-
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.
Battle of the Cricketers
- Thread starter Jamee999
- Start date
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
jeez, it is so tough to vote against McGrath whom I have seen for the whole of his career, almost, but gotta vote for Hadlee
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Could go either way really. Hadlee is perhaps my favourite bowler of all time. I love his action, his style and his reliability. His record of taking 5 wickets a test throughout his career as a pace bowler is one that's only exceeded by Lillee in the modern era, and he was a genuine matchwinner.
McGrath is really his equal in just about every category though. Hadlee took more wickets, but had the benefit of relatively little competition, while McGrath excelled and stood out even in a team containing Warne, Gillespie and company. McGrath also played in an era less conducive to fast bowling, and arguably faced a greater array of top class batsmen in his era as well. He can be unerringly consistent on the worst sort of road, and utterly unplayable when he gets a bit of help. Hadlee could bat, and is therefore the better player all-round, but I'll go for McGrath since it's a bowling comeptition alone, and I've had more chance to appreciate his brilliance.
Both of them are among 3 or 4 who could be deserved winners of this competition IMO.
McGrath is really his equal in just about every category though. Hadlee took more wickets, but had the benefit of relatively little competition, while McGrath excelled and stood out even in a team containing Warne, Gillespie and company. McGrath also played in an era less conducive to fast bowling, and arguably faced a greater array of top class batsmen in his era as well. He can be unerringly consistent on the worst sort of road, and utterly unplayable when he gets a bit of help. Hadlee could bat, and is therefore the better player all-round, but I'll go for McGrath since it's a bowling comeptition alone, and I've had more chance to appreciate his brilliance.
Both of them are among 3 or 4 who could be deserved winners of this competition IMO.
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
McGrath.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
Waqar Younis
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Waqar. Neither bowler deserves to be in the semis for mine, and indeed Hall doesn't deserve to be in the last 8 when the likes of Lillee and Marshall missed out, but Waqar is definitely the better of these two, even if he didn't maintain his brilliance for long enough to be among the greatest.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Waqar
