Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 129

Thread: Waqar Younis vs. Glenn McGrath vs. Shoaib Akhtar

  1. #91
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Still no answer as to why McGrath isn't afforded extra credit for bowling on unhelpful home decks.
    AUS decks during McGrath although pitches in AUS did get flatter - wasn't unhelpul @ all gorunds all the time

    - Basically every Brisbane test during McGrath peak (97-2006) had assitance for the bowlers for example.

    - While the likes of MCG, SCG, Perth, Hobart fluctuated every season between being flat & bowler friendly.

    - Only adelaide was always a batting beauty (unhelpul). But of course McGrath given he could reverse the ball on flat surfaces still manged to be effective there.

  2. #92
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    Here's a couple, not exhaustive though;

    Chris Rogers, never selected again.
    Greg Blewett, dropped pretty much because Hayden is a bigger hitter.
    Martin Love.

    - Rogers one test pefromace hardly proved anything. Based on what i've seen of him in county cricket, he certainly would open in tests for a few other sides in WC with ease (ENG, WI, NZ, SRI, PAK), even though he aint a big hitting type opener. He could very well @ still play for AUS again @ 35+ & have a good few years like Katich has currently, if he keeps up his FC performances in ENG & AUS.

    - Blewett was dropped more because he was technically exposed & drop him. Lets not forget Blewettt is a 90s baby & as i recall after his 214 vs SA @ Jo'Burg 97, he regularly looked troubled by quality new-ball/pace bowling, whether he was opening or batting in the middle-order. He just wasn't that good @ test level after his good start.

    - Love was just unlucky. Him not being a big/hitter doesn't change that he was a very good palyer. Made his debut as you should recall @ MCG 02 was Lehmann's injury replacement & contiuned to look good vs WI @ Antigua & vs BANG. Its just that come the 03/04 summer Martyn returned & Katich was stepping - he lost his place due to superior competition around. Would have played for & done well for a few other test teams @ his peak IMO. Love's stituation is very similar to Stuart Law.


    Their is no example of big hitting opener/batsman dominating a quality pace attack in bowler friendly conditons in big/hitting mode really in the 2000s. What we had is most FTBs struggling in such conditons (they few times it arised) - then going back to being gods on roads.

    They only player who adjusted his game as i said before was Hayden from the Oval test & vs SA 05/06 & IND 07/08. He certainly played those innings more circumspectly compared this bullymode days of Mumbai 01 to Cairns 04.

  3. #93
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson View Post
    The post of mine which you quoted and then wrote the above was in reply to the question of what is wrong with batsman's technique today to suggest that they'd have struggled in the 80's or 90's, and the answer is quite clear in that the technique of many of the prolific batsman of today are found out in less than perfect conditions.
    I don't particularly disagree that some would have adapted to a different era had they played in it. But that's all conjecture, whereas the flaws in their technique isn't.
    Exactly.


    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut
    They aren't flaws, though. They're differences that make them better at scoring runs today but worse at scoring runs should they ever decide to jump in a time machine.


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79
    This. People progress by demonstrating the skills that are most useful for the circumstances they are normally confronted with. In these days of five day pitches and batsman-weighted conditions, the batsmen that prosper are the formula one cars. When the odd rally stage comes up, of course they look all at sea. The same is true in reverse. You take any of the old-time players who we revere for their perfect techniques and drop them into today's game, they'd get pillorised for being stodgy and hurting the teams scoring rate. Times change, the game changes.
    Totally DWTA TBF.

    Firslty from you start talking about non-existant things like "time machines" haa to defend modern day FTBs, you are going to far & it is anothe one of the age old defenses used on CW. Although an educated assumption, you can judge whether batsman X of this FTB era would have been able to average Y (whether higher or lower) in the 90s. Based on the few on 90s like scenario's (difficult batting conditions vs top quality pacers) that batsman X would have encountered in this just 2000s era.

    If batsman X does well in those 90s like scenario just has well as the amount runs he would smoke of the majority of flat decks & joke attacks that he would have faced in this 2000s. That is very fair guide IMO to how well batsman X would have done average wise in a past difficult batting era's vs quality pace attacks (50s - 80s as well as the 90s).


    Plus cricket has been of a very similar style & standard since the 1950s:

    - A regular diet of two of quality new-ball bowlers of the 80-90 mph vs openers in most teams

    - change in the lbw rule.

