• 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.

Yes, it's another player comparison...

Who was the better bowler for Australia?


  • Total voters
    27

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Grew up watching 'The Kid' and although I prefered Hughes I respected McDermott a lot. I actually wonder how many games Reid, McDermott and Hughes played together?

Anyway, Gillespie may have been his equal but never really lead an attack like McDermott did.

For me McDermott takes it quite comfortably. I would vote for him but...
 
Last edited:

DaRick

State Vice-Captain
Jason Gillespie, for mine. Craig McDermott was a force at home, but away, Steve Waugh compared him to 'superman with Kryptonite' (a notable exception was against the West Indies in 1991). Gillespie, conversely, was almost as good away as at home and elicited so many plays-and-misses during his prime that it was almost ridiculous. Both were unlucky with injury, but while Gillespie overcame his, McDermott, alas, was never really able to. So I have no real hesistation in going for Gillespie, despite McDermott's exploits against England.

Although I realise that this is not always of consequence, Gillespie has a superior average to McDermott, too...and was a far better batsman.
 

bond21

Banned
Gillespie around 2002 with short hair.

Unbelievable. He could bowl 150k and could swing it and bowl cutters.

Of course he didnt lead the attack, McGrath did and he was after McDermott's time...and arguably the best quick in history, so you cant compare them by "leading an attack"
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
I've never seen (or read) McDermott doing away from home what Gillespie did in 2004 in India, that was amazing.

I'd pick Gillespie.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Very difficult question, this. Some people, who didn't follow McDermott's career and only looked at the one number they're spoon-fed by TV producers and one page on CricInfo, might not realise just how good he was for a time, on the rare occasion he managed a decent few games on the trot.

Early on (including debuting at just 19 years of age and not being overawed at all) he struggled, as did most of the rest of his team. But later he became a high-class bowler indeed and was the biggest force behind Australia's rise back toward the top of the World pile.

I'm not especially bothered by the "did he lead the pack?" question - that often depends more on the calibre of the bowlers around you than yourself - but I'd still go for McDermott, just. Both very much high-class operators, though.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I actually wonder how many games Reid, McDermott and Hughes played together?
Nowhere near the number they should have. McDermott and Reid alone played together just 14 times. :( And 8 of these were when Australia were still at an enormously low ebb and neither bowler was anywhere near as good as they would eventually become.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Jason Gillespie, for mine. Craig McDermott was a force at home, but away, Steve Waugh compared him to 'superman with Kryptonite' (a notable exception was against the West Indies in 1991).
Not, for mine, a 100% fair question. As I mentioned in my first post this thread, McDermott was fairly average home or away (another exception being England in 1985 when as mentioned he was just 19) in his first 4 years in Test cricket.

In his later phase when he became a top-class operator, he played just three followed by two series away from home, and did well in the first three, then less well in his single Test in England before returning with a twisted bowel (:sick:) then again fared poorly in South Africa before having 1 good and 1 poor game in Pakistan.

He never quite managed a series of the magnitude of Gillespie in India - but this was only because the rest of his side weren't up to the task in West Indies in 1991. McDermott's performance that series was every bit on a par with Gillespie's, and the only reason Gillespie's is remembered more fondly is that Australia were successful in 2004/05.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Nowhere near the number they should have. McDermott and Reid alone played together just 14 times. :( And 8 of these were when Australia were still at an enormously low ebb and neither bowler was anywhere near as good as they would eventually become.
McDermott, Reid and Hughes played together 9 times and had the suprisingly ordinary record of 2 wins, 2 losses and 5 draws
 
Last edited:

Engle

State Vice-Captain
Gillespie never got more than 20 wkts in a series. McDermott did scale 30 wkts 3 times. Gillespie never got a 10fer. McDermott did so twice.

Point being that Gillespie never seemed to take the ' bull by the horns ', which IIRC was what McDermott was called. Leadership matters. Gillespie will be forgotten far sooner than McDermott.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Gillespie never got more than 20 wkts in a series. McDermott did scale 30 wkts 3 times. Gillespie never got a 10fer. McDermott did so twice.
Part of that is to do with Australia tending to play more 5 (even 6) Test series in McDermott's day than Gillespie's - again, not a 100% fair comparison.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
As much as it pains me to say it, McDermott. They both took top-order wickets with regularity but McDermott was better at finishing the job.

The 'Superman with Kryptonite' thing was more to do with McDermott's freakish run of unusual injuries away from home. On the 1993 Ashes tour, was a twisted bowel and 1995 WI tour, was being a larrikin, jumped from the top of a brick wall to the ground, broke his leg. Guy was generally just an accident waiting to occur.
 

Top