Jasprit Bumrah vs Malcolm Marshall

[subshakerz]

There was a pretty noticeable change in his backlift and shuffle at the crease after 01/02 or so, gradually kept making little changes to it and by 07/08 he doesn't really look much like the 90s version .

These are basic facts any cricket watcher should know.

This is a shocking level of ignorance from @kyear2

 

[DrWolverine]

I can’t exactly describe it but 2000s Sachin was very much different from 1990s Sachin and it was easily visible.

 

[subshakerz]

I can’t exactly describe it but 2000s Sachin was very much different from 1990s Sachin and it was easily visible.

I can name half a dozen shots that 2000s Tendulkar did that he didn't in 1990s.

 

[kyear2]

honestly limiting Viv's rating to showmanship is kind of ******** and feels a bit pretentious

This.

 

[kyear2]

Gavaskar and Lillee just on the top of my head....

Also Greg Chappell.

Lillee and Chappell I haven't read, but it's important to remember that they played Roberts several times when they played, in the 70's. Neither played Malcolm.

So when asked for the best quick they played.....

 

[kyear2]

Based on this article where he considers Bumrah right up there with the best.

Dennis Lillee and Andy Roberts were the best fast bowlers I faced. Bumrah combines the best of both

The Indian pace spearhead combines Lillee’s ability to dictate terms and unsettle batsmen with the cerebral approach of Roberts. If Australia can best him, they will win the Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

www.smh.com.au

Can someone provide a non paywalled screen shot or link?

But yeah, best he faced. Didn't include Marshall.
Some would say not coincidentally.

 

[kyear2]

True. But Holding was showmanship moreso and Roberts also had plenty to do with that too. Also think how many people rated Compton over Hutton or Wasim over McGrath; showmanship had plenty to do with that

Hutton is well remembered as the best batsman of that era though.

 

[kyear2]

Viv was an all time great but yeah his destructive ability with the bat made him very popular.

Better or popular.

But continue with the revisionists history.

 

[kyear2]

It's a huge problem, but say, would you really swap Bumrah for any bowler ever in this series??

Quality wise?

There are at least 5 bowlers quality wise, and I suspect a couple more that would have made minced meat of that Australian batting order.

Look at bowling strike rates the past couple years, batsmen have forgotten how to value their wickets.

And not saying Bumrah isn't special, but also look at what Boland did.

So yeah, at least 5, but likely others would have done just as well.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Lillee and Chappell I haven't read, but it's important to remember that they played Roberts several times when they played, in the 70's. Neither played Malcolm.

So when asked for the best quick they played.....

Can someone provide a non paywalled screen shot or link?

But yeah, best he faced. Didn't include Marshall.
Some would say not coincidentally.

West Indies beat Australia, West Indies won by 5 wickets (with 17 balls remaining)

WI 146 vs AUS 147/5 - West Indies won by 5 wickets (with 17 balls remaining) in Melbourne, Benson & Hedges World Series Cup 1981, January 10, 1982

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[capt_Luffy]

Quality wise?

There are at least 5 bowlers quality wise, and I suspect a couple more that would have made minced meat of that Australian batting order.

Look at bowling strike rates the past couple years, batsmen have forgotten how to value their wickets.

And not saying Bumrah isn't special, but also look at what Boland did.

So yeah, at least 5, but likely others would have done just as well.

Disagree. I don't think any bowler, no matter how good and at what form, could with guarantee had delivered a similar calibre series here.

 

[kyear2]

Lillee is literally rated by 90% of the cricket faculty to be higher, especially in England as well. It wasn't the work of Benaud mafia.

That makes Sobers the Greatest Test all rounder by a very clear margin and the 2nd Greatest Test cricketer; but it's a factor while rating his batting.

90% wow.

I imagine you have some proof of this.

I mean Marshall made the Wisden team

CMJ had Marshall 11th and Lillee 19th

Gower had Maco 9th and Lillee 16th.

