silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Langeveldt said:
-
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.
Why is McGrath NOT an all-time great?
- Thread starter Matt79
- Start date
PhoenixFire
International Coach
He's got you there SS.
aussie tragic
International Captain
Plus he's only just above medium pace and he averages 28.53 over the last 12-monthsLangeveldt said:
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Anyone who is sub 80mph shouldn't really be allowed to bowl in test cricket, and should be sent to jail for life.aussie tragic said:Plus he's only just above medium pace and he averages 28.53 over the last 12-months
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
All right, that's it. I was just in an immensely good mood after reading some of C_C's hilarious comments, but thanks a lot for ruining it. 
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Me or Aussie Tragic?silentstriker said:All right, that's it. I was just in an immensely good mood after reading some of C_C's hilarious comments, but thanks a lot for ruining it.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Bastards, the both of you.PhoenixFire said:
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Good good, I've made the world a better place.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I am so getting into the Indian swing of things and burning your effigies.PhoenixFire said:
PhoenixFire
International Coach
What do I look like then?
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
PhoenixFire said:
What do I look like then?
aussie tragic
International Captain
No problem, but just so you know what to make it look like, all the taxi drivers in the UAE keep saying that I look like Ricky Pontingsilentstriker said:
PhoenixFire
International Coach
No it's Glenn McGrath you foolaussie tragic said:No problem, but just so you know what to make it look like, all the taxi drivers in the UAE keep saying that I look like Ricky Ponting
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I'll just assume you look like the guy on the left with the pinkish shirt. He has the best facial expression in effigy burning history.
I characterize it as "Uh..so what do we do with the donkey now?"
I characterize it as "Uh..so what do we do with the donkey now?"
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
LOL, it would be quite funny if you tricked one of those protesters into burning an effigy of Ganguly or something. All time classic.PhoenixFire said:No it's Glenn McGrath you fool
Though if I ever found out that I burnt a Glenn McGrath effigy, I'd have to commit suicide.
I wasn't kidding when I said I'm going to build a temple to honor the greatness that is Glenn McGrath. I am so starting a cult around it. I'm trying to find a nice little McGrath looking doll to put in the center. I'll post a picture once I find it. I don't suppose they make Glenn McGrath action figures?
Matt79
Global Moderator
Thought on McGrath triggered by the "why is Stuart Clark so good" thread - didn't want to take over another unrelated thread with a McGrath debate.
Many people (and one in particular) are fond of citing McGrath's success in a batsman dominated era as a reason for considering him above other bowlers with similar statistical records. My question was - would McGrath have actually been any more successful, or even AS successful in previous eras when the balance was more towards bowlers.
The hallmark of McGrath's attack is his accuracy in targeting a batsman's corridor of uncertainty and just inducing enough movement to draw a mistake when they play at it. Now my reasoning might seem convoluted a bit, but I actually wonder whether batsmen from previous eras would have made a better fist of resisting him. My logic goes something like:
- Its commonly accepted here that the game is easier for batsman in recent years than was previously the case.
- It is also commonly accepted here that many of the most successful batsmen of today have technical weaknesses that are not regularly exposed due to weak opponents and placid pitches (the basis of the no-matter-what-Ponting-or-Youssuf-average-they'll-never-be-as-good-as-Tendaulkar-and-Lara argument)
- This ability to get away with technical weaknesses has led to a proliferation of attacking, shot makers, who generally attempt to force the score along at a rate far in excess of the rates of days gone by
- McGrath is considered to be the exception to the this general decline in the standard of fast bowling, because he does so regularly show up opponent's weaknesses.
- Had McGrath bowled in the eras past when the standard was higher, he would have been bowling against batsmen who had had to learn to be successful against bowlers of his quality.
- Had McGrath bowled in eras past, he would have bowled to batsmen who were less concerned with trying to force the scoring along, and more prepared to be patient, and who didn't treat persistant, accurate line and length, and movement of the ball, as a dangerous novelty.
Basically, I'm saying that if McGrath had played in one of the previous eras when the emphasis by top order batsmen was on patient resistance rather than scoring at 4 an over, and when swing and difficult pitches were par for the course and something good batsmen were well practiced in handling, he might have done less well, rather than better. I think he'd still be very very good, but perhaps not quite as good.
Many people (and one in particular) are fond of citing McGrath's success in a batsman dominated era as a reason for considering him above other bowlers with similar statistical records. My question was - would McGrath have actually been any more successful, or even AS successful in previous eras when the balance was more towards bowlers.
The hallmark of McGrath's attack is his accuracy in targeting a batsman's corridor of uncertainty and just inducing enough movement to draw a mistake when they play at it. Now my reasoning might seem convoluted a bit, but I actually wonder whether batsmen from previous eras would have made a better fist of resisting him. My logic goes something like:
- Its commonly accepted here that the game is easier for batsman in recent years than was previously the case.
- It is also commonly accepted here that many of the most successful batsmen of today have technical weaknesses that are not regularly exposed due to weak opponents and placid pitches (the basis of the no-matter-what-Ponting-or-Youssuf-average-they'll-never-be-as-good-as-Tendaulkar-and-Lara argument)
- This ability to get away with technical weaknesses has led to a proliferation of attacking, shot makers, who generally attempt to force the score along at a rate far in excess of the rates of days gone by
- McGrath is considered to be the exception to the this general decline in the standard of fast bowling, because he does so regularly show up opponent's weaknesses.
- Had McGrath bowled in the eras past when the standard was higher, he would have been bowling against batsmen who had had to learn to be successful against bowlers of his quality.
- Had McGrath bowled in eras past, he would have bowled to batsmen who were less concerned with trying to force the scoring along, and more prepared to be patient, and who didn't treat persistant, accurate line and length, and movement of the ball, as a dangerous novelty.
Basically, I'm saying that if McGrath had played in one of the previous eras when the emphasis by top order batsmen was on patient resistance rather than scoring at 4 an over, and when swing and difficult pitches were par for the course and something good batsmen were well practiced in handling, he might have done less well, rather than better. I think he'd still be very very good, but perhaps not quite as good.
mohammad16
U19 Captain
There is noway no earth mgrath should make it to an Alltime xi theres simply been too many great bowlers over the years
mgrath is a great bowler, mayybe an alltime great but he wont make it to the all time XI cian think of like 3 windies bowlers id take over mgrath if i was going into the most importnat match of my life
mgrath is a great bowler, mayybe an alltime great but he wont make it to the all time XI cian think of like 3 windies bowlers id take over mgrath if i was going into the most importnat match of my life
aussie tragic
International Captain
Only 3......how about Marshall, Ambrose, Holding, Garner & Roberts in front of him, while Hall and Walsh would be just behind him....mohammad16 said: