McGrath. Marshall. Hadlee.

[OverratedSanity]

There's Nothing more unhelpful than 2000s Australian wickets

They were flat in terms of sideways movement, but had enough bounce still, which was what someone like McGrath really flourished with. Not saying he had it easy of course, but the conditions suited him somewhat.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'm sure I've heard it. But what's your argument for Steyn over McGrath?

More destructive overall, ability to pick up wickets in clumps (something Steyn was one of the best ever at imo, it would snowball one wicket into full on collapses all the time), and slightly more deadly on flat decks. He had the ability to take the pitch entirely out of the equation and run through a lineup on a road and demonstrated that more than McGrath imo.

 

[Prince EWS]

Virat. Vaughan. Amla.

@Gob @NUFAN

 

[subshakerz]

Steyn was also better in SA, and better in Aus than Mcgrath was in SA.

Not really. Steyn has an entire career in SA so hard to compare.

McGrath had one early career series in SA which brings down his wicket tally.

After that he has two quality series in 96 and 2001 where he outbowls the local pacers.

Steyn in Australia is also good but he took a lot of stick too, especially in 2012.

 

[subshakerz]

They were flat in terms of sideways movement, but had enough bounce still, which was what someone like McGrath really flourished with. Not saying he had it easy of course, but the conditions suited him somewhat.

Good point. It was still somewhat suited to his game. It's not like he was bowling in Multan or something.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Not really. Steyn has an entire career in SA so hard to compare.

McGrath had one early career series in SA which brings down his wicket tally.

After that he has two quality series in 96 and 2001 where he outbowls the local pacers.

Steyn in Australia is also good but he took a lot of stick too, especially in 2012.

Averaging 27-28 with a bigger haul of wickets in Australia (with two brilliant series winning spells) is more impressive than what McGrath did in SA imo.

 

[subshakerz]

Averaging 27-28 with a bigger haul of wickets in Australia (with two brilliant series winning spells) is more impressive than what McGrath did in SA imo.

With McGrath it's not just about the wickets he took but the control he brought.

If you discount his first series (playing in his first year of cricket) he took 25 wickets in 6 tests @20. That's a very quality haul.

However, I can understand folks choosing not to ignore the first series and giving it to Steyn. Let's just not pretend McGrath was bad in SA or anything.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Not really. Steyn has an entire career in SA so hard to compare.

McGrath had one early career series in SA which brings down his wicket tally.

After that he has two quality series in 96 and 2001 where he outbowls the local pacers.

Steyn in Australia is also good but he took a lot of stick too, especially in 2012.

Steyn in Aus was better than Mcgrath in SA. For his era he outperformed all contemporaries to Aus. Also Steyn is one of the best home bowlers(even after considering the SA pitches).

 

[subshakerz]

Steyn in Aus was better than Mcgrath in SA. For his era he outperformed all contemporaries to Aus. Also Steyn is one of the best home bowlers(even after considering the SA pitches).

Think you are underestimating McGrath in SA to not at least say it's close.

Steyn at home had it far easier than McGrath. He should be averaging in teens like Philander and Rabada actually to overcome McGrath at home.

 

[Arachnödouche2.0]

Wasn't McG notorious at gobbling up top orders in no time? Not sure what the stats say but teams seemed to be in dire straits often enough by the time his opening spells were done.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Think you are underestimating McGrath in SA to not at least say it's close.

Steyn at home had it far easier than McGrath. He should be averaging in teens like Philander and Rabada actually to overcome McGrath at home.

Far superior WPM than Philander, whilst having a comparable average

 

[subshakerz]

Wasn't McG notorious at gobbling up top orders in no time? Not sure what the stats say but teams seemed to be in dire straits often enough by the time his opening spells were done.

That's exactly what he did on day 1 in 96 in SA against SA on a flat deck. He set the tone for the series by taking four wickets. SA never recovered.

Donald and Pollock had a horrible test by comparison.

 

[subshakerz]

Far superior WPM than Philander, whilst having a comparable average

Ok but just saying that with those home conditions he would need to be even more extraordinary to claim definite edge over McGrath at home.

 

[DrWolverine]

But what's your argument for Steyn over McGrath?

For the majority of his career(1993-2002), McGrath played in arguably the golden period of fast bowling.

For the majority of his career(2007-2015), Steyn played in arguably the worst period of fast bowling and still excelled.

Steyn took 374 wickets(85% of his career wickets) between 2007-2015. No other fast bowler had an average below 25 or SR below 50 in that period. Dale took those wickets at an extraordinary average of 21.8 and SR of 40.8 and doing it in era when no one else could makes it even greater.

 

[ankitj]

They were flat in terms of sideways movement, but had enough bounce still, which was what someone like McGrath really flourished with. Not saying he had it easy of course, but the conditions suited him somewhat.

There is always a reason for someone performing well.

 

[Johan]

McGrath 2000-2007 — 297 wickets @ 20.54

and that's the batting era, don't think the era argument effects McGrath really

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Ok but just saying that with those home conditions he would need to be even more extraordinary to claim definite edge over McGrath at home.

Not a definite edge, but for me slightly better, supremely better in Asia, and better in Aus than McGrath in SA.

 

[Johan]

in general, Steyn has supremacy in Asia and McGrath outside Asia, I really don't think Steyn was consistent enough throughout his career to claim superiority over McGrath, and McGrath's ability to chip away the best batters of the opposition mignt be unmatched in the 150 year history of cricket.

 

[DrWolverine]

Between 2002-2007, there were only two standout fast bowlers.

McGrath: 44 Tests. 190 wickets. Avg of 21.15. SR of 52.8

Shoaib : 30 Tests. 132 wickets. Avg of 21.94. SR of 39.3

 

[DrWolverine]

in general, Steyn has supremacy in Asia and McGrath outside Asia, I really don't think Steyn was consistent enough throughout his career to claim superiority over McGrath, and McGrath's ability to chip away the best batters of the opposition mignt be unmatched in the 150 year history of cricket.

McGrath was more consistent
Steyn was more destructive

At least that’s what I felt from seeing them