Is McGrath finished?

[Rik]

Good, good - marc never did.

Yes that's because to him arguements become personal and have to be "Won"

Glad to see a few of us can actually appreciate we are wrong sometimes, or even if we can't, don't feel the need to fill pages of it.

 

[Craig]

but you have to question the reasons why a poor shot is played surely.

one of the main reasons that a poor shot is played(by top class batsmen) is due to frustration and pressure..the ball taking the wicket might not have really the one that was the batsmans undoing, the 20 balls that made the batsman have to think 'jeez, this is tough going' are the ones that did the work to get the batsman out...that 21st ball may be the slackest ball you will see, the batsmans eyes widen, and he tries to smack the ball, coz in that split second he thinks 'here is my opportunity to make my mark'..catches an outside edge..he is out ...and it may not be the bowler who did all the hard work that gets the wicket..this is one of the reasons why sometimes putting on an occasional bowler does the trick.

I know cricket isnt perfect and this perhaps only in a perfect world, but batsmen should take the line of Sir Donald Bradman by thinking: "That every batsmen should look to score off every ball is possible."

 

[Swervy]

I know cricket isnt perfect and this perhaps only in a perfect world, but batsmen should take the line of Sir Donald Bradman by thinking: "That every batsmen should look to score off every ball is possible."

and I agree with that, unless the ball bowled is in a position to take your wicket...that is why McGrath has been so successful...his accuracy,he bowls a lot of potential wicket taking balls, batsmen cannot risk scoring shots vs the majority of those balls. That is why when a ball where the batter thinks 'heres my chance to score,at last' comes about, he is overly eager to get a run and maybe more prone to getting out...that is not to say McGrath did not deserve the wicket..all the hard work was done with the the 'pressure' deliveries.

 

[Craig]

Or if you want a way to play McGrath, look at how NZ played him when they toured Australia in 01/02.

Boring but effective.

 

[Swervy]

exactly....and that takes alot of disipline...and it may mean you dont lose the game..but you wont win it either

 

[Neil Pickup]

Yes that's because to him arguements become personal and have to be "Won"

Glad to see a few of us can actually appreciate we are wrong sometimes, or even if we can't, don't feel the need to fill pages of it.

Now who's getting personal?

 

[Richard]

Or if you want a way to play McGrath, look at how NZ played him when they toured Australia in 01/02.

Boring but effective.

And it's not as if South Africa didn't follow their example more often than not.
Sadly that Wanderers Test kinda put paid to all the work done on McGrath that summer. If you get rid of that McGrath had about 2 succesful innings-spells in 8 Tests.

 

[Richard]

and I agree with that, unless the ball bowled is in a position to take your wicket...that is why McGrath has been so successful...his accuracy,he bowls a lot of potential wicket taking balls, batsmen cannot risk scoring shots vs the majority of those balls. That is why when a ball where the batter thinks 'heres my chance to score,at last' comes about, he is overly eager to get a run and maybe more prone to getting out...that is not to say McGrath did not deserve the wicket..all the hard work was done with the the 'pressure' deliveries.

And if the batsman hammers the delivery he thinks "here's my chance to score" to the fence, McGrath or anyone else gains nothing.
And like it or not, this is by far the most common occurrance.

 

[Swervy]

yep you are right..but if the number of deliveries that are loose is very small, then you have a situation where the pressure starts building on a batsman, and when the odd loose one does come, the chances of a mistake are greatly increased.

 

[Richard]

And if the batsman isn't worrying about the scoring-rate, as he shouldn't be, he doesn't feel under any more pressure than he would be if he was hammering along at 4-an-over.
So the chances of a poor stroke are not increased in any fold.

 

[Swervy]

ahhh, but that is the point these days..the Aussies have kind of opened up a new 'style' of play in tests, where by scoring quickly is the way to win tests these days.

The opposition tends to feel that they need to follow suit (I dont think they do need to always)..if a team doesnt score at over 3 an over these days,it would appear that everyone thinks they are shooting themselves in the foot (they may be they may not be, i dont know). If a team scores only 60 in a session (even for the loss of no wickets) it is almost considered a waste of a session for the batting team, in that they have not really pushed the game in anyway, and by doing that may well have given the bowling team (Australia or whoever) the upper hand.

Now that sort of pressure does get to a player..and that is all players from time to time..probably the only one I can think of who doesnt seem to be affected by this is Dravid and even then I am sure the pressure of a slow moving scoreboard gets to him occassionally. it is human nature, and that is the way cricket is going these days...patience is now not really considered a virtue in test cricket anymore.

