2nd greatest living cricketer

[trundler]

Ok.
McGrath was the only ATG pacer in early and Mid 00s, naturally he became the best.
It would be the same with any other ATG.

If you think Donald would have been a 30 avg bowler in 00s, then there is no point in calling him ATG.

Not the point

 

[OverratedSanity]

McGrath's probably the greatest pacer ever but I agree that the flat deck argument for the 2000s is highly overstated. Atg quicks retired and that's what made batting a bit easier worldwide. The idea that every country suddenly started producing roads when Donald Ambrose Wasim retired is pretty dubious.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

out of the 21 test series he averaged above 26 in twice and averaged under 20, nine times.

Akthar 17 series in 00s
Below 25 avg 12 times
Below 20 avg 8 times

 

[OverratedSanity]

I mean, yeah sure pace bowling stonks were not especially high in the 2000s but McGrath being the lone ATG is still a point in his favour.

I guess it depends on why you think he was the lone atg. If it's primarily because pitches got flatter then sure it's a point in his favour because he flourished in a tougher era. But if it's because the 90s quicks retired and the next line of atgs all had bad injury luck (bond, Shoaib, asif) then I'm less convinced what McGrath accomplished should give him a leg up on the 90s bowlers.

 

[trundler]

Australia did get way roadier though so if holds up in his case. I don't disagree with pace bowling stocks getting lower in the 2000s. It's also way down on the list of reasons why he sits on the top alongside Macko.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

If Akhtar doing almost as well over a third of the number of games diminishes McGrath's standout legacy, Marshall, Hadlee, Garner, and Imran coexisting means they were all meh.

Akthar played 33 tests in 00s, exactly half of McGrath's 66.

By general consensus, Akthar is not an ATG unlike Imran or Garner.

Lillee, Smith and Steyn are better comparisons.

 

[trundler]

Ah crap I was going by the 97 Ankit posted in the other thread but that was 97-07. My bad. Still half tho. Akhtar underrated for sure. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here

 

[Bolo.]

Ya, other ATGs would have been fine. See Pollock (really the only bowler we have to compare) averaging 25 in the same time period despite being up to 20+ klicks down from peak pace and losing his brutal lift. He went 22 or less average in 5 of the 9 years (when he wasnt getting hit by injuries too badly)

I kinda doubt any of them would have been able to match his average, but I guess a number of them would have been more penetrative in unhelpful conditions.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ah crap I was going by the 97 Ankit posted in the other thread but that was 97-07. My bad. Still half tho. Akhtar underrated for sure. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here

McGrath was outstanding in 00s because there was no competition at all.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Ya, other ATGs would have been fine. See Pollock (really the only bowler we have to compare) averaging 25 in the same time period despite being up to 20+ klicks down from peak pace and losing his brutal lift. He went 22 or less average in 5 of the 9 years (when he wasnt getting hit by injuries too badly)

Wasn't SA still pretty good for fast bowlers during that period though

McGrath's probably the greatest pacer ever but I agree that the flat deck argument for the 2000s is highly overstated. Atg quicks retired and that's what made batting a bit easier worldwide. The idea that every country suddenly started producing roads when Donald Ambrose Wasim retired is pretty dubious.

disagree. The lack of other ATG fast bowlers might have had some influence but it wasn't at all the major reason for batting being easier worldwide. You could also have the cause & effect backwards.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Shows how well NZ batted against McGrath in 2001/02. He only took 5 wickets at 65.40 in 3 tests. Good memories (although we were robbed in Perth)

 

[Gob]

I recall pitches being pretty flat in the 00s. Certainly compared to what we have now

 

[TheJediBrah]

Shows how well NZ batted against McGrath in 2001/02. He only took 5 wickets at 65.40 in 3 tests. Good memories (although we were robbed in Perth)

Only robbing that happened in Perth was Warne's maiden Test century when he was dismissed by a massive uncalled front-foot no-ball.

 

[Gob]

Only robbing that happened in Perth was Warne's maiden Test century when he was dismissed by a massive uncalled front-foot no-ball.

And that fat bloke who completely lost it

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Only robbing that happened in Perth was Warne's maiden Test century when he was dismissed by a massive uncalled front-foot no-ball.

If DRS had existed we would've won the test series

 

[trundler]

McGrath was outstanding in 00s because there was no competition at all.

no

 

[Gob]

no

no

Hi JBTRUNDLER

 

[Gob]

Pap Finn Keighl is eddo brandes

 

[trundler]

Hi JBTRUNDLER

 

[TheJediBrah]

If DRS had existed we would've won the test series

Yeah, nah

would have been 2-0 going into Perth if not for rain anyway