Marshall Vs Sobers

[ataraxia]

Neither did New Zealand or South Africa in any meaningful sense when Bradman was playing

RSA were the 3rd best team in the inter-war period. Please don't perpetuate lies.

 

[Xix2565]

He faced weak lineups as well yes but that's not unique to Marshall. Let's use today's bowlers: outside of Australia (at home) every team has a pretty weak batting lineup.

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug to be injecting like this.

 

[Slifer]

Yup. Marshall is one of CWs sacred cows apparently.

Subs, I'd gander that Tendulkar is as overrated as Marshall, whatever that means.

 

[ma1978]

RSA were the 3rd best team in the inter-war period. Please don't perpetuate lies.

Not saying a whole lot. I agree they were a decent team with a couple great players but Bradman not playing them has zero bearing on his record. That assertion is taking analysis by checklist to the next level.

 

[ma1978]

This poll is the ultimate sign of CE groupthink btw.

 

[subshakerz]

Subs, I'd gander that Tendulkar is as overrated as Marshall, whatever that means.

I think there is far more debate on his standing than with Marshall. Nor do I see him being treated as far ahead of the pack.

 

[subshakerz]

You people love to selectively parse stats when it suits you and ignore it when it doesn’t. There’s a case for Sobers to be a top 5 cricketer of all time and a case for Marshall. Sobers played in the most flat, insipid batting era ever when draws were the norm. Does this take away from his greatness? Of course not but let’s be clear, everyone has holes in their record bar Bradman

How charitable.

 

[Slifer]

I think there is far more debate on his standing than with Marshall. Nor do I see him being treated as far ahead of the pack.

That's not true and you know it. People literally call Sachin a god and such. Even you one time in the Marshall v Sachin debate tried to make the point that someone like Bumrah could easily be in the Marshall category in the future but no one could with Sachin. Which is dubious, considering that all of Sobers, Hobbs and even Lara are in a similar boat to Sachin.

 

[Slifer]

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug to be injecting like this.

It's not nostalgia it's facts. Are there any strong batting lineups going about right now? Maybe Australia and India at home respectively. And Rsa and WI's lineups (currently) are weaker than any from the 80s.

 

[subshakerz]

That's not true and you know it. People literally call Sachin a god and such. Even you one time in the Marshall v Sachin debate tried to make the point that someone like Bumrah could easily be in the Marshall category in the future but no one could with Sachin. Which is dubious, considering that all of Sobers, Hobbs and even Lara are in a similar boat to Sachin.

Stop strawmanning. I said it's more conceivable that a pacer could replicate Marshalls record, given that Bumrah is already on his way, than a bat replicating/overtaking Tendulkars.

I have said on multiple occasions that there are several candidates for best after Bradman and each could be selected based on what you value. I prefers Tendulkars longevity.

 

[subshakerz]

It's not nostalgia it's facts. Are there any strong batting lineups going about right now? Maybe Australia and India at home respectively. And Rsa and WI's lineups (currently) are weaker than any from the 80s.

Again, this argument is only relevant if we are evaluating Bumrah's and Cummins as ATGs. I am talking about ATGs that finished their careers, of which Marshall had it a bit easier.

 

[Slifer]

Again, this argument is only relevant if we are evaluating Bumrah's and Cummins as ATGs. I am talking about ATGs that finished their careers, of which Marshall had it a bit easier.

A bit easier relative to who? McGrath? Ambrose? Who? McGrath played in a similarly strong Aussie bowling lineup. I will admit he played against some strong Indian teams but he also played some weaker batting (similar to MM) like vs the WI, England etc.

Hadlee? Their careers overlapped enough to where they played vs similar strength teams and if you think wickets in WI are spicy, they have nothing on conditions in 80s NZ.

There are a handful of series where Marshall didn't necessarily have the full support of the other great pacers: away to India in '83 and away to Pakistan in '86 and he still excelled. I'm compelled to believe that bowling support or not, he'd have ended up with the record that he has.

 

[subshakerz]

A bit easier relative to who? McGrath? Ambrose? Who? McGrath played in a similarly strong Aussie bowling lineup. I will admit he played against some strong Indian teams but he also played some weaker batting (similar to MM) like vs the WI, England etc.

Ambrose faced stronger SA, Pak and Aus lineups.

McGrath is a mixed bag but generally he did face some reasonably strong lineups better than Marshall. Pak in the 90s, India in the 2000s, SA.

Hadlee? Their careers overlapped enough to where they played vs similar strength teams and if you think wickets in WI are spicy, they have nothing on conditions in 80s NZ.

Hadlee faced a 70s/80s strong Aus side and WI itself of course. Not talking pitches here, I have criticized Hadlee for that before.

There are a handful of series where Marshall didn't necessarily have the full support of the other great pacers: away to India in '83 and away to Pakistan in '86 and he still excelled. I'm compelled to believe that bowling support or not, he'd have ended up with the record that he has.

Lol in India he had Holding, etc who also took a ton of wickets. What are you talking about?

Having the high quality support helped in his early and late career phases.

 

[kyear2]

To clarify, we don't find your stance accords with your reasoning.


Again, you downplay Imran's rating though. Generally considered the best of four ARs both during and after career, top 10 cricketer in lists and in many ATG XIs.


Congrats that's our logic.


You have admitted captaincy accounts for around 15/20 percent of results. So not giving him credit for that is just you being stubborn.


The thing is even being very good against the best team ever means a lot more than very good against a normal team. That is the part you don't seem to correlate.


Dude, go through your old posts. You never bring up WSC at all with Imran in Australia. So what credit are you talking about? How can someone assess him in Australia honestly without doing that.

Any no, he isn't poor otherwise. You just haven't bothered to go through his series by series performances to see what his actual prime bowling record is. You still include two tests in 84/85 where he is wasn't even playing as a bowler because he was injured and late career in 90 where he was done as a bowler. Just a round average is misleading, you know this.


Again, there is no qualitative gap between Steyn/Ambrose and Imran. So you will be forced to acknowledge this.


The funny thing is you don't see your own logic. Marshall is almost never put in the top ten cricketer ever in lists, unlike Imran. Having him as number 3 defies cricket consensus way more than Imran.

Your case is built on suggesting an appreciable gap between Marshall and the other pacers that, upon reflecting, I realise now doesn't exist. McGrath, Hadlee, Ambrose, and yes Imran, are all his near equals.

So will try to answer point for point, then for multiple reasons I will end engagement with you on this.

Many all time XI's is a stretch considering he missed out on the only two that matters.

Stop saying our logic when even in the poll started by Imran's biggest fan, he's a relatively distant 4th in the voting and marginally ahead of Wasim.

This is one of the two reasons I'm not going to continue arguing with you about anything. You're disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. No captain is responsible for 15 -20% of the result and I never said that. I initially gave a number between 10 & 20%, which after consideration revived to at most 5%. I also have yet to be told what makes a great captain as it's incredibly subjective. The fact that the two greatest teams ever were captained by guys not seen to be great ones, lowers the importance even more.

The West Indies were not the best team ever based on their batting, not in the 80's. Hadlee had some if his best figures against them, and literally Imran's best. It was Viv, and after a while Richardson. In '88, the team was no better than the ones you're giving Marshall crap for. The middle.order had in Hooper and Logie.

I give him credit for it, he still has to answer for his test records. That's not mutually exclusive. I think he's the 8th best bowler of all time, you act as if I have him in the 20's where you have Kallis.

The same way you believe Imran is better than them, I believe they are better. Every poll ever don't on this site also shows them demolishing him head to head and as a trio. On one of the you represented half the Imran vote all on your own. I think both are clearly ahead of Imran in my estimation. I could post the poll results again for you if you don't remember them.

