DrWolverine
U19 Cricketer
As a bowler
Attachments
-
782.3 KB Views: 4
McGrath played in that tougher era, his style is almost independent of conditions, he played more high pressure matches, he elevated a team from great to one of the two greatest. He was also better vs the best of his day that Hadlee imo.McGrath is a slightly better bowler but Hadlee is a slightly better player
I think Hadlee's performance threshold v the best batsmen was restricted a bit by there not being as much pressure at the other end. McGrath's record against top drawer batsmen is ridiculous though.McGrath played in that tougher era, his style is almost independent of conditions, he played more high pressure matches, he elevated a team from great to one of the two greatest. He was also better vs the best of his day that Hadlee imo.
Agree McGrath had Great record vs top tier batsmen, but both Tendulkar and Lara did held their own against him.I think Hadlee's performance threshold v the best batsmen was restricted a bit by there not being as much pressure at the other end. McGrath's record against top drawer batsmen is ridiculous though.
Lara moreso. I think McGrath had Tendulkar overall.Agree McGrath had Great record vs top tier batsmen, but both Tendulkar and Lara did held their own against him.
Tendulkar played 2 full series vs McGrath, was MOS in the first (and had 3 very controversial decisions go against) and in the second, scored dual half centuries in the 1st Test and a match winning century in Chennai. Outside that played a one-off match in 90s he didn't scored much, and 2 games in a series he was called mid way out of injury, and in the second game scored a 50 crucial for the victory. Don't think can give McGrath the edge there.Lara moreso. I think McGrath had Tendulkar overall.
The decisions issue is a can of worms. That might have happened to various players in critical showdowns throughout history. McGrath's record head to head v Tendulkar in Test and ODI is very good.Tendulkar played 2 full series vs McGrath, was MOS in the first (and had 3 very controversial decisions go against) and in the second, scored dual half centuries in the 1st Test and a match winning century in Chennai. Outside that played a one-off match in 90s he didn't scored much, and 2 games in a series he was called mid way out of injury, and in the second game scored a 50 crucial for the victory. Don't think can give McGrath the edge there.
Sachin's average is 36.77 when McGrath played, head to head
Tendulkar's head-to-head average against bowlers
Came across this list compiled by Charles Davis. Bowlers who have dismissed SRT at least few times..www.cricketweb.net
Yeah, looks slight edge to the bowlers there.averages 32.9 when Donald played but apparently 35 against Donald himself specifically, reckon it's because of Cronje?
As I just pointed, looking from series to series, I will disagree there. Donald had an advantage over SRT, but given he was brilliant in both the full series vs McGrath and did good in a separate game with an injury, I can't place McGrath ahead. You could argue of average, but I think in such small sample sizes, a match to match analysis works better.The decisions issue is a can of worms. That might have happened to various players in critical showdowns throughout history. McGrath's record head to head v Tendulkar in Test and ODI is very good.
Re head to head, the first time McGrath got Sachin India were like 20 runs off crusing to 80. Not saying the wicket shan't count, just some context while average in such small sample sizes may not be properly reflective of the game.Sachin's average is 36.77 when McGrath played, head to head
Tendulkar's head-to-head average against bowlers
Came across this list compiled by Charles Davis. Bowlers who have dismissed SRT at least few times..www.cricketweb.net