View Poll Results: On the subject of Malcolm Marshall, do you consider ...

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • ... he was EITHER the best bowler of all-time OR the second-best after SF Barnes

    25 41.67%
  • ... someone other than SF Barnes was better than him

    33 55.00%
  • I have no real interest in cricket history so I don't have much of an opinion on him

    2 3.33%
Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 196

Thread: Do you consider Malcolm Marshall...

  1. #151
    International 12th Man Rant0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Country West Australia
    Posts
    1,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Yeah, Marshall's career - in terms of who he played alongside - is an interesting one. He first played Test cricket genuinely in 1980 in England, but his first 9 Tests (4 in England in 1980; all 4 in Pakistan in 1980/81; then 1 more at home to England in 1981) all came as a fill-in, when one or more of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft were unavailable. He mixed the good with the bad in this time (I'd say he had 3 excellent games, 3 moderate and 3 poor) and overall they produced an average of 26.41.

    Croft left the team and in '83, Marshall finally became a first-choice, and on a couple of occasions played alongside Roberts, Holding and Garner in what is surely the best first-choice attack West Indies have ever fielded. However, Garner picked-up a bad injury meaning this lasted just 2 games. By the time he was back, and just 2 series' (both against India) after Marshall became established, Roberts then retired. For the next 3 years it was Marshall, Holding, Garner and someone else. In '84 against Australia and England, it was Baptiste. In '84/85, Walsh debuted. Then Winston Davis returned in '85, then in '86 it was Patrick Patterson debuting. In this "first leg", '83 to '86, Marshall picked-up 181 wickets in 33 matches at 19.64

    The "second leg" of Marshall's career begun in '86/87, when Holding and Garner quickly waned and were gone. In the 36 matches comprising it, he picked-up 161 wickets in 36 matches at 20.10. His support acts here were the likes of Tony Gray, Patterson, Walsh, Bishop, Ambrose and Winston Benjamin. None too shabby by any stretch of the imagination, but somehow not quite to my mind in the Holding and Garner league - with the exception of the injury-plagued Bishop and, eventually (but not straight away, and not until Marshall's career was almost over) Ambrose.
    i challenge anyone to name a better attack

  2. #152
    International Captain LongHopCassidy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Nursing a broken ****ing arm
    Posts
    5,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Rant0r View Post
    i challenge anyone to name a better attack
    Charizard's Fire Blast against a Venusaur, for mine.
    "The Australian cricket captain is the Prime Minister Australia wishes it had. Steve Waugh is that man, Michael Clarke is not." - Jarrod Kimber

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi and Craig Walsh - true icons of CricketWeb.

  3. #153
    International Vice-Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Rant0r View Post
    i challenge anyone to name a better attack
    well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

    but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

    mcgrath
    gillespie
    lee
    warne

    akram
    younis
    akhthar
    saqlain

  4. #154
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    akram
    younis
    akhthar
    saqlain
    This attack played together in 2 games and didnt win either (1 of which was agianst Zim).

    IMO, neither the Pak attack or the Aus attack quite compares
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net


  5. #155
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

    but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

    mcgrath
    gillespie
    lee
    warne
    Not a chance. Lee only became a good bowler after McGrath, Gillespie and Warne were no more in Test cricket.

    Well, there was 2000/01, but again the attack played together once in that time, IIRR. Lee debuted in 1999/2000, a season which Gillespie missed entirely due to injury - though he was replaced by Damien Fleming who though he didn't have a long career was IMO every bit as good as Gillespie when he did play - but this was smack in the middle of Warne's 3-year down period where he wasn't all that good. No attack between March 1998 and March 2001 can be considered for mine, as a Warne at the top of his game is absolutely essential.

    The best Australian attack fielded in the last 19 years was, without question for me, the one which played most of the calendar-year 2004 - McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Warne. This attack conquered Australia's most difficult frontiers (SL and Ind), and was peerless at home - hardly anyone scored a run against them other than on a rank featherbed at Cairns, and that too just Marvan Atapattu and Mahela Jayawardene, two excellent technicians.

    At no other point was there an attack filled with four bowlers, all of whom had proven their excellence beforehand and all of whom were not either out-of-form at the time or constantly missing with injury.

    However, does McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Warne of 2004 compare to Roberts, Holding, Garner, Marshall of 1983? Not a chance, IMO. For quality, just, just maybe. For intimidation? No chance.
    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

  6. #156
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    This attack played together in 2 games and didnt win either (1 of which was agianst Zim).

    IMO, neither the Pak attack or the Aus attack quite compares
    TBF, Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall played just twice as a first-choice, against India in 1983 (IIRR, they won both games - they certainly didn't lose either). I don't give the Pakistan attack any great consideration as it played together at a time when Waqar was past his best and Shoaib, well, you can never truly know what's going to turn-up with him.

    However, the sad truth is that the best WI attack of all played together only very, very briefly. Marshall only became a first-choice in 1983 (he'd played the odd game as a replacement between 1980 and 1983 and had lined-up alongside Roberts, Holding and Garner on 1 or 2 occasions) and Roberts retired 2 series after Marshall replaced Croft. Garner played just the first 2 of the 11 games of these 2 series', picking-up a serious injury.

    The attack that had a long stint as West Indies' first-choice was Roberts, Holding, Garner, Croft. Even that didn't play together a massive number of times due to various absences. And Croft was arguably a lesser bowler than a man ignored throughout this time - Wayne Daniel.

    As well as these two attacks, there was also Marshall, Holding, Garner, Walsh (which played together in Australia in 1984/85) and Marshall, Holding, Garner, Patterson (which wiped England off the Caribbean in 1986 in the last act of West Indian dominance and the start of the most wretched period in England Test history).

    Either of these has a fair case, based purely on the brevity of Roberts-Holding-Garner-Marshall, to be the finest attack West Indies briefly fielded.

    At most other times there was a weak-link, be it Winston Davis, Milton Small or Eldine Baptiste. And Holding and Garner were essentially finished after '86 (I think they each played a further 2 games), Patterson never again attained the heights of his debut series, and Ambrose (debuting in '88) took time to become the bowler he would be later.

    Had Marshall, Bishop, Ambrose, Walsh ever played together around about 1990 or 1991, that too might have something of a case.

  7. #157
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Wellington, NZ
    Posts
    1,633
    Two other attacks from the earlier days of test cricket that one could mention as being close to the Windies in the 1980's

    Australia 1948

    Lindwall
    Miller
    Johnston
    Toshack
    Johnson
    Loxton

    England - Mid 1950's

    Trueman
    Statham
    Tyson
    Laker
    Bailey

  8. #158
    Cricketer Of The Year Anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    well, i think roberts, marshall, holding and garner combo is genuinely intimidating.

    but these attacks are also comparable i feel.

    mcgrath
    gillespie
    lee
    warne

    akram
    younis
    akhthar
    saqlain
    neither of them are good enough, lee and gillespie bring down the quality of the aussie attack and akhtar and saqlain does the same for the pakistanis...the quality being referred to is comparative of course...

  9. #159
    International Vice-Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,872
    inthe 88-89 home series against india the west indies fielded, IIRC, marshall, ambrose, walsh, and, the debutante, bishop. i thought ravi shastri's 108 against this attack in barbados was one of the best centuries by an indian for the sheer quality of fast bowling he had to deal with on the fastest wicket in the carribbean

  10. #160
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,690
    In 1976 when the West Indies first decided on the four man pace attack they had a debate about it on TMS and Trevor Bailey reckoned that the most potentially lethal was Lillee, Thomson, Walker and Gilmour. In his defence, at the time Holding was still very young, Daniel still quite raw and Holder not really express pace and it wasn't known how long Jeff Thomson would keep up his form of the previous two years or how Gilmour was going to develope.

  11. #161
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by bagapath View Post
    inthe 88-89 home series against india the west indies fielded, IIRC, marshall, ambrose, walsh, and, the debutante, bishop. i thought ravi shastri's 108 against this attack in barbados was one of the best centuries by an indian for the sheer quality of fast bowling he had to deal with on the fastest wicket in the carribbean
    They did, not sure how I forgot that. However, it should be remembered that Ambrose was not the bowler he would become at that point (averaged 55 in that series) and so the attack wasn't, quite, what it seemed.

