Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: The better bowler ?

Voters
101. You may not vote on this poll
  • Curtley Ambrose

    60 59.41%
  • Glenn McGrath

    41 40.59%
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 171

Thread: Ambrose v McGrath

  1. #31
    U19 Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    England.
    Posts
    607
    at their best, ambrose. the same traits, but more aggression and more pace, after bradman he is the first name on my all time 11 team sheet. a fast bowling god. mcgrath is in my top 3 quicks of all time though, just that curtly is number one for my money.

  2. #32
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    ITSTL, not heard many place Ambrose ahead of Marshall.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  3. #33
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    I had to place McGrath ahead of Amby.

    My all time quick bowling attack would be McGrath, Ambrose and Marshall.

    McGrath really won me over with his propensity for taking wickets on the flattest of flat decks. When he did get something with a bit of juice in it (Lords for example) he was positively dangerous. Ambrose had a stronger aura about him, but bowled in a more bowler-friendly era.

  4. #34
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Just because Ambrose bowled more in a time when there were more seam-friendly pitches doesn't mean he didn't get plenty of flat surfaces - and do well on plenty of them.


  5. #35
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Just because Ambrose bowled more in a time when there were more seam-friendly pitches doesn't mean he didn't get plenty of flat surfaces - and do well on plenty of them.
    I love how this coincides with our debate in the other thread.
    ★★★★★

  6. #36
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Amazingly enough I've just said exactly what I said about Ambrose here about Tendulkar there.

  7. #37
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Amazingly enough I've just said exactly what I said about Ambrose here about Tendulkar there.
    And it's not like Kallis never got bowlers bowling brilliantly or the pitch being lively and still made runs...

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Indeed he did, because Kallis is a good player, something I've never countenanced saying otherwise to.

  9. #39
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,779
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Just because Ambrose bowled more in a time when there were more seam-friendly pitches doesn't mean he didn't get plenty of flat surfaces - and do well on plenty of them.
    Aye, but who would be your first pick quick for taking on a tour to India? McGrath for mine.

  10. #40
    International 12th Man Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Aye, but who would be your first pick quick for taking on a tour to India? McGrath for mine.
    When did India become the sole proving ground for being a great fast bowler? I think we place too much emphasis on how a fast bowler does in India versus ne where else. For me the ultimate proving ground these days for fast bowlers is Australia, as they are by far the best players of pace bowling. I too chose Mcgrath over Ambrose (slightly) but not because of ne India factor
    Cause Slifer said so.........!!!!

  11. #41
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Aye, but who would be your first pick quick for taking on a tour to India? McGrath for mine.
    I'd be quite delighted with either.

  12. #42
    Cricket Web Staff Member archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Slifer View Post
    When did India become the sole proving ground for being a great fast bowler? I think we place too much emphasis on how a fast bowler does in India versus ne where else. For me the ultimate proving ground these days for fast bowlers is Australia, as they are by far the best players of pace bowling. I too chose Mcgrath over Ambrose (slightly) but not because of ne India factor
    On the money for mine, I am sick of hearing about how different the pitches are around the world, there are some differences but it is not like the old days when we had matting, un covered pitches, real stickies in Aust as compared to England, when they did not cover the foot marks for the fast bowlers either.

    How much flatter could you find pitches around the world than we have in Aust atm?
    You know it makes sense.

  13. #43
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    None flatter, but that's not the point - it's only the last 6 years that surfaces Worldwide have become universally flat. Before then there was still a huge amount of variation country-to-country, even if not as much as in the days of uncovered surfaces in some countries (and at one point in all) and matting wickets in some countries.

    In any case, as has been said so many times, not everything is about the surface, there's more to the difficulties of bowling than purely what the surface is like.

  14. #44
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,312
    None flatter, but that's not the point - it's only the last 6 years that surfaces Worldwide have become universally flat. Before then there was still a huge amount of variation country-to-country, even if not as much as in the days of uncovered surfaces in some countries (and at one point in all) and matting wickets in some countries.
    Come on, Richard. The differences in the 90's between countries wasn't that significant. There were just as high scores in South Africa in the 90's as there were in Australia as there were in the WI. Subcontinental pitches haven't changed for many years now and England's decks have improved too but largely due to the time of year Tests are played these days.

    In Australia, the only really dramatic change has been how flat the WACA is these days. Aside from that, Adelaide and Tassie are still batting paradises, Melbourne has pace, Sydney still turns and the 'Gabba is green for a session then flattens out for the rest of the Test. Nothing has changed there in years.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp

  15. #45
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    The SCG still turns? Hasn't seemed to - anywhere near as much - since about 2002\03 TBH.

    And I thought The 'Gabba was supposed to have been a seamer's paradise throughout the 1990s? That's what you always told me when saying Hayden couldn't be a non-seaming-track bully.

    TBH, I'd say tracks in India have changed - hugely. You could be almost certain of at least two real, proper turners - quickish, uneven, really offering big turn. Now a whole series can go by without it.

    Pitches in West Indies might have started becoming slower and lower in the mid-1990s rather than the early 2000s, true - it's the bowlers rather than the pitches that changed there. The only two that were ever (generally) that quick at any time, though, were Sabina Park and Kensington Oval were they not?

    And over here - well, times of play have changed, sure, but if anything you'd expect it to have made things more seam-friendly, not less - Tests in May and September used to be a never-never and almost-never (respectively) before 2000. Between 2001 and 2006, in domestic FC cricket, there was an absurd explosion in runscoring (though that had as much, IMO, to do with balls as pitches). This was mirrored in Tests from 2002. A seaming deck has been a relative rarity here since then - and IMO a non-seaming deck should be the exception not the rule. These isles are supposed to be about a challenge from seam and swing.

    There's been immense disquiet over here, and in India, and finally (it seems) in Australia about flat pitches. Sure, there are a few grounds that've remained the same (The Oval's square in 1976 could be transported 30 years on and it'd be almost the same) but I'm surprised anyone would perport that little has changed.

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ambrose vs. Lillee in Tests. Who was better?
    By Days of Grace in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 28-05-2008, 06:19 AM
  2. Curtly Ambrose vs. Steve Waugh
    By jack_sparrow in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 14-02-2006, 05:03 AM
  3. Who is better McGrath or Ambrose
    By aussie in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 12-08-2005, 02:12 PM
  4. McGrath/Ambrose/Walsh
    By membersstand in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 27-04-2005, 05:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •