wasim akram vs glenn mcgrath

[Goughy]

So Subcontinent is one Country, isn't it ? That was my lesson of the Day, For 30 years I was told that India, Pakistan and SriLanka were 3 countries and now comes the fact. Thanks for showing the light to me.

It feels very good to know that Wasim played for the country named Subcontinet and both of us were Subcontientians.

To my Subcontientian friend . Re-reading, I see your point, I did not quote the whole thing where it primarily applies to Pakistan which I what I intended to do.

Its my mistake, I should have quoted.

The fact that Wasim played majority of his matches in Pakistan where Mcgrath averages 31 compared to Akram's 22.

Also Dont forget that Mcgrath was averaging around 28-29 against Pakistan until 2003. Only after 2003 world cup when Pakistan dropped 8 senior players and fielded a team of school boys, Mcgrath's average got to 21-22. Dont believe me Check it out :-

But really, I dont think its as bad as you made out. The only country you mentioned specifically was Pakistan and that was the main thrust.

Its my fault for not making myself completely clear but its not that big an issue.

 

[Sanz]

Thats funny. How much have you been drinking? The England team in the mid-late 1980s was terrible. It may have had some decent names and won the Ashes in 85 and 87 but believe me they were terrible.

From 1985 - 1990 England won 7, YES 7 out of 48 Tests played. Winning % = 14.6

To say England were better in the 1980s is an absolute joke which just shows how people will say anything to back a weak point.

Am I drinking or may be you are smoking something you shouldn't or you are not used to ? Are you suggesting that a batting lineup of Gooch, Gatting Broad, Athey, Gower, Botham etc was worse then the batting lineup they had for most of 90s ?

Also England won only 7 because
a. in the 80s most tests used to end up Draws
b. other teams were much stronger(such as WI, NZ, Pak) in the 80s
c. They had pathetic bowling attack.

McGrath is/was better than Wasim and in all honesty I don't care what a CW poll in 2004 said. I've been here long enough to know that I disagree with a lot said here and just because someone or something wins a CW poll does not make it correct.

Whether it makes it correct or not isn't the point. The point is a Poll was created on this forum to see who. the members of the this forum think, was better (or something along those lines) and the poll was overwhemlingly in favor of Akram and there is a reason why so many people think of Akram as better despite statistically Mcgrath being superior in majority of categories.

And whether or not you care for that doesn't really matter. I am okay with your or anyone's opinion that Mcgrath is better as long as you dont make insulting remarks about Akram by saying 'he was great at knocking the tails, but give me Mcgrath for taking the Top order wickets' esp when Akram took on 35 % tailender and 65 % of his wickets were top-middle order wickets.

 

[Goughy]

Am I drinking or may be you are smoking something you shouldn't or you are not used to ? Are you suggesting that a batting lineup of Gooch, Gatting Broad, Athey, Gower, Botham etc was worse then the batting lineup they had for most of 90s ?

Also England won only 7 because
a. in the 80s most tests used to end up Draws
b. other teams were much stronger(such as WI, NZ, Pak) in the 80s
c. They had pathetic bowling attack.

England team batting average 85-90= 30.5

England team batting average 90-95= 32.2

10 wickets per innings and thats a fair difference.

and yes I would rather take Gooch, Atherton, Smith, Thorpe, Stewart, Hussain etc over the names you mentioned especially when 2 of them (Broad and Athey) played a combined 48 tests in their whole careers.

 

[Sanz]

Wasim only played 5 of his 17 Tests against the West Indies in the 80s and he certainly did not have excellent figures. They were good but he only had 1 5fer in those 5 games and averaged 25.35.

If you only look at the games against the WI both have played since McGrath career started then Wasim averages 19.58 and McGrath 19.38.

So even taking the 1980s out of the issue it is still marginally in favour of McGrath. The difference is too small to make any reason conclusion from but that is also why the use of the WI as a rebutal of the info I presented is useless.

During McGraths career the WI have been pretty weak thats why I did not include them in the original analysis.

Please use correct stats. Since Mcgrath's career started, Wasim has played 6 tests against WI, averaged 17.43 with strike Rate of 41.9 whereas Mcgrath is averaging 19.38 with a Strike rate of 49.7.

Since Glenn McGrath made his Test debut on Nov 12 1993

West Indies have played 134 tests and won 33. A winning % of less than 25%
West Indies have lost more games than they have won against England. 9 Won 14 Lost.
England have played 153 Tests and won 55. A winning % of 36%
West Indies have won 33 games and lost 65
England have won 55 and lost 50.

How can anyone say that England have not been better than the WI for the majority of their career? Crazy and blind.

