Battle of the Cricketers

[Anil]

ambrose

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Both very fine bowlers, but it's Lillee for me.

 

[TT Boy]

Ambrose.

 

[silentstriker]

Gotta give it to Ambrose. Lilee is close though.

 

[Sanz]

Ambrose.

 

[Fusion]

Lilee

 

[honestbharani]

Ambit.

 

[alternative]

Ambrose

 

[BoyBrumby]

A bit over 24 hours again, I'm afraid, but I had to go to work before the day was up & I thought that battle definitely deserved to go the distance. Curtly completes the quarter-final line-up with a 13-6 victory over DKL.

I've drawn the quarter-finals totally randomly & to keep the suspense at fever pitch I'll announce the battles as we go. The first one is a genuine ripper tho. If I were seeding the comp these two possibly wouldn't have met here. Anyhoo, pick the bones out of:


Quarter-final 1

Glenn McGrath

vs

Sir Richard Hadlee

Ouch!

 

[silentstriker]

Oh man...wtf?

Two of the greatest bowlers of all time. But Hadlee was an allrounder as well.

In the end though, I like specialists doing spealist jobs. I like keepers to be great at keeping with batting a secondary attribute, and bowlers to be great at bowling.

So I'm going to have to go McGrath.

 

[Goughy]

Well we are down to the final 8, so I guess its not going to be easy.

Do I think McGrath could be the best ever? Yes, but I think its always better, if possible, to reserve judgement until 5 years after retirement. With Hadlee this has happened and therefore he has stood the test of time. It may be an unfair method of judging (as McGrath has not had a chance to stand the test of time) but I had to find someway of splitting them.

Hadlee

This could easily have been the final

 

[Jono]

Oh dear God.

This is almost as huge as when Bananaman met Appleman.

I'll vote McGrath simply because I've seen more of him, but if Hadlee wins it'll be perfectly justified. Toughy though.

 

[Jono]

Oh man...wtf?

Two of the greatest bowlers of all time. But Hadlee was an allrounder as well.

In the end though, I like specialists doing spealist jobs. I like keepers to be great at keeping with batting a secondary attribute, and bowlers to be great at bowling.

So I'm going to have to go McGrath.

Hadlee wasn't THAT much of a batsman, and you could take out the batting part of his game and he'd still make most XIs anyway on his bowling alone one would believe.

 

[silentstriker]

Hadlee wasn't THAT much of a batsman, and you could take out the batting part of his game and he'd still make most XIs anyway on his bowling alone one would believe.

Easily. My all time XI would have McGrath, Hadlee, Marshall, and Imran Khan (as all rounder). You could substitute Ambrose for any one of them and I wouldn't really mind. Although I may go all out and have a five pronged pace attack .

Bring those pitches as flat as they come, you'll still be bowled out for 200.

I also have a distinct feeling that if you had a side with all time bowlers and average batsman, that it would easily beat a side with all time batsman and average bowlers.

Cricket is NOT a batsmans' game!

 

[Sanz]

Hadlee easily mainly due to his allround skills.

 

[Anil]

hadlee - in my opinion, he had mcgrath's accuracy and more variety....a magnificent bowler....

 

[thedarkmullet]

Hadlee a champion working in what was largely an average team.

 

[Slifer]

I tossed a coin and called heads for hadlee and tails for mcgrath and in the end it was tails so Mcgrath it is.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Hadlee.

Kiwi power. Also, see Anil.

 

[Dasa]

Hadlee.