Warne or McGrath?

[Matt79]

McGrath gets most of the big wickets for Australia, a high proportion of Warne's victims are tailenders (actually the highest proportion among all bowlers with over 300 wickets). McGrath has caused the very best like Lara and Tendulkar difficulties - Warne just gets hammered against them. McGrath is far more consistent and much less reliant on conditions - he hardly ever has a bad series and can boast a good record against all teams (worst average 25), while Warne averages nearly 50 against India and 40 in West Indies. Also Warne is very dependant upon the presence of McGrath and averages a Kumbleesque 28 without him, while McGrath is relatively unaffected by the presence of Warne.

Statistically it is a no contest and IMO those people that prefer Warne are simply following the typical ill educated media bandwagon.

Jeez, tell us what you really think, why don't you!

 

[silentstriker]

McGrath gets most of the big wickets for Australia, a high proportion of Warne's victims are tailenders (actually the highest proportion among all bowlers with over 300 wickets). McGrath has caused the very best like Lara and Tendulkar difficulties - Warne just gets hammered against them. McGrath is far more consistent and much less reliant on conditions - he hardly ever has a bad series and can boast a good record against all teams (worst average 25), while Warne averages nearly 50 against India and 40 in West Indies. Also Warne is very dependant upon the presence of McGrath and averages a Kumbleesque 28 without him, while McGrath is relatively unaffected by the absence of Warne.

Pretty much agree with everything you posted.

 

[PhoenixFire]

SS, you'll be pleased to hear that I'm now a converted Glenn McGrath fan. It being my birthday today, I got a DVD showing the Aus v India 2001 Test Match series. McGrath was by a distance the best fast bowler on show, and second only to Harbhajan Singh. Every time one of the highlights of McGrath coming onto bowl was show, I was sure that he was going to take a wicket of some sort.

 

[silentstriker]

SS, you'll be pleased to hear that I'm now a converted Glenn McGrath fan. It being my birthday today, I got a DVD showing the Aus v India 2001 Test Match series. McGrath was by a distance the best fast bowler on show, and second only to Harbhajan Singh. Every time one of the highlights of McGrath coming onto bowl was show, I was sure that he was going to take a wicket of some sort.

It always pleases me when someone changes a wrong opinion to my opinion.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I'm still going to go with Warne, because of various reasons. I never though McGrath wasn't anything other than a very good bowler, but now I can understand how he can be called a great bowler.

 

[silentstriker]

I'm still going to go with Warne, because of various reasons. I never though McGrath wasn't anything other than a very good bowler, but now I can understand how he can be called a great bowler.

McGrath is not a great bowler, he is the greatest bowler.

 

[PhoenixFire]

McGrath is not a great bowler, he is the greatest bowler.

Ever in the history of the game?

 

[silentstriker]

Ever in the history of the game?

Yes.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Fair play, but I wouldn't put him in my top 10, needless the No1/. For me that would have to be either Wilfred Rhodes, Titch Freeman or Alec Bedser.

 

[silentstriker]

Fair play, but I wouldn't put him in my top 10, needless the No1/. For me that would have to be either Wilfred Rhodes, Titch Freeman or Alec Bedser.

Alec Bedser averaged 25 and S/R of 67 in a bowler friendly era.
Glenn McGrath averages 21.55 with an S/R of 51 in a batsman friendly era.

Glenn McGrath also has more top order wickets than anyone in history (total number or percentage wise). He specializes in the best and the biggest wickets in the game, and not lower order ones.

Definitely, he's the best.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Bradman called Bedser the best bowler of all time, right up until his death. That's good enough for me. It's not all about stats you know, people can get caught up with stats and less so about the performances, not a point about McGrath, but as general.

On the other point, McGrath has played over twice the amount of Test Matches that bedser did, thus having more time to prove himself in. Also Bedser had a higher ratio of wickets per match than McGrath.

How would you compare Rhodes and Freeman to McGrath?

 

[silentstriker]

Bradman called Bedser the best bowler of all time, right up until his death. That's good enough for me. It's not all about stats you know, people can get caught up with stats and less so about the performances, not a point about McGrath, but as general.

On the other point, McGrath has played over twice the amount of Test Matches that bedser did, thus having more time to prove himself in. Also Bedser had a higher ratio of wickets per match than McGrath.

How would you compare Rhodes and Freeman to McGrath?

Wasn't Rhodes a spinner? And I have to confess I know little about Freeman.

And no, its not about stats but when a bowler puts out all time great stats in a batsman friendly era, it pops your eye.

And what about taking the wickets off the best batsman of his era?

PS. I obviously respect Bradman's opinion, but this was Bradman's all time side when he died:

1. Barry Richards - South Africa
2. Arthur Morris - Australia
3. Don Bradman - Australia
4. Sachin Tendulkar - India
5. Gary Sobers - West Indies
6. Don Tallon - Australia
7. Ray Lindwall - Australia
8. Dennis Lillee - Australia
9. Alec Bedser - England
10. Bill O'Reilly - Australia
11. Clarrie Grimmett - Australia

Not a bad side, but I am sure most would have a different side. I would probably have the same middle order (Bradman, Tendukar, Sobers), but different in other places.

 

[Sanz]

Alec Bedser averaged 25 and S/R of 67 in a bowler friendly era.
Glenn McGrath averages 21.55 with an S/R of 51 in a batsman friendly era.

Do you realize that cricket has become much more attacking in this era hence more opportunity for the bowlers to take wickets than it was in the 70-80s ? Even the ordinary batsmen of the 70s-80s batsmen would have better defence and staying power (or at least as good) than today's top batsmen.

I dont really think of 90s-2000s as batting friendly era, its just a myth. Actually batsmen have become very aggresive and the fact that there aren't many quality bowlers in world now results in higher scores and more results. I think the 70s-80s pitches in the subcontinent were flattest I have seen.

 

[silentstriker]

I find Benaud's all time XI much better:

1. Jack Hobbs
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Donald Bradman
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Vivian Richards
6. Gary Sobers
7. Imran Khan
8. Adam Gilchrist
9. Shane Warne
10. Sydney Barnes
11. Dennis Lilliee

Mine would be almost exactly the same except McGrath and one of Marshall/Ambrose would be in there for the last two spots.

 

[silentstriker]

Do you realize that cricket has become much more attacking in this era hence more opportunity for the bowlers to take wickets than it was in the 70-80s ?

So how come batting averages have gotten better and bowling averages have gotten worse?

 

[Sanz]

So how come batting averages have gotten better and bowling averages have gotten worse?

Because there probably aren't enough good bowlers. At the moment I can think of only 3 world class bowlers who can bowl consistently well and of the 3, two happen to be spinners.

 

[silentstriker]

Because there probably aren't enough good bowlers. At the moment I can think of only 3 world class bowlers who can bowl consistently well and of the 3, two happen to be spinners.

I would say the bowlers aren't seen as being as good because the pitches don't help them as much. A lot of 'good' bowlers of today would become great if they had the 1970's pitches to help them.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Because there probably aren't enough good bowlers. At the moment I can think of only 3 world class bowlers who can bowl consistently well and of the 3, two happen to be spinners.

Would you really class Dave Mohammed and Mohammed Rafique alongside McGrath?

 

[Sanz]

Would you really class Dave Mohammed and Mohammed Rafique alongside McGrath?

Haha.. I was talking about mere mortals like Murali and Warne.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Haha.. I was talking about mere mortals like Murali and Warne.

Surely not? What has Murali got that Dave Mohammed doesn't?