subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Who is the greater cricketer?
-
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.
Malcolm Marshall vs. Sachin Tendulkar
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
shortpitched713
International Captain
Both deified a bit too much, for a level of performance which IMO didn't separate them from their bowling and batting ATG competition respectively. Going to have to give this one a think.
shortpitched713
International Captain
Will go Marshall. Was considering whether I needed to factor in his batting, but even without better than tailender level batting I'd take Marshall's bowling barely over Tendulkar's batting.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Tests only definitely Marshall.
Tests and ODIs combined definitely Tendulkar.
Tests and ODIs combined definitely Tendulkar.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
Marshall by a canter
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Marshall was slightly more exceptional than other pacers but Tendulkar's longevity and consistency is far more impressive.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
By that reasoning Anderson > Lillee
shortpitched713
International Captain
This is a good reason to put McGrath above the other 4 greatest pacers. It's not as good of a reason for Tendulkar, as longevity for a bat is much easier than for a pace bowler.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No. Anderson wasn't worldclass enough in his longevity like Tendulkar. I assume you would catch that before making that stretch of a comparison.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
It is but with Tendulkar we are talking about a career of over two decades and 200 tests, around 30/40 percent more than other batting greats.
And that includes a period in between of 157 tests averaging 60. Unparalleled longevity peak.
Both Marshall and Tendulkar have faultless records but Tendulkar played more than twice as long.
Also Marshall didn't quite generate the level of ultra high veneration that Tendulkar did, for what it's worth, though he is generally recognized as the best pacer of his time.
Last edited:
shortpitched713
International Captain
Lol, it's hardly fair to compare the longevity of a batsman to a bowler, especially when my whole point is that the longevity of the latter is so much more rare than the former.
And Marshall is very venerated on CW. I'm not talking about veneration from Joe, Siddharth, or Moin on the street here.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes but that doesn't mean we ignore longevity for bats altogether, that is just reductive thinking. We are talking about the longest international test career in history and a peak longer than entire careers of ATGs for which you are giving zero points.
Talking about veneration from opponents and punditry of the time, not CW nerds. Tendulkar was treated as something far more special than Marshall.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
That in part has to do with the Indian market.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Not just that. Viv and Lillee for example had huge peer value approaching Tendulkar, Marshall for whatever reason didn't have as high. But this is a minor point.
shortpitched713
International Captain
Way to put up a strawman to argue against.
Generally though, I'm giving Anderson more points for longevity than Tendulkar. It's harder to do what he does for that long. Anderson obviously isn't as good as Tendulkar though.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
They were from 70s. Plus had charismatic personalities unlike the more reticent Marshall.
Plus Kallis had amazing peer rating while Imran barely had any.
BazBall21
International Captain
Think there was disgruntlement from the media towards the west Indian style of bowling. Hence English and Australian writers tended to rank Marshall lower than his figures suggested. That is the main reason most likely.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
That's quite funny since Lillee who was the media darling had a similar style of bowling.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah I would give Anderson more points too. But we are talking about Marshall who played half as long as Anderson.
BazBall21
International Captain
Lillee and Thommo didn't seem to get the same condemnation.