Wasim or McGrath?

[Laurrz]

yes i know you guys will go... ok not this again!!

but i really thought this was an interesting topic for me anyway...

we all know McGrath has better stats [albeit by 1 or 2 runs better average] however one could say Wasim was more entertaining...which i don't think is relevant anyway...

the Metronome or the Magician?

[C_C]

Originally Posted by Laurrz

yes i know you guys will go... ok not this again!!

but i really thought this was an interesting topic for me anyway...

we all know McGrath has better stats [albeit by 1 or 2 runs better average] however one could say Wasim was more entertaining...which i don't think is relevant anyway...

the Metronome or the Magician?

Depends.
In ODIs, i'd pick Wasim. In tests, it'd have a lot to do with who the other bowlers are.McGrath is a more consistent bowler than Wasim and in general has less bad days at office. But picking a bowler isnt just about who is better bowler - it is about how they'd fit in the bowling attack and what they bring in the picture.

[archie mac]

I picked the Pakistan champ. not as consistent but more dangerous and a natural player. Plus if you were picking an all time team, would be good to have a LH quick, in your team.

[Laurrz]

im not saying for like a team or anything...just as bowlers..

[adharcric]

For an over - Wasim Akram.
For a match - Glenn McGrath.

Again, this is as bowlers. As cricketers, I'd take Wasim over McGrath.

[Dravid]

This is a tough one actually. If you want to go on just bowling, I'd say it would be a close battle. But if I was to pick one, I would go for McGrath.

[Laurrz]

why would u want a bowler to bowl only one over? o.O

[adharcric]

Originally Posted by Laurrz

why would u want a bowler to bowl only one over? o.O

I had one over left in a test match and I needed someone to get me that final wicket with only six deliveries, I'd take Wasim for his variety and his tendency to attack the stumps.
For an entire match, I'd take McGrath for his consistency and brilliant ability to pick up wickets at regular intervals.
That's what I meant.

[Laurrz]

Originally Posted by adharcric

I had one over left in a test match and I needed someone to get me that final wicket with only six deliveries, I'd take Wasim for his variety and his tendency to attack the stumps.
For an entire match, I'd take McGrath for his consistency and brilliant ability to pick up wickets at regular intervals.
That's what I meant.

oh ok i see your point.... then again you may want Akhtar rather than McGrath if we're talking about that situation...

anyways what do you guys think of this article and chart?

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/c...ry/222700.html



as you can see, McGrath has the second best perc. of top order wickets and Wasim has the lowest [in that group of elite modern day fast bowlers]

[nightprowler10]

I think the point of top order wickets has been beaten to death. The fact is that McGrath is clearly better than Akram in this regard if you look at the stats from any point of view. But it is also a fact that McGrath has had some of the best slip fielders (or fielders in general) of the time in his team to help him take those top order wickets, whereas Akram had some of the worst. Make of that what you want.

[Laurrz]

oh i did't know ppl were talking about that issue.. i just thoguht it was interesting because it shows McGrath is so good against the best batsmen rather than 7-11... even if McGrath had bad slipsman u would expect him to still have the same perc. of top order wickets and same with Akram..

[C_C]

Originally Posted by Laurrz

oh i did't know ppl were talking about that issue.. i just thoguht it was interesting because it shows McGrath is so good against the best batsmen rather than 7-11... even if McGrath had bad slipsman u would expect him to still have the same perc. of top order wickets and same with Akram..

Actually if McGrath didnt have excellent slippers,i'd expect his figures to plumet significantly.
If you notice, Pakistan had fairly poor slippers during Akram's time(and even today) and Akram didnt rely on them to fetch wickets nearly as much as Pidge does. Wasim took a far larger chunk, if not the majority of his wickets by bowling the batsmen or having them trapped lbw. While McGrath unquestionably is the 'edge inducer' master- without hallowed slippers like Taylor, Junior, Warne, etc, i dont see how McGrath would've made up for it- he isnt very successful when bowling at the wicket- simply because he doesnt get the ball to talk nearly as much as Wasim did. Dont get me wrong, McGrath is a great bowler and IMO, better than Wasim in tests- but I'd still pick Wasim for my team over McGrath for the simple reason that Wasim is a superior cricketer and a leftie. Not to mention,he is the dynamic magician as opposed to a metronome maestro like Pidge- a role that Hadlee can fulfill just as well while bringing batting skills several orders of magnitude higher than Glenn.

[nightprowler10]

Originally Posted by Laurrz

even if McGrath had bad slipsman u would expect him to still have the same perc. of top order wickets and same with Akram..

You make it sound like a sure thing. 39.5% of McGrath's wickets were caught and 27.1% of them were caught behind. Its pretty obvious he relies on edges for a good amount of his wickets. Had he had bad fielders in the slip cordon, I think his average might be tad bit higher and he may not be as effective against top order batsmen. Akram on the other hand relied heavily on bowling the batsmen out and leg before decisions. Don't get me wrong, he did dismiss 123 batsmen (29.7%) thanks to the fielding, but the number is not quite as high as McGrath's 214 (39.5%).

That said, its impossible to say clearly how McGrath's stats might have shaped up if he didn't have people like Waugh waiting in the slips. For all we know he may have started using more variety in his bowling like Akram to get the batsmen out, but I somehow doubt he would've been as successful as Akram in doing so since Akram's bowling was a lot more explosive in many ways.

[Laurrz]

Originally Posted by C_C

Actually if McGrath didnt have excellent slippers,i'd expect his figures to plumet significantly.
If you notice, Pakistan had fairly poor slippers during Akram's time(and even today) and Akram didnt rely on them to fetch wickets nearly as much as Pidge does. Wasim took a far larger chunk, if not the majority of his wickets by bowling the batsmen or having them trapped lbw. While McGrath unquestionably is the 'edge inducer' master- without hallowed slippers like Taylor, Junior, Warne, etc, i dont see how McGrath would've made up for it- he isnt very successful when bowling at the wicket- simply because he doesnt get the ball to talk nearly as much as Wasim did. Dont get me wrong, McGrath is a great bowler and IMO, better than Wasim in tests- but I'd still pick Wasim for my team over McGrath for the simple reason that Wasim is a superior cricketer and a leftie. Not to mention,he is the dynamic magician as opposed to a metronome maestro like Pidge- a role that Hadlee can fulfill just as well while bringing batting skills several orders of magnitude higher than Glenn.

hmm yes i see your point..
but if both teams had good slipsmen.. then i think McGrath would be the one..

Wasim is a great cricketer... probably better than Pigeon..but i just think Pigeon had the edge over bowling alone... the top order distributions shows that... he sets out targets and succeeds them more than any other fast bowler..

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Laurrz

oh ok i see your point.... then again you may want Akhtar rather than McGrath if we're talking about that situation...

anyways what do you guys think of this article and chart?

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/c...ry/222700.html



as you can see, McGrath has the second best perc. of top order wickets and Wasim has the lowest [in that group of elite modern day fast bowlers]

Tells us how underrated Fred Trueman and Allan Donald are outside their home countries IMO.