Warne or Mcgrath the bigger loss?

[zaremba]

Hmm, that's a strange one.

Can't say I've ever studied Lindwall's action in great detail before now TBH, and am not about to go making up my mind based on one piece of footage, but I'll take a closer look next time I'm watching what I've got.

This is the only clip I've ever seen. It makes Shabbir Ahmed look like a textbook model of perfection

 

[pasag]

Warne, easy.

 

[morgieb]

Warne, largely because all our spinners are ****, whereas we have good quicks.

 

[Uppercut]

Call me a cynical old England fan (you'd be right) but I wouldn't say we had the best pace attack by a long way. I'd say the Saffers are number 1. Then the rest. England, Pakistan, India and Australia are all pretty much of a muchness imo. Sri Lanka maybe a little behind but still competent (and I understand they have a couple of decent spinners).

Tough one, but i'll say Clark, Lee, Johnson> Ntini, Steyn, Morkel. I'm not sure what i make of Anderson or Harmison currently. If Tahir is successful for SA they'll have quite the complete team.

On the question at hand, Warne.

 

[howardj]

Warne.

He leaves the biggest void, as there is nobody at all to replace him. There's not even a spinner to replace him let alone a legspinner. By contrast, Clark, Johnson and Lee make a more than decent pace attack, thus the loss of McGrath is felt less acutely.

 

[gettingbetter]

Warne.

1. He could bowl longer spells
2. As said, Clark is McGrath-esque, White is blonde and from Victoria
3. Added a bit with the bat
4. Good tactitian
5. Good slipper

 

[Matt79]

Funnily enough there was a similar thread around the time of their retirement and then the medium-fast mafia here ran it to a pretty close thing that McGrath not only **** all over Warne as a bowler, but was an equally big loss Events have shown the validity of that opinion IMO.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Funnily enough there was a similar thread around the time of their retirement and then the medium-fast mafia here ran it to a pretty close thing that McGrath not only **** all over Warne as a bowler, but was an equally big loss Events have shown the validity of that opinion IMO.

Well, how many of his replacements are averaging 18 with the ball in India? White, on the other hand, is averaging close to 50 in India.

 

[Matt79]

lol...

 

[Richard]

I really do think the Clark-is-McGrath thing is overplayed.

I cannot believe Clark will - short-term or long-term - manage what McGrath did. Clark is an excellent, excellent bowler but I cannot believe he will be as good as McGrath, ever.

Make no mistake, if McGrath was still 28 years old and available, he'd improve this current side. Lots and lots and lots. He is a HUGE loss.

 

[silentstriker]

McGrath would have been more important to Australia this series. There is no doubt in my mind about that.

 

[Migara]

Even Sri Lanka, if they had him, certainly you'd play both Murali and Warne everywhere you went. It would be a ludicrously good spin combo - in fact, they may become the first team in history to be the best bowling side in the world solely due to their spinners. Regardless of how badly India got Mendised, you'd tell him to sit in a corner and wait a while until one or the other retired.

It's not the point. Usually a tet attack will have 3 seamers and one spinner. McGrath will walk in to any of those spots in any side in history. Since the team has one spot for a spinner, then the problem comes which one to pick. Yes, India will pick Warne over both Kumble and Harbhajan, but it's not the case for Warne over Murali. When compared all four above bowlers, Kumble bowls best on tailor made wickets, while Warne and Murali are equal on non-helpful wickets. Now the million dollar question is will Warne walk in to any side of entire cricket history if only one spin spot was available? Murali, O;Riely and Grimmet will be having huge says on that issue. Once more McGrath will walk in to any side. Marshall, Hadlee and McGrath probaly are the best three fastmen we have seen in cricket.

 

[Cevno]

McGrath would have been more important to Australia this series. There is no doubt in my mind about that.

I agree.
Indians would rather face warne in this series than mcgraath.

 

[GIMH]

SA could potentially be the best seam-attack around currently, beyond question, for mine. But the trouble is, Nel appears terminally past his best, Ntini is fast going the same way, Steyn has a plateuing to do, and Morne Morkel, well, isn't the finished article by a long chalque.

Sidebottom and Flintoff is a highly exciting combination for mine, and as I say, if Anderson can continue the progress he made last summer, we've got a damn good attack on our hands.

However, being no small cynic myself, I'm certainly not going to go getting confident that this'll be happening.

Hmm Richard, you seem to be forgetting somebody, can't remember who

To the question at hand, yeah, Warne, easily.

 

[krkode]

I would have to say that in an immediate sense, McGrath is the one they will miss most. He was just a class act and could really dominate the batting when the situation called for it. Part of me loved that about him but then a part of me hated him for it because I'm usually supporting the teams he does so well against. Most fearsome bowler I've seen in what little time I've been watching cricket... I would always rather watch a McGrath highlights package than McGrath bowling live because he was one of those bowlers who always looked like taking another Indian wicket.

In a long-term sense, I think Warne is the kind of bowler Australia will probably not see again. In that sense, he is probably hardest to replace. Australia is more likely to generate another bowler who is as good as McGrath than they are to bring forth another Warne.

I wonder if we can generate a list of games McGrath has played without Warne and vice versa and compare Australia's performance in those. The sample size will probably be too small to make any reasonable conclusions... But over all I feel like although Warne is harder to replace, Australian cricket will march on without him. But I don't think they will return to "normal" (i.e. the vastly dominating team that they once were) until they find another McGrath.

 

[Richard]

Hmm Richard, you seem to be forgetting somebody, can't remember who

Nah, as I've said, Hoggard isn't forgotten by me, but it's pretty plain he'll never play for England again, whoever doesn't like that fact.

 

[Precambrian]

Nah, as I've said, Hoggard isn't forgotten by me, but it's pretty plain he'll never play for England again, whoever doesn't like that fact.

I thought he was referring to Harmison.

 

[Top_Cat]

Random moment; I saw the thread title and momentarily, my brain read it as "Warne or Mcgrath the bigger tosser?"

Now there's a debate for the ages.

 

[howardj]

Random moment; I saw the thread title and momentarily, my brain read it as "Warne or Mcgrath the bigger tosser?"

Now there's a debate for the ages.

Oooh Ahhh, for mine.

Just quietly.

 

[Top_Cat]

Oooh Ahhh, for mine.

Just quietly.

What is it they say? The most sensitive organ when you're doing it is your ears?