Marshall vs Hadlee (overall cricketers)

[h_hurricane]

I wouldn't ignore Marshall's batting totally but Hadlee is easily a couple of tiers above as a lower order batsman. As pure bowlers, Marshall is ahead by a razor thin margin for me, but the margin is so small that even if Marshall was at Akram's level as a batsman(which he clearly isn't), I would have rated Hadlee as the better cricketer.

 

[Sunil1z]

Sachin barely bowled, and it's debatable is he typically added value when he did. You bat every time your team Needs runs.

What's the cutoff for disregarding batting? If a bat as weak as Steyn can win a big series with the bat, why should we not credit him for it in relation to a complete spud?

Sachin also won Test as a bowler

1. Eden garden Test 2001 vs Aus (4th innings)
2. Adelaide Test 2003 vs Aus ( 3rd innings ) .

 

[Bolo.]

Sachin also won Test as a bowler

1. Eden garden Test 2001 vs Aus (4th innings)
2. Adelaide Test 2003 vs Aus ( 3rd innings ) .

Maybe we should be factoring his bowling in then. Not sure it's the same thing though. A bat like Marshall is contributing (slightly) positively with the bat in most matches in relation to someone terrible. Sachin is not bowling often, And when he does, he is arguably adding negative value most of the time.

 

[Sunil1z]

Maybe we should be factoring his bowling in then. Not sure it's the same thing though. A bat like Marshall is contributing (slightly) positively with the bat in most matches in relation to someone terrible. Sachin is not bowling often, And when he does, he is arguably adding negative value most of the time.

Yeah you are right . Every runs are useful .

 

[Slifer]

You do realise Hadlee was better in the SC than Marshall right?

Misleading. Marshall averaged 21 odd in Pakistan and 24 in India. Hadlee went at 22 in India and 12 in SL and 44 in Pakistan. Hadlee owes a lot to feasting on a weak SL team. Granted, he didnt quite play the threshold of 5 tests minimum we agreed upon vs Pakistan or SL. Give Marshall 4 tests in 80s SL and I don't want to imagine the results....

 

[Silver Silva]

Marshall cause I believe he is the greatest strike bowler and that's his role in my team and that's the way i view him as a cricketer..
With cricket being a team game I don't have to worry about if he can bat or not that's why there is other players to select .

 

[Bolo.]

Yeah you are right . Every runs are useful .

Ya, not a lot of difference between bats scoring 40/50 and bowlers scoring 10/20. There are things like batting in easier positions, but 10 runs are still 10 runs.

 

[smash84]

Being clearly best doesn't make you streets ahead.

However, for some strange reason I totally forgot about Marshalls own batting skills. It does make him have a good case versus Hadlee. In fact, switching my vote.

You have no idea what you are talking about

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

Misleading. Marshall averaged 21 odd in Pakistan and 24 in India. Hadlee went at 22 in India and 12 in SL and 44 in Pakistan. Hadlee owes a lot to feasting on a weak SL team. Granted, he didnt quite play the threshold of 5 tests minimum we agreed upon vs Pakistan or SL. Give Marshall 4 tests in 80s SL and I don't want to imagine the results....

This is how Marshall performed against SL in six ODIs in 1985 and 1986:

 

[Coronis]

Misleading. Marshall averaged 21 odd in Pakistan and 24 in India. Hadlee went at 22 in India and 12 in SL and 44 in Pakistan. Hadlee owes a lot to feasting on a weak SL team. Granted, he didnt quite play the threshold of 5 tests minimum we agreed upon vs Pakistan or SL. Give Marshall 4 tests in 80s SL and I don't want to imagine the results....

Misleading. Quoting Hadlee’s stats in that one series against Pakistan before he was a good bowler would be like me trying to use Marshall’s first 3 tests in India against him lol

 

[Arachnodouche]

Marshall cause I believe he is the greatest strike bowler and that's his role in my team and that's the way i view him as a cricketer..
With cricket being a team game I don't have to worry about if he can bat or not that's why there is other players to select .

Yeah, ultimately an effective cricketer is one who wins you the most matches. Obviously, Marshall had an ATG support cast around him to help him along, but it is what it is. If anything, Sir Richard should blame it on being Kiwi.

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

Misleading. Marshall averaged 21 odd in Pakistan and 24 in India. Hadlee went at 22 in India and 12 in SL and 44 in Pakistan. Hadlee owes a lot to feasting on a weak SL team. Granted, he didnt quite play the threshold of 5 tests minimum we agreed upon vs Pakistan or SL. Give Marshall 4 tests in 80s SL and I don't want to imagine the results....

This is how Hadlee performed against SL in 15 ODIs from 1979 to 1988:

 

[Slifer]

This is how Marshall performed against SL in six ODIs in 1985 and 1986:
View attachment 39888

Yeah because odi performances have anything remotely to do with tests. Marshall was mediocre in odis vs Australia and India as well, had absolutely no reflection on his performances in tests. Nice try though...

 

[Slifer]

Misleading. Quoting Hadlee’s stats in that one series against Pakistan before he was a good bowler would be like me trying to use Marshall’s first 3 tests in India against him lol

You can leave it out if you want. I don't care. Still, Hadlee owes much to the 4 tests he played vs a weak SL team. Doesn't take away from the fact that he was great in Asia but I wouldn't put him above Marshall there.

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

Hadlee's first tour to India in 1976, two years before he joined Notts:



Marshall's first tour to India in 1978, one year before he joined Hampshire:



Hadlee did much better.

 

[ankitj]

Sachin barely bowled, and it's debatable is he typically added value when he did. You bat every time your team Needs runs.

What's the cutoff for disregarding batting? If a bat as weak as Steyn can win a big series with the bat, why should we not credit him for it in relation to a complete spud?

My cutoff for batting as secondary discipline is around the level of Davidson or Benaud. So anyone under ~24 average are just tailender warriors.

 

[Coronis]

You can leave it out if you want. I don't care. Still, Hadlee owes much to the 4 tests he played vs a weak SL team. Doesn't take away from the fact that he was great in Asia but I wouldn't put him above Marshall there.

Not like he was superior to Marshall in India was it

 

[Swamp Witch Hattie]

Yeah because odi performances have anything remotely to do with tests. Marshall was mediocre in odis vs Australia and India as well, had absolutely no reflection on his performances in tests. Nice try though...

I never said they did. It was the only information I could find about him against SL. I then mentioned how Hadlee did against SL in ODIs as a common point of reference. BTW, go to the very first post of this thread. It doesn't mention about confining the discussion to tests.

 

[Slifer]

I never said they did. It was the only information I could find about him against SL. I then mentioned how Hadlee did against SL in ODIs as a common point of reference. BTW, go to the very first post of this thread. It doesn't mention about confining the discussion to tests.

It's understood that when we compare players on this board, unless otherwise stated it's tests.

 

[Slifer]

Not like he was superior to Marshall in India was it

They're close enough there tbh and I'll take Marshall's record vs Pakistan over Hadlee’s vs SL. Also, imo the Indian batting that Marshall destroyed in '83 was better than the one Hadlee faced in '88.