But again, the split is generational and divided between the ones who played in the 70's compared to the 80's. Border and Akram rates Malcolm best.

90% though, would like to see some back up of this number of you don't mind.

And again, if this is supposed to suggest that an generational split would indicate that the universal peer and pundit rating supremacy that Viv had over Sunny was similar.
Lillee was the GOAT when he retired, was then succeeded as best in the world and ever by Marshall. Sunny was never in said conversation for either.

 

[capt_Luffy]

90% wow.

I imagine you have some proof of this.

I mean Marshall made the Wisden team

CMJ had Marshall 11th and Lillee 19th

Gower had Maco 9th and Lillee 16th.

But again, the split is generational and divided between the ones who played in the 70's compared to the 80's. Border and Akram rates Malcolm best.

90% though, would like to see some back up of this number of you don't mind.

And again, if this is supposed to suggest that an generational split would indicate that the universal peer and pundit rating supremacy that Viv had over Sunny was similar.
Lillee was the GOAT when he retired, was then succeeded as best in the world and ever by Marshall. Sunny was never in said conversation for either.

Viv Richards, Barry Richards, Richard Hadlee, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, Javed Miandad, Alvin Kallicharran, Colin Croft.

Among lists: John Woodcock, Wisden Cricketer of the Century, TMS, that ESPN list.


These are mostly on top of my head. I will say though, 90% was likely an overshot

 

[kyear2]

Blatantly false.

The Wisden list and ESPN lists relying on international panels had Lillee high in the top ten, Marshall nowhere near.

And I was going through the Lord's ATG XIs of so many ex cricketers on YT and frankly Lillee's name came up more than Marshall by not just Aussies. Lillee was in Dickie Birds XI. I can go on and on.

The Wisden list that had Worrell 6th and Compton 9th.

Looking for bowler ratings.

And I'll let Dickie slide, he does rate Barry as the best batsman he ever saw and Sobers as the best cricketer. And as I said, we're forgetting that during the 70's Lillee was literally the GOAT.

 

[kyear2]

This was an innings of absolute discipline and controlling one self. I highly doubt if Viv could play such an innings.

I recall that innings.

If you dig deep enough you would also see what I said about that innings, or the fact that Border and Waugh Sr had to cut out shots from their games.

Tendy, somewhat like Virat now, was getting dismissed outside of the off stump. And he, if I recall correctly said he was going to eliminate the cover drive.

If I recall correctly, and I think I do. The adjustment wasn't permanent. Was just till he got his feet under him again.

And there was an innings that Viv played, can't for the life of me remember, where he basically shut down and played out the innings, don't think there's a pitch map, but I'll look for it.

To insinuate that Richards, one of the greatest batsmen ever couldn't eliminate shots is incorrect.

To eliminate shots and slow down scoring is a far easier skill that the ability to accelerate an innings as required.

 

[kyear2]

West Indies beat Australia, West Indies won by 5 wickets (with 17 balls remaining)

WI 146 vs AUS 147/5 - West Indies won by 5 wickets (with 17 balls remaining) in Melbourne, Benson & Hedges World Series Cup 1981, January 10, 1982

www.espncricinfo.com

Are you serious?

You're comparing the people he played in tests abd f/c with for a decade to a know day match before Marshall was even established on the team as your evidence they played.

Chappell retired before Marshall played them in tests.

That example was ridiculous.

 

[kyear2]

Disagree. I don't think any bowler, no matter how good and at what form, could with guarantee had delivered a similar calibre series here.

You've watched cricket for how long?

As great as Bumrah is, and he is great. There are at least 5, and probably.morw great bowlers who could have done what he did.

****, Boland did what he did.

 

[centurymaker]

You've watched cricket for how long?

As great as Bumrah is, and he is great. There are at least 5, and probably.morw great bowlers who could have done what he did.

****, Boland did what he did.

No. Boland didn't do what Bumrah did. You can't be this delusional now, surely.

