• 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?

Matt79

Matt79

Global Moderator
Firstly, calm down SS, read the rest of the post - I'm not having a go at him.

I'm considering promoting McGrath into my alltime XI, which I've only done for two other current players. Obviously at the moment, there's heaps of talk, and certainly some compelling performances to suggest that he deserves a spot over the myriad of other fantastic quicks who have played a game.

I'd be interested to hear whether anyone can come up with sound criticisms of why he isn't an absolute all-time great? Kinda a devil's advocate thing when they put someone up for saint-hood.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Global Moderator
Goughy said:
This is the tough part. Who defines 'sound'?
Click to expand...
:) I'm not going to be shooting people down, I guess I just meant criticisms that have some basis beyond "I think he's a knob" kinda thing.
 
U

UncleTheOne

U19 Captain
Can't really see any arguement against him being an all time great. He can do it anytime, anywhere, although for me

Ambrose >> Mcgrath

As far as the last 15/16 years or so.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Global Moderator
Pretty much all I can come up with is a lack of absolute pace compared to other all-time greats. It certainly hasn't hurt him or his performances, but if the choice is between a deadly accurate bowler who gets it to move and consistently takes out the best batsmen in the opposing team, and one who does all of that, and bowls at near the 150kph mark, I guess you take the second guy.
 
open365

open365

International Vice-Captain
Shaun Pollock is basicaly McGrath with batting average of 30 yet he isn't considered great.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Matt79 said:
Pretty much all I can come up with is a lack of absolute pace compared to other all-time greats. It certainly hasn't hurt him or his performances, but if the choice is between a deadly accurate bowler who gets it to move and consistently takes out the best batsmen in the opposing team, and one who does all of that, and bowls at near the 150kph mark, I guess you take the second guy.
Click to expand...
Yes, but there has been no one who did that. No one in the history of the game has taken so many top order wickets.
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
McGrath is an absolute all-time great.

McGrath has consistently taken the wickets of the best batsmen in the world on relatively flat wickets.
The quality of a bowler is judged by his ability to take wickets, not his ability to bowl with express pace.
Need intimidation? Facing a bowler who is almost guaranteed to take your wicket is pretty damn intimidating IMO.

As for a place in an all-time XI, he wouldn't make mine. He is one of the three greatest bowlers ever, but that's not enough.
Hadlee will give you nearly the same value with the ball in addition to superior batting and fielding. Warne and Muralitharan form a lethal spin duo. Marshall is the greatest ever.

Sunil Gavaskar
Jack Hobbs
Don Bradman
Sachin Tendulkar
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
 
Last edited:
nightprowler10

nightprowler10

Global Moderator
McGrath would probably make my all-time XI by the time he retires. He, along with Akram would open the bowling, or he could come in first change after Akram and Ambrose open the bowling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top