Incase you forgot, Last time Wasim Played a test was in 2002. And between 1993 and 2000 England lost 9 and won only 7 against WI 3 of which came in 2000(which I agree England were a better team in 2000 and since). But between 1990 and 1999 WI were definately way better than England. So before you declare others as crazy and blind, please work on your analysis and look bit more closely.

 

[Sanz]

England team batting average 85-90= 30.5

England team batting average 90-95= 32.2

10 wickets per innings and thats a fair difference.

Of course it is a fair difference but take into account who England faced between 85-90 and in 90-95 then the whole perspective changes.

and yes I would rather take Gooch, Atherton, Smith, Thorpe, Stewart, Hussain etc over the names you mentioned especially when 2 of them (Broad and Athey) played a combined 48 tests in their whole careers.

I am sure you will but I wont. I would rather have Broad, Athey, Goochie, Gower, Lamb, Gatting, Botham anyday over the likes of Artherton, Smith, Thorpe, Stewart, Hussain etc.

 

[Goughy]

Please use correct stats. Since Mcgrath's career started, Wasim has played 6 tests against WI, averaged 17.43 with strike Rate of 41.9 whereas Mcgrath is averaging 19.38 with a Strike rate of 49.7..

Correct, the Wasim stats I used are for the 1990s onwards.

Incase you forgot, Last time Wasim Played a test was in 2002. And between 1993 and 2000 England lost 9 and won only 7 against WI 3 of which came in 2000(which I agree England were a better team in 2000 and since). But between 1990 and 1999 WI were definately way better than England. So before you declare others as crazy and blind, please work on your analysis and look bit more closely.

How can you bring in Wasim and start talking about his career when my analysis of the relative strengths of WI and English cricket was a direct response to the below quote from you.!!

Yeah Right !! England were top 4 for majority of Mcgrath's career and WI were not and you accuse others of ignoring the facts.

That quote was all about McGrath and his career and I made a direct response to it. Do you even read your own posts let alone mine?
Wasim and the 1990s have no direct involvement with your quote and my response and therefore you are completely making things up. That what Im talking about with the blind bit.

 

[Sanz]

But really, I dont think its as bad as you made out. The only country you mentioned specifically was Pakistan and that was the main thrust.

Okay I must have mentioned SriLanka, I am sure Mcgrath averages much better than Wasim in SriLanka. As for India, Akram played only 3 tests there since Mcgrath's debut and has better strike rate than him, Mcgrath does have better average than Akram though.

 

[Sanz]

Correct, the Wasim stats I used are for the 1990s onwards.

I am sure that suited your argument. It is getting so ridiculous now.

How can you bring in Wasim and start talking about his career when my analysis of the relative strengths of WI and English cricket was a direct response to the below quote from you.!!

It was all about McGrath and his career. Do you even read your own posts let alone mine?
Wasim and the 1990s have no direct involvement with your quote and my response and therefore you are completely making things up. That what Im talking about with the blind bit.

You seem to forget that we are talking about Wasim and Mcgrath Both. You also seem to mis-represent a lot of stats to suit your argument in favor of Mcgrath. If Wasim and 1990 has no direct involvment then why did you quote Wasim's average from 1990 ?

 

[Goughy]

I am sure that suited your argument. It is getting so ridiculous now

I was acknowledging a mistake. I phrased it as since the start of McGraths career but in reality it was for since the start of the 1990s. Those figures were used as it was responding to Wasim playing in the 1980s and I was just taking those figures out. I was responding to the question.

Again, I listed Wasims post 1990 record as it was directly addressing this issue that Wasim had played against the 1980s West Indies. Go back and read the original post. It was very relevant and had a direct involvement.

You seem to forget that we are talking about Wasim and Mcgrath Both. You also seem to mis-represent a lot of stats to suit your argument in favor of Mcgrath. If Wasim and 1990 has no direct involvment then why did you quote Wasim's average from 1990 ?

For that particular bit we were not. You are just making stuff up now. You said directly that the West Indies were clearly the better team during McGraths career and I attempted to show that they have not and then you bring in other variables.

Im trying to address the issues raised and when I do the goalposts are moved. There is nothing mis-representing in any of my arguments.

You are saying a lot and then changing it as I respond.

 

[marc71178]

b. other teams were much stronger(such as WI, NZ, Pak) in the 80s

Wasn't the debate about the best sides that were around at the time though?

 

[Goughy]

A few points in conclusion

About the English batting again-
Wasim against England pre 1990- 28.18
Wasim against England post 1990- 30.30

I honestly do not think the England team of the mid-late 80s were a better batting line-up than the 90s and they were certainly a worse team.

The point was also raised that Wasim averages better than McGrath in Pakistan
22.22. That is very true. But it must be understood that that is Wasims home. McGrath averages a nearly identical 22.31 at home in Australia. So that is really a wash.

