CMJ's top 100

[Richard]

I'm trying to remember (and can't off the top of my head) how many Tests Marshall played at The ARG, which was 1986 or 2006 the flattest deck in World cricket.

 

[Slifer]

If you're comparing to McGrath, just take the minnows out of his stats. It doesn't make any difference.

Sure, Marshall played on flat ones too, just like Hayden played on seamers, but not to the same extent McGrath did. Nowhere near it in fact. Wasim Akram is another fast bowler who did remarkably well considering he played so much of his cricket in the subcontinent.

Yes but Mcgrath doesnt have the infallible record Marshall does (flat wicket or not) and Marshall showed that he could have success in all conditions against all comers. In 81 tests he took 22 freakin 5 fors (considering the competition he had for wickets) that is amazing tbh. Its not a run away by ne means but he'd get the edge over Mcgrath for mine

 

[cowboy up]

That's because he was a finger spinner.

how did you make that assessment? im pretty sure his 700 plus wickets came from wrist spin

 

[Manee]

Yes but Mcgrath doesnt have the infallible record Marshall does (flat wicket or not) and Marshall showed that he could have success in all conditions against all comers. In 81 tests he took 22 freakin 5 fors (considering the competition he had for wickets) that is amazing tbh. Its not a run away by ne means but he'd get the edge over Mcgrath for mine

AWTA.

how did you make that assessment? im pretty sure his 700 plus wickets came from wrist spin

Precam!

 

[Richard]

Certainly an exceedingly odd post.

 

[Uppercut]

Yes but Mcgrath doesnt have the infallible record Marshall does (flat wicket or not) and Marshall showed that he could have success in all conditions against all comers. In 81 tests he took 22 freakin 5 fors (considering the competition he had for wickets) that is amazing tbh. Its not a run away by ne means but he'd get the edge over Mcgrath for mine

As I've said before, I agree with your conclusion. I'd pick Marshall over McGrath too. But there's no doubting that McGrath played on a greater proportion of flat pitches.

I'm only making a point about the general attitude towards this era as opposed to previous ones. Runs scored nowadays seemingly only count half, but wickets don't count double.

 

[Slifer]

Well im certainly not one of those persons. I definitely rate players like: Kallis, Ponting, Dravid because when the greats were around they did show the mettle that they could score runs against them. TBH i think people (my self sometimes) rate Lara and SRT of the 90s too highly esp when one considers that they had their own struggles against the better fast bowlers of the 90s.

 

[Slifer]

I'm trying to remember (and can't off the top of my head) how many Tests Marshall played at The ARG, which was 1986 or 2006 the flattest deck in World cricket.

To answer ur query:

4 tests 19 wickets @ 23.05 SR 49.3 Econ 2.8

2 vs Australia and 1 each vs Eng and Ind

 

[oitoitoi]

TBH i think people (my self sometimes) rate Lara and SRT of the 90s too highly esp when one considers that they had their own struggles against the better fast bowlers of the 90s.

Please elaborate.

 

[Slifer]

Both players came up short (average wise) against the likes of Donald and co and the two Ws. Lara for example averaged something like 32 and 35 against Pakistan and RSA respectively b4 these 2 attacks wained (and pitches flattened out) around 2001. SRT had similar numbers against both teams. I can elaborate further and will

 

[cs41hk]

My all time best XI:

Sir Don Bradman
Sachin Tendulkar
Sir Viv Richards
Brian Lara
Sir Gary Sobers
Imran Khan
Adam Gilchrist
Wasim Akram
Shane Warne
Malcolm Marshall
Muttiah Muralitharan

I can't see the above team on their prime would get beaten by any one!!!