    - Introduction of helmets

    - elimination of timeless tests

    - 6 ball pers over in all natiosn except for AUS in the 60s & 70s

    - No uncovered wickets, except the last phase of it in England during the 60s.

    Has been very consistent in test cricket for more than 60 years now. So i'd say comparing players across era's in the last 60 years can be easily done. I can see no difference between comparing from the 1950s to 90s in terms of standard of cricket.

    You can't compare post-war (1900-1939) to (1950s-1990s). Given for example uncovered wickets where present & lack of much quality pace attacks for batsmen. But taking out the uncovered wickets part & timeless test of 1900-1939 to the 2000-2009 its comparable given the lack of quality bowling present & the flat pitches. So there is absolutely no reason to bring up talk of time-machines - just use scenarios players encountered as a guide.

    Their is a good chance too that using the evidence of 2010 to date, that this next decade of the 2000s (2010-2019) we could may be seeing a revival in quality pace attacks & testting 90s style conditions.

    - AUS have good fast bowling attacks that will be around the majority of this decade.

    - Steyn/Morkel just keep getting better & have good back-up potentially

    - England have good depth now & teams touring ENG will always be tested by seaming conditons

    - PAK have 4 strong seamers that will be around for a while, once something unsually crazy doesn't happen again.

    - WI possibly could have Taylor/Roach/Edwards together @ some point.

    - Just SRI, NZ, IND look a bit behind in pace depth department. But even in helpul conditions those pace attacks could be dangerous.

    But this will be clearly wayyyyy above what batsmen encountered between 2000-2009 without a doubt.


    Finally for the myth notion of:

    Quote Originally Posted by quote
    In these days of five day pitches and batsman-weighted conditions, the batsmen that prosper are the formula one cars. When the odd rally stage comes up, of course they look all at sea
    That isn't true for the few great batsmen of the 2000s era like your Ponting & Dravid. Who as i mentioned earlier:

    Quote Originally Posted by me
    This wasn't the case with the likes of Ponting & Dravid for eg during the 2000s era @ their peak. They would dominate good or joke attacks on roads just like other average batsmen for years - but when the bowling & conditons got tough - they adjusted & stepped up accordingly. While other average batsmen (whose records where inflated by runs againts joke attacks on roads) would struggle.
    Old timers like a Boycott, Gavaskar, Barrington who would be stodgers in certainly would not be critiqued at least by me for being slow scorers of flat decks oif the 2000s - especially when i know they would still score runs just as easily & better than many other recent players, who would just fail when they end facing tough conditions. Dravid plays like those blokes, has anyone every critqued his style for affecting INDs scoring rate etc?. Not to my knowledge (at least not any legitmate criticism)


    There should be seperate thread on CW about this topic i think like the Murali vs Warne theread. Since there is no middle middle ground in this argument anymore. For every 20 posters who criticize FTBs accordingly - their is another 20 that defend using the same argument & every other thread this argument just keeps going around in circles.
    Last edited by aussie; 24-08-2010 at 05:43 PM.

  4. #94
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The great state of New South Wales
    Posts
    43,325
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    There should be seperate thread on CW about this topic i think like the Murali vs Warne theread. Since there is no middle middle ground in this argument anymore. For every 20 posters who criticize FTBs accordingly - their is another 20 that defend using the same argument & every other thread this argument just keeps going around in cricles.
    I nominate this one. Not just because I started it () but because it was actually supposed to be about this topic and didn't just descend into it.
    ~ Cribbage


  5. #95
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    I nominate this one. Not just because I started it () but because it was actually supposed to be about this topic and didn't just descend into it.
    Yea i remember that & IIRC you establised a theory to defend modernd FTBs. Which died out because people like myself & others who are fundamentally on the opposite side of the argument. Just ran into idelogical gridlock over the matter, so i dont know..

  6. #96
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,733
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    AUS decks during McGrath although pitches in AUS did get flatter - wasn't unhelpul @ all gorunds all the time

    - Basically every Brisbane test during McGrath peak (97-2006) had assitance for the bowlers for example.

    - While the likes of MCG, SCG, Perth, Hobart fluctuated every season between being flat & bowler friendly.

    - Only adelaide was always a batting beauty (unhelpul). But of course McGrath given he could reverse the ball on flat surfaces still manged to be effective there.
    McGrath (and Warne incidentally) bowled better away from home than they did in Australia, so the unhelpful home pitches argument carries a lot more weight for McGrath than it does for Wasim, Waqar or Imran. Yet no-one uses the argument as an excuse to elevate McGrath's achievements.

