The matchwinners and more valuable players are the pace duo here.
-
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.
Tendulkar/Hobbs vs Marshall/McGrath
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Then you should have no bats except Bradman at all in your top ten.
I do though. You've seen my top 10/11/etc quite a few times by now. Sobers/Kallis only get mentions because they're ARs.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
But why it should just be pace bowling and ARs by your criteria.
Murali and Warne are in my top 10 though. And the reason I tend to rate bowlers/ARs higher than batters is because of the value of Test bowling in general vs Test batting.
Last edited:
sayon basak
Cricketer Of The Year
Then why is it insane if other people disagree with you?
It's insane because people overrate Test batters.
Sliferxxxx
First Class Debutant
Don't know about the insanity part, but all else being relatively equal, gimme a atg bowler over batsman any day.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ok but you don't have any bats in the top10 yes except Bradman? Because that would be inconsistent.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I suggest parity between batters and bowlers and I just think Hobbs Tendulkar have objectively more impressive milestones.
Marshall had a relatively short career.
McGrath definitely has comparable longevity to Tendulkar and Hobbs but not the same level of allround excellence across conditions.
DrWolverine
International Regular
McGrath averaged 27 with a strike rate of 72 against in 17 Tests against the second best team of his era.
In Asian pitches where are often regarded as the greatest test for a fast bowler, he took just one 5-Fer in 19 Tests in Asia which is not impressive.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
To be fair to McGrath, he was excellent in India, the two series he had in Pakistan truly flat wickets and he has only one real series in SL. Still I wouldn't rate him as highly on SC flat wickets.
Then we can say that sachin was also not that successful against sa and pak as he averaged around 40 against both the teams.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
40 is still borderline acceptable. So is 27 as a bowling average. The bigger issue is his WPM and SR against SA.
Last edited:
What is the acceptable bowling average for a bowler?
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
27 is fine as an average for me as long as your WPM and SR are good. But it's not vs SA.
Thala_0710
State Captain
These ones have a lot of context though, 4 tests against Pak were in his debut series against Wasim, Waqar and Imran and majority of the rest were in the 05-07 time (post tennis elbow), where he was struggling against everyone. Only played them once in his prime, and played arguably his best inns ever against them at Chepauk.
As for SA, he is arguably the greatest touring bat ever to SA, although his home record is definitely disappointing against them.
DrWolverine
International Regular
Be honest which would you prefer
McGrath vs SA:
17 Tests.
57 wickets @ 27
2 5- Fers
Sachin vs SA :
25 Tests.
1741 runs @ 42
7 centuries
DrWolverine
International Regular
27 isn’t a bad average
But a SR of 72 and 3.3 WPM is not impressive
Easily sachin