhere else. Wonderful bowler. Awesome.

 

[Prince EWS]

Similar in primary disciplines, and Marshall's batting is a little underrated, but yeah this is a no contest.

 

[subshakerz]

This is the argument we're coming with?

I guess if the best argument against him is, he could have played longer and been worse, it's a compliment.

No, to be clear, this isnt my argument, I was responding to another point.

I do think the other points I mentioned are pretty irrefutable, he didnt face generally the stronger batting sides over his career stretch compared to others, and was shielded pre and post peak from having weaker stats.

I think he would have likely ended up with McGrath/Hadlee-like numbers otherwise. Awesome, but not clearly ahead of everyone.

A few days ago I said that coronis's lost helped me see a bowler in a slightly better light. You asked who, it was (I thought) obviously Wasim.

I don't rate him higher than McGrath, Ambrose or Steyn, but he's closer.

Right now it's a 3 man completion in my head for my 3rd seamer, but Wasim (skill, variety, peer rating) is leading over Steyn (wpm, s/r, aggression) and Imran (batting).

Marshall's, skill set, impact, and home and away peak combination is unmatched. Nothing would have changed his place in the game.

I think its a fair toss up between Wasim and Imran. Steyn just aint cut as a third seamer, I told you why.

 

[kyear2]

No, to be clear, this isnt my argument, I was responding to another point.

I do think the other points I mentioned are pretty irrefutable, he didnt face generally the stronger batting sides over his career stretch compared to others, and was shielded pre and post peak from having weaker stats.

I think he would have likely ended up with McGrath/Hadlee-like numbers otherwise. Awesome, but not clearly ahead of everyone.


I think its a fair toss up between Wasim and Imran. Steyn just aint cut as a third seamer, I told you why.

No point that you made were irrefutable, but not going to argue with you about it.

Re the bolded part, McGrath and Hadlee are similar, I and most here still rate McGrath higher.

And I wrote a lengthy post extolling the virtues of the great man, how often did I mention 20.94 or 46.6?

Finally, for Steyn, the 3rd bowler does get some of the new ball, and the opening bowlers do have to bowl with the old as well.
Steyn's wpm and s/r are elite and can't be easily overlooked.

 

[subshakerz]

No point that you made were irrefutable, but not going to argue with you about it.

Ok simple question then. Can you tell me ATG pacers who over their career faced (overall) poorer quality batting lineups than Marshall?

And I wrote a lengthy post extolling the virtues of the great man, how often did I mention 20.94 or 46.6?

You didnt need to but those numbers have a definite effect.

Finally, for Steyn, the 3rd bowler does get some of the new ball, and the opening bowlers do have to bowl with the old as well.
Steyn's wpm and s/r are elite and can't be easily overlooked.

I think in your heart of hearts, you realise that the risk of a poor number 8 doesn't merit a bit better bowler who may not even do as well in this 3rd seamer role. So it's likely Wasim or Imran.

 

[kyear2]

Well as a peace offering, I will submit that I am leery to put Imran that high if he wasnt seen so supreme in his career, even though I recognize his achievements as underrated. Top 5 yes for me, top 3 maybe on points but I hesitate.

I will say that from peer review and recognition, I never got why Imran wasn't seen as highly as you do, but....

He.was like the reverse Lillee or Wasim, where peer rating exceeded their numbers.

What I want to know is if you understand why I don't rate him 3rd, if that makes sense to you, or just some part of a public agenda.

My reasons.

He's not a lock for most ATG teams, not even ours and he's rated here (again 3rd) higher than anywhere else. He made neither the Cricinfo nor Wisden teams. The 3rd best player ever would be as much a lock as the top 2. His peer rating as a bowler was not that high, I feel like I know why, but you would disagree.

He's my 8th rated bowler, I don't see how you can be the 8th best bowler, yet the 3rd best player. That's a serious jump and a couple tiers. In his own era, he was 3rd best.

The same arguments used to elevate him to third, accumulative stats, should also be sufficient to push Kallis to the top 5, which no one does. It's the ultimate inconsistency.

I'm not of the belief that just because you're an all rounder that it automatically makes you a top 5 player, you primary skill, imo opinion has to put you there.

I'm not asking for your arguments, I know them, I know you have Imran as a top 5 bowler. I'm asking you if you can understand mine, or even makes sense.
Or for reasons yet to be made known to me, that I just hate your hero.

 

[Coronis]

I will say that from peer review and recognition, I never got why Imran wasn't seen as highly as you do, but....

He.was like the reverse Lillee or Wasim, where peer rating exceeded their numbers.

What I want to know is if you understand why I don't rate him 3rd, if that makes sense to you, or just some part of a public agenda.

My reasons.

He's not a lock for most ATG teams, not even ours and he's rated here (again 3rd) higher than anywhere else. He made neither the Cricinfo nor Wisden teams. The 3rd best player ever would be as much a lock as the top 2. His peer rating as a bowler was not that high, I feel like I know why, but you would disagree.

He's my 8th rated bowler, I don't see how you can be the 8th best bowler, yet the 3rd best player. That's a serious jump and a couple tiers. In his own era, he was 3rd best.

The same arguments used to elevate him to third, accumulative stats, should also be sufficient to push Kallis to the top 5, which no one does. It's the ultimate inconsistency.

I'm not of the belief that just because you're an all rounder that it automatically makes you a top 5 player, you primary skill, imo opinion has to put you there.

I'm not asking for your arguments, I know them, I know you have Imran as a top 5 bowler. I'm asking you if you can understand mine, or even makes sense.
Or for reasons yet to be made known to me, that I just hate your hero.

Hello. Is it me you’re looking for?