Maybe you misunderstood what I meant. I said whilst the change goes for both batsmen and bowlers; it doesn't make as much of an effect in the comparison between batsmen as it does for the bowlers. The bowlers are close enough for such a thing to make a difference. For the batsmen, not so much. Australia's batting line-up is still a bit better, and deeper.
It's not that they shouldn't be compared, but that a straight stats comparison is different between pacers and spinners. TBF, this site generally rates Marshall higher than what you'd find elsewhere. You're more likely to read that Warne or Lillee or even Hadlee are the greatest bowlers of all time than Marshall.
The bowler who has a greater impact on the match is the better bowler IMO.
Reiffel was about as good as McDermott. Both cut short by injuries, unfortunately. Same with Bruce Reid, who misses the cut-off for this thread.
I did provide stats to prove my arguments, with Mcgrath that is. That's why I said learn to read English.LOLOLOLOLOL
.....dude you were the one who claimed you will bring a stats to prove your argument. Now bring them.
In trying to prove your point you go and say stupid things which you can't back up with facts. And I am the one who is accused of seeing only one side of the picture
lol are you impersonating him?
sorry I couldn't resist.
Yes but Lillee and Warne getting voted ahead has to do with a lot of other factors too and not just bowling performance. After all some sites also rate Tendulkar > Bradman.
Haha ya you thought I was his multi didn't you?
If thats the case I dont think ne bowler has had more of an impact on a match for their country than the great sir Richard Hadlee.
Do you know what you had written in English a few pages back? It was not a statistical comparison between McGrath and Marshall. It was between Warne and Marshall.
haha........another adhominem attack. Rather than backing up the statements that you make. This is getting funnier. I am being accused of not making a genuine post. Dude please take a look at your posts and then throw accusations
No. One other bowler has. Muralitharan
No multis get you banned here but I gotta say through that's a very good impression. All 3 "
" in row like that lol. Pretty much 50% of his posts.
Even though there are some numpties who say Tendulkar is better than Bradman, the large majority of the sane world do not.
I think neither of them were frankly, and that is, maybe, unfortunately, because of the sides they were in.
Except I never said just Warne and Marshall. That was your friends Subshakerz and Silfer. What did I say about reading first bro?Do you know what you had written in English a few pages back? It was not a statistical comparison between McGrath and Marshall. It was between Warne and Marshall.
This is getting more and more lolworthy tbh
Its true though. Most of your posts have been"
" and saying "awta" & "THIS" to others who said WI is better.
True that but of course he will never get his due because of the team he played for and possibly his action. Its really interesting that a 'certain' poster (he knows who he is) is putting so much credence into what the experts think, only when it suits his argument.
Ok Mr English Champion. You may have won the spelling bee competition in high school but I don't really want to know your grades in logic. Care to "read" your own statement above? Your statement does not rule out any comparison.
Please care to explain?
Nah, just using them as a refutation of an assertion that claims Warne can't or has never been as good as Marshall.
If you're comparing him to someone like McGrath or bowlers who played in this flat track era, you have to make that adjustment. Regardless if that is Lillee or Marshall.
Yes there are quite a few and for all we know in a few years time (or possibly even now) those numpties might actually outnumber the total population of the rest of the cricketing world combined.
Warne and Imran are different because they are spinner and fast bowlers respectively but Lillee is an apples to apples comparison. As I said earlier that the reason that Lillee is rated higher is also due to factors other than performance. The numbers clearly don't make Lillee that great compared to Marshall and although the sample size is small but Lillee's record in the SC is awful.
As silly as the Indian fans get, I wouldn't go so far as to say the majority are numpties - think Tendulkar is better than Bradman. FTR, you mentioned sites and I was referring to reputable sources, not just the average fan.
You'll have to spell this out. I was under the impression that people thought Lillee was the greatest due to having all the weapons; being capable as a tearaway and as a methodical bowler; being a lone-wolf and hunting in a pack; and playing his best against the best (WSC and World XI); etc. That's certainly why I rate him as the greatest fast bowler and that has all to do with performance.
Yeah I said I would be willing to go on a statistical argument if wanted which I did with Mcgrath. I don't see anywhere where I said statistical comparison between Warne and Marshall in particular.
Exactly what I mean:
It was those 2 that wanted me to statistically compare Warne and Marshall in particular for some reason.