Comparing performance overseas (playing outside home country)- 21.35 McGrath compared to 24.44 for Wasim

Also Wasim played 12 games against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh versus 3 for McGrath.

Again I rate Wasim very highly but I rate McGrath more. If I saw any evidence to suggest Wasim was better I would have no issue arguing the other way around, its just that I don't.

 

[FRAZ]

A little difference in the attack policy !!!!
Australian fielding has always been better than Pakistan . And I have seen Pakistani fielders as being the worst fielders in the game and once I remember Wasim saying (jokingly ) ,If half of the catches were not dropped while I was bowling then I would have got atleast the double amount of wickets ,And I have to work hard to get'em I do not trust fielders any more (ptv) .
Glen Mcgrath
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=1133
Wasim Akram
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=0029

 

[Hugh]

Bowlers like Kapil average less at home than they do away. Really makes one question the validity of the "more difficult in the sub-continent" "theory" . Bowlers adapt to their home conditions. Hence Wasim bowls beter than McGrath in Pakistan. All things considered, MacGrath ends up trumping Wasim.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Bowlers like Kapil average less at home than they do away. Really makes one question the validity of the "more difficult in the sub-continent" "theory" . Bowlers adapt to their home conditions. Hence Wasim bowls beter than McGrath in Pakistan. All things considered, MacGrath ends up trumping Wasim.

Exactly. Most of the time, you're a product of where you come from.

 

[andyc]

A little difference in the attack policy !!!!
Australian fielding has always been better than Pakistan . And I have seen Pakistani fielders as being the worst fielders in the game and once I remember Wasim saying (jokingly ) ,If half of the catches were not dropped while I was bowling then I would have got atleast the double amount of wickets ,And I have to work hard to get'em I do not trust fielders any more (ptv) .
Glen Mcgrath
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=1133
Wasim Akram
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=0029

Fancy a clutch, Fraz?

 

[Goughy]

A little difference in the attack policy !!!!
Australian fielding has always been better than Pakistan . And I have seen Pakistani fielders as being the worst fielders in the game and once I remember Wasim saying (jokingly ) ,If half of the catches were not dropped while I was bowling then I would have got atleast the double amount of wickets ,And I have to work hard to get'em I do not trust fielders any more (ptv) .
Glen Mcgrath
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=1133
Wasim Akram
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBowlGraph.asp?PlayerID=0029

I don't disagree with you about the catching. But the pie charts you posted illustrate a different line of attck for each bowler rather than proving the catching point.

Wasim bowled over the wicket (and round) left arm with a lot of big inswingers to the righthander. This is shown by the number of LBWs and Bowleds.

McGrath attacked outside off stump looking to get the batsman caught in the slips or the keeper.

They just had different lines of attack with Akram targeting the stumps and McGrath outside off.

 

[FRAZ]

Just a matter of speech anyways!!!!

 

[Sanz]

For that particular bit we were not. You are just making stuff up now. You said directly that the West Indies were clearly the better team during McGraths career and I attempted to show that they have not and then you bring in other variables.

Im trying to address the issues raised and when I do the goalposts are moved. There is nothing mis-representing in any of my arguments.

You are saying a lot and then changing it as I respond.

Only person that is making up stuff is you. When you are proved wrong, you are saying that was a mistake.

 

[Goughy]

Only person that is making up stuff is you. When you are proved wrong, you are saying that was a mistake.

Ive not been proved wrong about anything at all. Ive made a mistake or 2 but even then the figures still refered to the original question and were still relevant.

You have not made 1 good arguemnt for Wasim and all you have done is unfairly attack the methods I have used to support McGrath and when they are irrefutable you either ignore them or twist them.

You have done no work or research to back up your own case just attacked mine. I'm not going to waste time doing the heavy lifting to have you distort it.

Finished.

 

[Sanz]

The point was also raised that Wasim averages better than McGrath in Pakistan
22.22. That is very true. But it must be understood that that is Wasims home. McGrath averages a nearly identical 22.31 at home in Australia. So that is really a wash..

In Mcgrath's home Wasim Averages 24.05 whereas in Wasim's home Wasim's home Mcgrath averages 31. Not to forget, Wasim was bowling against the Aussie team which were no. 1 for majority of his career.

Also Wasim played 12 games against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh versus 3 for McGrath.

Well Mcgrath played England.And people keep forgetting the fact that Zimbabwe were pretty decent side for most of Wasim's career.

Again I rate Wasim very highly but I rate McGrath more. If I saw any evidence to suggest Wasim was better I would have no issue arguing the other way around, its just that I don't.

For the nth time, I have no problem with that i but please dont make remarks like ' Wasim was good at knocking the tail'. Also, Since you are using statistics to prove that Mcgrath is better then be consistent and dont come up with statements like " I dont care what stats say....and blah blah blah".