    Ambrose only became the Ambrose we knew him as in 1990.

  12. #162
    International Vice-Captain bagapath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Anil View Post
    neither of them are good enough, lee and gillespie bring down the quality of the aussie attack and akhtar and saqlain does the same for the pakistanis...the quality being referred to is comparative of course...
    mcgrath, warne, gillespie and lee's record. looks very impressive to me...

    Australia 2001-2005 16 10 2 0 4

  13. #163
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Lee's record 2001-2005:
    31 matches, 105 wickets, average 39.40, economy-rate 3.86-an-over, strike-rate 61.1.

    Just because McGrath, Gillespie and Warne may have covered for his uselessness, doesn't mean the attack was a four-prong one of excellence. It had three excellent bowlers and one very poor one.

  14. #164
    Cricketer Of The Year The Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,512
    As an Aussie I grew up with the “DK Lillee is the best ever” mentality and even at my ripe old age now I think he’s got an argument to be considered as such. But that being said, I personally believe that at his peak, for 5-6 years circa 1983-1989, Malcolm Marshall was the greatest fast bowler the game has ever seen. He had electric pace, lethal bounce, movement in the air and off the pitch and could bowl anything…and on top of it all, he had the mind of a wily old spinner – he was forever thinking and analysing and probing.

    When the greatest West Indian cricketers after Sobers are acknowledged, it invariably seems to be the batsmen who are positioned next in line, be it Richards, Headley, Lara or the Ws. In my opinion, Marshall has as strong a case as any of them to be considered Sir Garfield’s proxima accessit.

    Barnes by all accounts must have been a magnificent bowler, whether judged on his figures – which, even when factoring in his freakish performances against South Africa – were superb, or even moreso on his reputation among his contemporaries. I don’t think I’ve ever read or heard of someone who played with or against Barney, or even who observed him at close quarters, who doesn’t consider him the very best they ever saw.

    A coat of varnish between the two of them, but I’ve personally got Macko ever so slightly ahead. He ranks in my personal top 10 cricketers of all time, whereas Barney just misses out coming in at number 11.
    Member of the Twenty20 is Boring Society

    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    C'mon Man U.
    RIP Craigos

  15. #165
    International 12th Man Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by The Sean View Post
    As an Aussie I grew up with the “DK Lillee is the best ever” mentality and even at my ripe old age now I think he’s got an argument to be considered as such. But that being said, I personally believe that at his peak, for 5-6 years circa 1983-1989, Malcolm Marshall was the greatest fast bowler the game has ever seen. He had electric pace, lethal bounce, movement in the air and off the pitch and could bowl anything…and on top of it all, he had the mind of a wily old spinner – he was forever thinking and analysing and probing.

    When the greatest West Indian cricketers after Sobers are acknowledged, it invariably seems to be the batsmen who are positioned next in line, be it Richards, Headley, Lara or the Ws. In my opinion, Marshall has as strong a case as any of them to be considered Sir Garfield’s proxima accessit.

    Barnes by all accounts must have been a magnificent bowler, whether judged on his figures – which, even when factoring in his freakish performances against South Africa – were superb, or even moreso on his reputation among his contemporaries. I don’t think I’ve ever read or heard of someone who played with or against Barney, or even who observed him at close quarters, who doesn’t consider him the very best they ever saw.

    A coat of varnish between the two of them, but I’ve personally got Macko ever so slightly ahead. He ranks in my personal top 10 cricketers of all time, whereas Barney just misses out coming in at number 11.
    I wholeheartedly agree with ur above assessment of MM. MM>Lara, IVAR et al among West Indian cricketers.
    Cause Slifer said so.........!!!!

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. HJ Marshall
    By abu in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-11-2006, 08:48 PM
  2. Is it time for Malcolm Speed to go ?
    By JASON in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 26-08-2006, 11:45 PM
  3. the better bowler Malcolm Marshall or Dennis Lillee
    By aussie in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 214
    Last Post: 04-08-2006, 04:09 AM
  4. Malcolm Nash
    By cricket player in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-06-2005, 08:07 AM

Posting Permissions

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