Harbhajan vs MacGill

[stephen]

Who was the better bowler?

Harbhajan or MacGill.

Harbhajan has the advantage of playing on turning tracks in India, but was really the second picked spinner for most of his career so far. MacGill played most of his cricket in Australia and also was the second picked spinner for most of his career (though for balance reasons he was not picked as often as Harbhajan has been).

Here are career stats:

 		Mat  	Inns  	Balls  	Runs  	Wkts  	BBI  	BBM  	Ave  	Econ  	SR  	4w  	5w  	10
Harbhajan 	75 	139 	20885 	9818 	321 	8/84 	15/217 	30.58 	2.82 	65.0 	10 	23 	5
MacGill  	44  	85  	11237  	6038  	208  	8/108  	12/107  29.02  	3.22  	54.0  	9  	12  	2

Obviously Harbhajan has played a lot more than Macgill and still has much of his career to come, but MacGill played on far worse tracks and was only not picked because Australia did not need a second spinner most of the time.

So who was better?

[Daryl Harper]

Macgill

[stephen]

Why?

[Jono]

At his best, MacGill was the better bowler.

However at his worst, MacGill was the worse bowler.

Its an interesting one. Despite being one of the biggest dicks in cricket, Harbhajan is a little better than people on this forum give him credit for. But so is MacGill.

I'd say MacGill, simply because he played in less favourable conditions for more of his career (even including the fact he was often chosen specifically for Sydney).

[Maximus0723]

McGill.

[Anil]

macgill...

[G.I.Joe]

McGrath.

[Migara]

but MacGill played on far worse tracks

When Warne was around MacGill played

1. if the track was turning
2. The oppositions are rabbits against spin

Harbhajan did not have the above factors for him all the time.

Harbhajan on the role is like Akthar on a role, able to blast any lineup in to shreads.

Harbhajan for me, because he's a better bowler to better players of spin.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Migara

When Warne was around MacGill played

1. if the track was turning
2. The oppositions are rabbits against spin

Harbhajan did not have the above factors for him all the time.

Harbhajan on the role is like Akthar on a role, able to blast any lineup in to shreads.

Harbhajan for me, because he's a better bowler to better players of spin.

Number 2 is not a real variable. Number 1 is. But MacGill bowled better than Warne at times, so that's hardly saying anything. And Harbhajan bowled a lot on pitches that suited spin - i.e. at home.

I would agree that the distance isn't as big as it seems, but I'd bet Macgill to be far more better away. Macgill also missed out in bowling in his prime. Harbhajan's gone out and had the better career, but I don't think that makes him better than Macgill in terms of ability.

[SJS]

Come on guys we have to root for SS. Lets have one of our guys show 'em !

[PhoenixFire]

Can't remember seeing a better spinning performance than that of Harbhajan in the 2001 India v Aus series TBH, I'll go with him.

[Julian87]

MacGill. Not only a better bowler, but better batsman under pressure too.

[silentstriker]

Well, I don't bowl spin so that automatically makes me the best bowler out of the three.

[haroon510]

MacGil.. he didn't play much but everytime he played and even when Warne was playing.. he played well

[Salamuddin]

Originally Posted by Ikki

Number 2 is not a real variable. Number 1 is. But MacGill bowled better than Warne at times, so that's hardly saying anything. And Harbhajan bowled a lot on pitches that suited spin - i.e. at home.

I would agree that the distance isn't as big as it seems, but I'd bet Macgill to be far more better away. Macgill also missed out in bowling in his prime. Harbhajan's gone out and had the better career, but I don't think that makes him better than Macgill in terms of ability.

Interesting though Macgill doesn't have a particularly good record away from home though.....his average is boosted a lot by figures against Bangladesh.
Macgill also never played in India and given the pasting he got from the Indians in 2003/204 I think its safe to say had he done so, the end result would not have been pretty for him.


Harbhajan has his limitations but he's played in pretty much every country - don't think there's much about him that's yet to be discovered.
And barring Pakistan, he's had decent performances (home or away) against every other major test playing nation.
Macgill's overall record still has too many question marks over it - the only teams Macgill has an excellent record against are Pakistan, Bangers and England.
And neither Pakistan nor England were regarded as particularly adept at playing leg spin.