Boland padded his stats in the SCG test which had the liveliest pitch of the series by far! Par score was 160-180. Boland didn't take a single 5-fer in the series until his final innings of the series. So please stop.



Here's Mr. Boland's figures-

Pink Test 5/105
MCG Test 6/86
SCG Test 10/76

(not even a single 4-fer in the Pink ball or MCG Test).

 

[kyear2]

Viv Richards, Barry Richards, Richard Hadlee, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, Javed Miandad, Alvin Kallicharran, Colin Croft.

Among lists: John Woodcock, Wisden Cricketer of the Century, TMS, that ESPN list.


These are mostly on top of my head. I will say though, 90% was likely an overshot

Viv said Malcom was the best he played with or against, Lillee he said was the best he faced in tests. I'll look for the interview.

Barry never faced Marshall, neither did half the people on that list. Lillee was Hadlee's idol.

And again Lillee was the GOAT until Marshall took it over. Being 2nd best to the rest is pretty decent.

Do you care now to list all the people who rate Barry and Viv over Sunny and see that those are actually more than 90%.

Same Lillee for sure, Thompson as well, the same Dickie Bird, Pollock, Procter, Gooch, Bob Taylor, McKenzie. And that's just the list for Barry, the one for Viv is too long to repeat, but I'm sure you know the names. I can mention the one for Sunny though, Hutton.

Marshall being mostly on par with former players and making the Cricinfo team along with him and the Wisden team ahead of him isn't bad for the kid from Bim.

There was no ambiguity or splitting with regards to who was the best batsman in the early 70's, and definitely none in the latter and onto the '80's.

I know you're trying to show how peer and pundit ratings aren't always accurate, but Marshall and Lillee mostly didn't play together and were two titans one after the other, one literally taking the mantle from the other. Yes it would be close. One was the kid who was a little despised and seen as part of what was wrong with world cricket at the time. The discourse and journalism in Australia and England more than bordered on open racism and they were regularly criticized, not to mention having several rules drafted just to stop them. It got to be so downright petty that they, and this is no joke, restricted the amount of tickets, Caribbean immigrants in England could buy to watch the games, restricted them from sitting together and banned the instruments they walked with.
So yeah, I'm happy with Malcolm's ratings.

It wasn't close between the Richards and Sunny. Now one can say Sunny had a better career than the former, but there was no doubt as to whom was better in the 80's. There's no such argument for the latter.

With regards to @subshakerz and the comments about the changes that Sachin made, and the tropes that Viv couldn't and didn't make adjustments as his career went along. Vivian didn't know how to play in England, swinging conditions as a whole really, prior to playing county cricket and through his years with Botham, he honed his technique and his footwork to adjust to the swing and the conditions.
The idiocy from him to suggest that Viv was so brainless that he just basically relied on his physical gifts over a 20 year career is just that. All batsmen adjust their stances, tweak their techniques, bat lifts, remember Haynes changing his entire stance to deal with Wasim. Until 89 or so Viv had long past his peak, and he had had his surgery and the reflexes dulled, and but was still a world class performer. There's a story that Lara was telling, about how Viv tried to explain to him how to bat in England, how it took patience and even to grind it out at times. But yeah rank ignorance.

But both of you feel free to continue on.

 

[centurymaker]

The more I think about it the more I believe @Prince EWS is right.

McGrath taking 563 wickets at 21.64 is clearly superior to Marshall's 376 at 20.94.

Because if Marshall were to take another 190 wickets, imagine what would happen to his average? It will surely fall to 22/23. He would have had to play more during his early career phase and more in late career (possibly retire later) to get close to McGrath's tally and in the process his stats would tank a little.

Marshall retired at age 33 (early)
McGrath retired at age 37

I think based on actual output and career, you would have to place McGrath ahead of Marshall. Because clearly we can't simply go off on "absolute quality" alone. If we did so, then Bumrah would be top 5 already. But he isn't as he doesn't have the wickets. Likewise no one has the wickets that McGrath has at that rate, so he's had the best career among all pacers. He is clear number one.