Jasprit Bumrah vs Malcolm Marshall

[centurymaker]

1. McGrath
2. Marshall
3. Hadlee

 

[subshakerz]

Can someone provide a non paywalled screen shot or link?

But yeah, best he faced. Didn't include Marshall.
Some would say not coincidentally.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1hdjhi0

 

[subshakerz]

The Wisden list that had Worrell 6th and Compton 9th.

Looking for bowler ratings.

And I'll let Dickie slide, he does rate Barry as the best batsman he ever saw and Sobers as the best cricketer. And as I said, we're forgetting that during the 70's Lillee was literally the GOAT.

No the Wisden list had Lillee at 6th

 

[subshakerz]

To insinuate that Richards, one of the greatest batsmen ever couldn't eliminate shots is incorrect.

Simple fact is that as a matter of course, Viv was not making continual adjustments to his technique and shots the way Tendulkar was series by series, which reflects in the record that Tendulkar was still able to score and be no.1 well after his initial peak as a very different looking bat late career, while Viv was not because he just continued to physically decline.

 

[halba]

Two of the greatest to ever play this sport. If you could only pick one of them at their peak for a single test match who are you picking?

Marshall easily. Bumrah struggles in ENG and NZ is the main flaw.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Bumrah did pretty well in Eng apart from the WTC final

 

[DrWolverine]

Marshall easily. Bumrah struggles in ENG and NZ is the main flaw.

Really?
Bumrah vs England (away) has a good record.
37 wickets @ 23.9

 

[DrWolverine]

NZ is the main flaw.

For whom?
Marshall : 3 Tests. 9 wickets @ 32.
Bumrah : 2 Tests. 6 wickets @ 31.

 

[DrWolverine]

To insinuate that Richards, one of the greatest batsmen ever couldn't eliminate shots is incorrect.

To eliminate shots and slow down scoring is a far easier skill that the ability to accelerate an innings as required.

Is it possible? Yes
But AFAIK he did not ever do it.

 

[subshakerz]

I know you're trying to show how peer and pundit ratings aren't always accurate, but Marshall and Lillee mostly didn't play together and were two titans one after the other, one literally taking the mantle from the other. Yes it would be close. One was the kid who was a little despised and seen as part of what was wrong with world cricket at the time. The discourse and journalism in Australia and England more than bordered on open racism and they were regularly criticized, not to mention having several rules drafted just to stop them. It got to be so downright petty that they, and this is no joke, restricted the amount of tickets, Caribbean immigrants in England could buy to watch the games, restricted them from sitting together and banned the instruments they walked with.
So yeah, I'm happy with Malcolm's ratings.

Lol please don't play the race card to suggest that Marshall was downgraded when you know that Viv was celebrated so much at the time along with Roberts.

Bottomline: As per cricket global punditry, Marshall isn't a top 10 cricketer. You know this.

With regards to @subshakerz and the comments about the changes that Sachin made, and the tropes that Viv couldn't and didn't make adjustments as his career went along. Vivian didn't know how to play in England, swinging conditions as a whole really, prior to playing county cricket and through his years with Botham, he honed his technique and his footwork to adjust to the swing and the conditions.
The idiocy from him to suggest that Viv was so brainless that he just basically relied on his physical gifts over a 20 year career is just that. All batsmen adjust their stances, tweak their techniques, bat lifts, remember Haynes changing his entire stance to deal with Wasim. Until 89 or so Viv had long past his peak, and he had had his surgery and the reflexes dulled, and but was still a world class performer. There's a story that Lara was telling, about how Viv tried to explain to him how to bat in England, how it took patience and even to grind it out at times. But yeah rank ignorance.

But both of you feel free to continue on.

Nobody is talking about tweaks and little changes.

We are talking major adjustments to your game play, entirely new shot selections as a matter of course which you deny Tendulkar did.

Nobody who saw Tendulkar in 2010 would say he is similar in technique to the batsman of a decade earlier. But he was still scoring well and no.1.

Whereas Viv was fundamentally playing the same late career but his scoring output had massively decreased.

This is the basic difference between them. Tendulkar was a technician. Viv was not.

 

[Coronis]

The Wisden list that had Worrell 6th and Compton 9th.

Looking for bowler ratings.

And I'll let Dickie slide, he does rate Barry as the best batsman he ever saw and Sobers as the best cricketer. And as I said, we're forgetting that during the 70's Lillee was literally the GOAT.

Please stop bullshitting half the peer ratings because they don’t agree with you and then relying on the other half because they agree with you. Its increasingly tiresome.

The more I think about it the more I believe @Prince EWS is right.

McGrath taking 563 wickets at 21.64 is clearly superior to Marshall's 376 at 20.94.

Because if Marshall were to take another 190 wickets, imagine what would happen to his average? It will surely fall to 22/23. He would have had to play more during his early career phase and more in late career (possibly retire later) to get close to McGrath's tally and in the process his stats would tank a little.