And that is where a bowler like mcGrath fits in....his strength is playing on the human weakness of impatience. He tucks a player up, he gets awkward bounce thanks to his height...he makes it hard for batsmen to score runs......i know ideally a batsman should just ride this out and not take chances...but everyone does..again that is human nature, to sieze the opportunity of personal gratification when it has been denied for so long.

So 20 balls of perfect 'corridor of uncertainty' bowling may not take the wicket, maybe ball 21 might be a wide one there to drive,and it may go crashing into the boundary after the batsman has reach out for the drive..but I would guarantee you that if that happens,a bowler like McGrath stores that away, so that in another 3 overs time, he might just let a 'loose' one go that bit wider..and i will tell you,those Aussie slips would be just waiting for the snick.

that is what pressure is all about a lot of the time...

 

[marc71178]

If you get rid of that McGrath had about 2 succesful innings-spells in 8 Tests.

So you're now discounting other things that don't suit you...

 

[marc71178]

And if the batsman isn't worrying about the scoring-rate, as he shouldn't be,

Except, Batsmen are only human, and therefore emotion comes into play.

 

[Linda]

Just a quick sidenote in here, not really relevant... not sure if anyone's mentioned it as I haven't read the whole thread. Anyway..
On this sports show the other night, McGrath said that there was another reason he would've liked to have played in Waugh's last Test match. He said that Steve had said to him he would go in at 10, in front of Stuie McGill

 

[Swervy]

bless him

 

[Richard]

So you're now discounting other things that don't suit you...

No, I'm discounting anomalies in a trend.
You did exactly the same with Nehra in WC2003.
I'm afraid you don't have any ground on which to stand on these issues any more.

 

[Richard]

Except, Batsmen are only human, and therefore emotion comes into play.

And this says what exactly about the ability of the bowler?

 

[Swervy]

And this says what exactly about the ability of the bowler?

that sustained accuracy can be the undoing of human batsmen

 

[twctopcat]

And this says what exactly about the ability of the bowler?

That bowler's can expose this weakness by means of pressure, not allowing the batsmen to score until the fatal ball....especially effective in ODI.

 

[Richard]

ahhh, but that is the point these days..the Aussies have kind of opened up a new 'style' of play in tests, where by scoring quickly is the way to win tests these days.

The opposition tends to feel that they need to follow suit (I dont think they do need to always)..if a team doesnt score at over 3 an over these days,it would appear that everyone thinks they are shooting themselves in the foot (they may be they may not be, i dont know). If a team scores only 60 in a session (even for the loss of no wickets) it is almost considered a waste of a session for the batting team, in that they have not really pushed the game in anyway, and by doing that may well have given the bowling team (Australia or whoever) the upper hand.

Now that sort of pressure does get to a player..and that is all players from time to time..probably the only one I can think of who doesnt seem to be affected by this is Dravid and even then I am sure the pressure of a slow moving scoreboard gets to him occassionally. it is human nature, and that is the way cricket is going these days...patience is now not really considered a virtue in test cricket anymore.

And that is where a bowler like mcGrath fits in....his strength is playing on the human weakness of impatience. He tucks a player up, he gets awkward bounce thanks to his height...he makes it hard for batsmen to score runs......i know ideally a batsman should just ride this out and not take chances...but everyone does..again that is human nature, to sieze the opportunity of personal gratification when it has been denied for so long.

So 20 balls of perfect 'corridor of uncertainty' bowling may not take the wicket, maybe ball 21 might be a wide one there to drive,and it may go crashing into the boundary after the batsman has reach out for the drive..but I would guarantee you that if that happens,a bowler like McGrath stores that away, so that in another 3 overs time, he might just let a 'loose' one go that bit wider..and i will tell you,those Aussie slips would be just waiting for the snick.

that is what pressure is all about a lot of the time...

The Aussie slips might have been waiting for it - but recently they've been rather less good at catching it.
I can think of plenty who are not effected by not scoring quickly: Dravid, Kirsten, Kallis, Atapattu, Grant Flower, and the like of the best are highly unlikely to let it trouble them unduly (Tendulkar, Lara etc.)
The fact is, the problems you identified in paragraphs two and three are something that badly needs adressing. One, someone needs to do all they can to stop Australia scoring so fast, two, someone needs to make everyone realise that you don't need to follow-suit (indeed, almost invariably it's counter-productive to try and do so).
What little success has been achieved against full-strength Australia recently has been achieved by patient batting.