Just because McGrath has a higher batting average and a lower bowling average than Murali over the last two years it makes sense that Murali would be the better bowler.C_C said:Muralitharan first, daylight second,McGrath third.
batting average is utterly irrelevant.Just because McGrath has a higher batting average and a lower bowling average than Murali over the last two years it makes sense that Murali would be the better bowler.
mmmm i disagree.I actually think Mcgarth is better his record against top batsmen is better then Murali, espically Lara. Their records against Tendulkar are about the same, but i don't think there is a bowler was has really got it over Tendulkar.
Wouldnt that also work against Mcgrath? because Murali doesnt have other quality bowlers to 'take' wickets away from him, whereas McGrath has 3 othersC_C said:mmmm i disagree.
Lara played murali very well but one or two candidates dont really sway it.
plus dont forget, murali has no support to speak of- not the callibre McGrath has anyways.
For the last 5-6 years, its Murali all the way.
Logically, the difference between two equally good bowlers with one operating in a great attack and another being a lone warrior should be this:Wouldnt that also work against Mcgrath? because Murali doesnt have other quality bowlers to 'take' wickets away from him, whereas McGrath has 3 others
I know all that stuff so theres no point stating the obvious, what i would like to see however, is their ODI record over the couple of years, would make for interesting reading me thinks...C_C said:Logically, the difference between two equally good bowlers with one operating in a great attack and another being a lone warrior should be this:
The one in the better attack should have lower wicket/match ratio but better average and strike rates and less # (or frequency) of five-fers and 10-fers.
Reason being, if you operate in a better attack, you have more competition for the wickets but batsmen do not have the luxury of seeing you off and the sustained pressure means lower aggregate scores (ie, a team will more likely fold for lower scores against a better attack than an inferior attack).
Since average is runs scored/wickets taken, bowlers in a better attack should have lower averages and in most cases, strike rates.
However, Murali leads McGrath in categories where he should lead as well as in categories that McGrath should lead....over the last few years that is.
Therefore, i conclude that Murali has been far better than McGrath over the past few years.
Also, for a spinner to boast an average of less than 23 in the days of professional cricket is simply unreal.
Well i dont care much about pyjama cricket unless its the world cup or some ICC championship or whatever....I know all that stuff so theres no point stating the obvious, what i would like to see however, is their ODI record over the couple of years, would make for interesting reading me thinks...
well when you lead in every single category but one, its pretty comprehensive, i would say.Im not arguing that muralie has been a better bowler, im simply saying that its not as 'clear cut' as you think, its not like he is miles and miles ahead like you described..
When you take it into context they arent a massive maragin that he is leading though, that is why im NOT arguing that murali has performed better, but im simply saying that it isnt as big of a margain, no doubt that murali has been the best IMO...C_C said:Well i dont care much about pyjama cricket unless its the world cup or some ICC championship or whatever....
but feel free to debate this from the ODI angle.
well when you lead in every single category but one, its pretty comprehensive, i would say.
well i dont give ODIs the same level of importance i give to tests. but its a tough ask to have a cumulative ODI and Test record....for eg, if McGrath leads murali by the same margin in ODIs as murali leads him in tests, how do we say who is better ?The thread is best bowler, so surely ODI's must be counted
well if we are gonna break it down that way, i would say this:Best Fast Bowler = McGrath
Best Spinner = Muralitharan (as Warne missed half of the period in question)
When he plays well over half his games in Sri Lanka, it most certainly isn't.C_C said:Also, for a spinner to boast an average of less than 23 in the days of professional cricket is simply unreal.
So i guess since McGrath plays half his games in Aus, his average most certainly isnt that great, eh ?When he plays well over half his games in Sri Lanka, it most certainly isn't.