• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ambrose Vs Mcgrath?

Whoz the best?

  • Total voters
    127
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
KaZoH0lic said:
Only McGrath himself, Waqar and Wasim played against Bangladesh. Donald and Ambrose played Zimbabwe about 2-3 times which is the same amount of games McGrath played against both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. So he's even with them as it stands. And of course, all the other bowlers I mentioned didn't play the two and Warne played them as much as McGrath.

So it's only Waqar and Wasim who played Zimbabwe enough times where it makes a difference, but I'll redo the analysis excluding those games and compare to McGrath. But tell me, how should I do it? For you see McGrath did play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in total 3 times without registering even a 4 wicket haul. If I remove them I am improving his figures giving him an advantage he doesn't deserve. Whereas with Akram and Younis, they played about 7-8 more tests, but they were more successful. Yes, they did play against minnows, but just more against minnows that McGrath couldn't take.
Click to expand...
The point is when you remove figures for Zimbabwe and Bangladesh by removing the matches played and the 4/5/10 wickets hauls from the equation (as these figures can tend to inflate a percentage as is the case with Younis), and then taking the percentage, McGrath comes off slightly better or at least equal with Ambrose, Donald, Wasim and even Waqar. Including minnows gives an unfair advantage when comparing to past greats. So your entire premise that McGrath has a weakness in taking big hauls falls flat when his contemporaries, who nobody considers to have the same problem, have comparable numbers or worse.

Are you then suggesting that McGrath, Wasim, Ambrose, Waqar and Donald all had an issue with taking bigger hauls?
 
Ikki

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz said:
The point is when you remove figures for Zimbabwe and Bangladesh by removing the matches played and the 4/5/10 wickets hauls from the equation (as these figures can tend to inflate a percentage as is the case with Younis), and then taking the percentage, McGrath comes off slightly better or at least equal with Ambrose, Donald, Wasim and even Waqar. Including minnows gives an unfair advantage when comparing to past greats. So your entire premise that McGrath has a weakness in taking big hauls falls flat when his contemporaries, who nobody considers to have the same problem, have comparable numbers or worse.

Are you then suggesting that McGrath, Wasim, Ambrose, Waqar and Donald all had an issue with taking bigger hauls?
Click to expand...
LMAO, that's the entire point of the previous post. EVEN when you remove them he is behind - a lot of them haven't even played B/Z either, so your point is moot on the grander scale. But still:

a) McGrath DID play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as many times as Ambrose or Donald and their records as previously compared still stand
b) In the case of Waqar he is still superior to McGrath
c) Akram is the only one where there is a real inflation enough to mislead and that just puts him level with McGrath

So every other bowler I named in this thread, like Botham, Marshall, Lillee, Warne, Khan, Donald, Waqar, Roberts, etc, all have much better percentages of big hauls than McGrath. And the only ones who bowl more are Lillee and Warne. All the others are still better even bowling less than McGrath.

I'm not sure how much more obvious I can point it out to you. In the previous post you mentioned 4 players talking about minnows. Ambrose only played 2 tests against minnows and Donald only 3 - which is the same amount McGrath did, so no case there. Waqar even when you remove those innings is still ahead which leaves only Akram who becomes par with McGrath when you take them out.

Am I saying McGrath couldn't take big hauls or had trouble? Again, I say no. But in comparison to the best ever bowlers, to which he is always compared, yes he does not stack up well and he is at the bottom of the pile.
 
Last edited:
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
funnygirl said:
Mcgrath didn't play against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.?
Click to expand...
He certainly did, though not extensively. Played against Bangladesh in 2 Tests in the top-end season in 2003. Didn't make the return trip in 2005/06 though, and missed the subsequent series against Zimbabwe in October 2003 as he was injured.

Played 1 Test against Zimbabwe in 1999/2000, but obviously at that time they were credible Test opposition, unlike in 2003/04.

Another McGrath game that is wrongly classified Test is that World XI rubbish of 2005/06.
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
He certainly did, though not extensively. Played against Bangladesh in 2 Tests in the top-end season in 2003. Didn't make the return trip in 2005/06 though, and missed the subsequent series against Zimbabwe in October 2003 as he was injured.

Played 1 Test against Zimbabwe in 1999/2000, but obviously at that time they were credible Test opposition, unlike in 2003/04.

Another McGrath game that is wrongly classified Test is that World XI rubbish of 2005/06.
Click to expand...
Was that top end series where he was coming back from ankle surgery?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No, his ankle surgery came after said series. He missed the 2003/04 season (inclusive of the previously-mentioned Zimbabwe series) due to it.
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
No, his ankle surgery came after said series. He missed the 2003/04 season (inclusive of the previously-mentioned Zimbabwe series) due to it.
Click to expand...
Cheers. I recall at that time making my usual accurate New Years sporting prediction that he'd not play another test for Australia.

Mr Accuracy am I.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
You certainly weren't the only one, half this country's cricket-following population were gleefully exclaiming that he was finished.

Mind, they were trying that back in early 2003 too. 8-) And 4 years later he was still there and still making contributions to Australia's last-hurrah victory.
 
GuyFromLancs

GuyFromLancs

State Vice-Captain
Mcgrath v Ambrose (GFL sells out the Vs thread)

It's Friday and a bank holiday weekend (in England anyway). so let me indulge.

For years and partly owed to my anti-Aussie sentiment I assumed that Ambrose was the better bowler. This was owed to him being -

- A bit quicker
- More scary
- A (slightly) better average
- Able to single handedly destroy when the conditions were in favour

However growing up a little bit since my youth and watching the second half of Mcgrath's career I have come to the conclusion that Mcgrath was even better than Ambrose owed to his awesome record in the 00s on pitches that people generally agree have been flattened beyond all recognition, better wickets per match ratio and better strike rate.

What do others think?
 
Teja.

Teja.

Global Moderator
GuyFromLancs said:
It's Friday and a bank holiday weekend (in England anyway). so let me indulge.

For years and partly owed to my anti-Aussie sentiment I assumed that Ambrose was the better bowler. This was owed to him being -

- A bit quicker
- More scary
- A (slightly) better average
- Able to single handedly destroy when the conditions were in favour

However growing up a little bit since my youth and watching the second half of Mcgrath's career I have come to the conclusion that Mcgrath was even better than Ambrose owed to his awesome record in the 00s on pitches that people generally agree have been flattened beyond all recognition, better wickets per match ratio and better strike rate.

What do others think?
Click to expand...
Very very close one, Reckon Ambrose is of a slightly higher quality and McGrath has him beat in Longevity and temperament. I'd say McGrath overall by a very very small margin. Both bowlers in my top 3 for the last two decades.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top