I've made quite the substantive post as to why I believe Marshall was the best. He's near unanimously made the last 3 all time teams we've made, he was a clear no. one in the recently concluded vote and in the poll atarataxia made he received 46 out of 48 votes. No one on the platform besides you thinks that Imran Khan is the equal to Malcom Marshall as a bowler. They don't even think he's the equal to Steyn and Ambrose. No Ambrose is better, I love Amby and watched his entire career, he's top 4, possibly even top 4, but he's not Marshall's equal. Steyn, Steyn, lacked control and a plan B, was also more prone to loose the plot, along with his radar. He was excellent, but he was too expensive and his record away from home isn't close to what it is at home. Again, top 4, top 5. Hadlee clearly no. 3 for me, but don't even think he was better than McGrath. Don't think anyone from the era rates Hadlee above Marshall, and never seen him on an all time team, but I do give him his props. I rate Marshall over McGrath primarily for his greater variance of skill set and adaptability. They both proved themselves in most conditions but Marshall just had that extra gear and tool kit, and could be argued that he was the ultimate match winner. He challenged your technique and your will and if I had to choose one bowler to win me a test match anywhere, it's Marshall.

As per Marshall not being in the top 3's, I noted in my post that the players normally positioned for that spot have been.
As per Wisden
Hobbs, Richards & Warne
As per Cricinfo's team
Warne & Tendulkar

My argument is that Marshall has as good a case as any of them, and even in polls on the thread, has beaten each of them in one on one votes.

As per your last paragraph, most on the forum acknowledges a big 3, Imran's not in it, despite your best attempts to tear down all of his potential rivals. The big three for almost everyone here is Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee, the others being rated by many here as being behind the two spinners.

You keep trying to create these narratives by repeating them and hoping that they stick. You have tried to disparage Ambrose and Steyn because they are his closest rivals. You daily go after Kallis because he's his closest rival as an all-rounder, recently started going after Hadlee as well, and today Marshall. It just never ends.

Everyone if over rated for you, but Imran is the only one's that under rated. You consistently ignore the ball tampering and home umpiring advantages that he enjoyed more than any other ATG bowler, but focuses on everything else for every other player. And it's tiring.

 

[Xix2565]

It's not nostalgia it's facts. Are there any strong batting lineups going about right now? Maybe Australia and India at home respectively. And Rsa and WI's lineups (currently) are weaker than any from the 80s.

No it's nostalgia. Some might be weaker than the 80s versions but some are much better. What's different is that everyone else has better bowling which makes the improvements in batting talent/lineups look minimal. The 80s had some **** teams, you can't really pretend otherwise.

 

[Slifer]

Ambrose faced stronger SA, Pak and Aus lineups.

McGrath is a mixed bag but generally he did face some reasonably strong lineups better than Marshall. Pak in the 90s, India in the 2000s, SA.


Hadlee faced a 70s/80s strong Aus side and WI itself of course. Not talking pitches here, I have criticized Hadlee for that before.


Lol in India he had Holding, etc who also took a ton of wickets. What are you talking about?

Having the high quality support helped in his early and late career phases.

I said he didn't have the full attack in India, reading is fundamental; Garner was missing and Roberts only played the last two tests if I recall. Yet he dominated in alien conditions. Ditto in Pakistan in '86. My point, even when he didn't have the full attack around him, he still excelled.

 

[Slifer]

No it's nostalgia. Some might be weaker than the 80s versions but some are much better. What's different is that everyone else has better bowling which makes the improvements in batting talent/lineups look minimal. The 80s had some **** teams, you can't really pretend otherwise.

There's not a current batting lineup much better than the those of the 80s. And I'm not even going to start on the bowling.

 

[subshakerz]

I said he didn't have the full attack in India, reading is fundamental; Garner was missing and Roberts only played the last two tests if I recall. Yet he dominated in alien conditions. Ditto in Pakistan in '86. My point, even when he didn't have the full attack around him, he still excelled.

Yes so maybe you are confused. I have no doubt that in his peak (83 to 88) he could excel on his own nor that he had little trouble with tough conditions. He had one of the best peaks ever.

The pace support was more of a point in shielding his record (slightly) pre and post peak where most bowlers have a tougher full load.

 

[h_hurricane]

For the record Marshall and Hadlee as bowlers > Imran

I too agree with the assessment, however one stat that might interest you.

Imran averaged better than Marshall between Marshall's debut and retirement.

 

[Xix2565]

There's not a current batting lineup much better than the those of the 80s. And I'm not even going to start on the bowling.

Still nostalgia wanking. Be better than this, there is nothing objective about your assumptions.