Marshall retired at age 33 (early)
McGrath retired at age 37

I think based on actual output and career, you would have to place McGrath ahead of Marshall. Because clearly we can't simply go off on "absolute quality" alone. If we did so, then Bumrah would be top 5 already. But he isn't as he doesn't have the wickets. Likewise no one has the wickets that McGrath has at that rate, so he's had the best career among all pacers. He is clear number one.

Lets also not forget McGrath bowled in a much tougher era too, and was at his best during the toughest point.

Can someone provide a non paywalled screen shot or link?

Wayback Machine is generally your friend.

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[OverratedSanity]

Please stop bullshitting half the peer ratings because they don’t agree with you and then relying on the other half because they agree with you. Its increasingly tiresome.

Everyone apart from him knows he's doing this apparently.

 

[centurymaker]

McGrath doesn't "look" like a magical fast bowler so he gets downplayed by people & experts, but record wise he is undoubtedly No.1

(Not to mention the era he bowled in)

 

[DrWolverine]

McGrath doesn't "look" like a magical fast bowler so he gets downplayed by people & experts, but record wise he is undoubtedly No.1

Not really

1. His record against the best team he faced is not that great. An average of 27.3 against SA

2. An average of 31 in Pak & 29 in SL

3. Just one 5-Fer in 17 Tests in Asia

(Not to mention the era he bowled in)

To an extent this is true.

First half of his career(1994-2000) he was ONE of the greats.



During the second half(2000-2007) he was the best but this could be attributed to other greats like Ambrose, Walsh, Donald & Akram retiring.

 

[ankitj]

53 pages !!! No way Bumrah vs Marshall discussion should fill up so many pages.

Oh right.

 

[Coronis]

53 pages !!! No way Bumrah vs Marshall discussion should fill up so many pages.

Oh right.

At least we’re kind of getting back towards bowlers now.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You've watched cricket for how long?

As great as Bumrah is, and he is great. There are at least 5, and probably.morw great bowlers who could have done what he did.

****, Boland did what he did.

I will leave at just saying it's highly disrespectful and full of nostalgic glasses to think any bowler could had just came and produced a series as good as this.

 

[subshakerz]

The more I think about it the more I believe @Prince EWS is right.

McGrath taking 563 wickets at 21.64 is clearly superior to Marshall's 376 at 20.94.

Because if Marshall were to take another 190 wickets, imagine what would happen to his average? It will surely fall to 22/23. He would have had to play more during his early career phase and more in late career (possibly retire later) to get close to McGrath's tally and in the process his stats would tank a little.

Marshall retired at age 33 (early)
McGrath retired at age 37

I think based on actual output and career, you would have to place McGrath ahead of Marshall. Because clearly we can't simply go off on "absolute quality" alone. If we did so, then Bumrah would be top 5 already. But he isn't as he doesn't have the wickets. Likewise no one has the wickets that McGrath has at that rate, so he's had the best career among all pacers. He is clear number one.

Advantages for Marshall:

- Overall just slightly more statistically impressive
- Far better peak
- Pace and more penetration on flat SC wickets

Advantages for McGrath:
- Longevity of worldclass performance
- Higher standard of batting teams faced generally
- Flat 2000s era (a bit overblown argument but anyways)

Marshall takes it for me. Just a bit more lethal and McGrath will have questionmarks on how he would do if he played more in low bounce flat tracks in SL and Pakistan.

 

[subshakerz]

To the question of which bowler, Bumrah or Marshall, I would take at their peak for a single test match, I am going Bumrah.

What Bumrah has achieved this last year has been unprecedented. He has effectively become a nightmare combination of Wasim and McGrath.

He has taken Wasim's exceptional swing variety and matches that with McGraths control and precision. I don't recall any other bowler regularly bowling jaffa after jaffa at around 90 MPH. On top of that his action and wrist makes him unreadable to bats to anticipate where he will bowl.

I am sure Marshall was awesome as he mastered all the fundamentals of fast bowling but he was still operating within normal worldclass zones of performance. Bumrah has been something else.

 

[capt_Luffy]

To the question of which bowler, Bumrah or Marshall, I would take at their peak for a single test match, I am going Bumrah.

What Bumrah has achieved this last year has been unprecedented. He has effectively become a nightmare combination of Wasim and McGrath.

He has taken Wasim's exceptional swing variety and matches that with McGraths control and precision. I don't recall any other bowler regularly bowling jaffa after jaffa at around 90 MPH.

I am sure Marshall was awesome as he mastered all the fundamentals of fast bowling but he was still operating within normal worldclass zones of performance. Bumrah has been something else.

I am not even saying I will take Bumrah over Marshall at peak for a 1 off Test, I am arguing it's disrespectful to think Marshall or McGrath or Hadlee or Steyn or Ambrose Would (mind you, not could) had produced a series as good as this one on getting replaced.