• 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.

Did Marshall and McGrath have it easier?

S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
While we are familiar with the argument of lone guns vs those part of pace packs, I wanted to ask to the degree to which scoreboard pressure contributed to the records of Marshall and McGrath.

While I still think they may be technically the two best pacers, I suspect the gap with others may not be as wide if you account for the strength of their team and the psychological pressure of having massive totals to defend regularly, compared to those from weaker teams like Hadlee.
 
K

Kirkut

International Regular
It can work both ways - being the lone great bowler in your team can force you to operate at top gear all the time, simultaneously it opens up opportunities to get more fifers/10fers thereby improving your stats.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Kirkut said:
It can work both ways - being the lone great bowler in your team can force you to operate at top gear all the time, simultaneously it opens up opportunities to get more fifers/10fers thereby improving your stats.
Click to expand...
Yeah but isn't a lone gun feeling constant pressure to get wickets while defending low scores? Whereas a Marshall or McGrath may have tired bats simply throw away wickets with much less applied pressure.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Molehill said:
Yeah, the England top order was always knackered when facing McGrath!!
Click to expand...
Just to check the first innings scores of Aus in the 2001 and 2002/3 Ashes: 576, 401, 190, 447, 641, 492, 552, 456, 551, 363.

Are we going to pretend regularly scoring up front like that didn't significantly help McGrath?
 
K

Kirkut

International Regular
subshakerz said:
Yeah but isn't a lone gun feeling constant pressure to get wickets while defending low scores? Whereas a Marshall or McGrath may have tired bats simply throw away wickets with much less applied pressure.
Click to expand...
True, but there can be a different perspective to this as well.

If a batsman is well set after surviving 8 over spells from both Holding and Garner, then he need not make big adjustments if he has to face Marshall next.

In second case, if a batsman is comfortable and well set after facing part time spinners who bowled a sum of 40 overs and then suddenly Marshall appears, the adjustments to be made will be massive.
 
K

Kirkut

International Regular
^^ This is an opinion of an armchair cricket expert, I was batshit scared while facing a tennis ball at 75 mph in the nets, let alone facing a leather ball.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Kirkut said:
True, but there can be a different perspective to this as well.

If a batsman is well set after surviving 8 over spells from both Holding and Garner, then he need not make big adjustments if he has to face Marshall next.

In second case, if a batsman is comfortable and well set after facing part time spinners who bowled a sum of 40 overs and then suddenly Marshall appears, the adjustments to be made will be massive.
Click to expand...
Yeah but Marshall and McGrath were opening bowlers with first dibs.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
subshakerz said:
While we are familiar with the argument of lone guns vs those part of pace packs, I wanted to ask to the degree to which scoreboard pressure contributed to the records of Marshall and McGrath.

While I still think they may be technically the two best pacers, I suspect the gap with others may not be as wide if you account for the strength of their team and the psychological pressure of having massive totals to defend regularly, compared to those from weaker teams like Hadlee.
Click to expand...
Yes
 
Johan

Johan

International Debutant
The lone great bowler gives you a bunch of 5/150 scores instead of the classic 1/74 or 2/100, it goes both ways
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Johan said:
The lone great bowler gives you a bunch of 5/150 scores instead of the classic 1/74 or 2/100, it goes both ways
Click to expand...
That's not the argument though. Yes, the chance for more long gun big hauls balances out the peer support from the pack attack leaders, but I am arguing that scoreboard pressure gives a significant more advantage to the latter.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
I don't believe that the average scores if the WI from '83 was anywhere comparable to that of Australia.

But at the end of the day, you still have to take those wickets.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
I don't believe that the average scores if the WI from '83 was anywhere comparable to that of Australia.

But at the end of the day, you still have to take those wickets.
Click to expand...
That was a lower scoring era tho so a 350 in the 80s may be a 400-450 in the 2000s.

Yes you still have to take those wickets but are we going to pretend this didn't have a notable effect to face a tired demoralised opposition regularly?

The same credit you want to give McGrath for succeeding in a batting era likely helped him gain many extra scalps
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top