  7. #97
    State Vice-Captain Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,299
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    McGrath (and Warne incidentally) bowled better away from home than they did in Australia, so the unhelpful home pitches argument carries a lot more weight for McGrath than it does for Wasim, Waqar or Imran. Yet no-one uses the argument as an excuse to elevate McGrath's achievements.
    I was always kinda sad that no home-town pitches were prepared for McGrath. Always wondered how he would go if a series at home was played on green seamers.

  8. #98
    International Debutant Black_Warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    TEF
    Posts
    2,637
    LOL @ McGrath's 'unhelpful' pitches at home

  9. #99
    International Captain weldone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kolkata --> Mumbai, India
    Posts
    5,955
    Overall, McGrath>Waqar>>Shoaib

    Peaks? I don't care. Because at their peaks, Mendis>Murali and Hussey>Sachin. Depends on how you define a peak.

    Disclaimer: I think Waqar had the potential to be the best fast bowler in the history of test cricket by a comfortable margin, period.
    "I want to raise my hand and say one thing. Those who complain about my love for the game or commitment to the game are clueless. These are the only 2 areas where I give myself 100 out of 100."
    - Sachin Tendulkar, as told in an interview published in Bengali newspaper Anandabazar Patrika after his 100th International century (translated by weldone)

  10. #100
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Black_Warrior View Post
    LOL @ McGrath's 'unhelpful' pitches at home
    McGrath bowled worse in Australia than he did outside Australia.

    Australian pitches might not have been a massive hindrance, but they weren't as helpful as the pitches he played on abroad.

    Imran, Kapil, Wasim and Waqar always get the "remember they had to bowl a lot on dead home wickets" excuse, despite the fact that all of them bowled better at home than they did abroad.

  11. #101
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,458
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    McGrath bowled worse in Australia than he did outside Australia.

    Australian pitches might not have been a massive hindrance, but they weren't as helpful as the pitches he played on abroad.

    Imran, Kapil, Wasim and Waqar always get the "remember they had to bowl a lot on dead home wickets" excuse, despite the fact that all of them bowled better at home than they did abroad.
    Yeah. The idea of "good" and "bad" pitches for bowling on obviously isn't entirely untrue, but it's an oversimplification. Certain bowlers prefer certain conditions. For Waqar that might mean an abrasive, dry pitch that will aid reverse swing soon in the innings. For McGrath it might mean decent bounce and that little bit of seam movement only he can extract. It's even more notable with it comes to spinners. Harbhajan Singh and Shane Warne generally excelled on diametrically opposite pitches.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  12. #102
    International Coach tooextracool's Avatar
    Dick Quicks Island Adventure Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    not far away from you
    Posts
    14,308
    Yep Johnson doing well at home and struggling away is a classic example. Hes more suited to the conditions at home and batsmen are less used to playing his style of bowling in Australia.

    Not that it means that he isnt garbage though.
    Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
    Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
    Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!

  13. #103
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by weldone View Post
    Overall, McGrath>Waqar>>Shoaib

    Peaks? I don't care. Because at their peaks, Mendis>Murali and Hussey>Sachin. Depends on how you define a peak.

    Disclaimer: I think Waqar had the potential to be the best fast bowler in the history of test cricket by a comfortable margin, period.
    Do you think he ever showed this level of ability (which would make him the greatest pace bowler of all-time)? If so, which year was it in? When I'm talking about peak, I mean the best 1-2 years of a player's career - for instance, as long as McGrath's peak was, he was really at his best in 2000.

    More importantly, what kind of stats do you think Waqar could have had? Total wickets, wickets per match, Bowling Average, Strike Rate and Economy Rate? I sincerely doubt his Economy Rate could have been superior to McGrath - his best Economy Rate in a year (and when I say peak, I mean 1-2 years) was 1990 when it was 2.63 (although his peak Strike Rate, in 1993, is simply sensational - 29.5 - this might well be the lowest Strike Rate of all-time for a one-year period in the modern era). On the other hand, McGrath spent 10 years with a lower Economy Rate than that.
    Last edited by GameGod; 25-08-2010 at 12:26 PM.

  14. #104
    International Captain weldone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kolkata --> Mumbai, India
    Posts
    5,955
    Quote Originally Posted by GameGod View Post
    Do you think he ever showed this level of ability (which would make him the greatest pace bowler of all-time)? If so, which year was it in? When I'm talking about peak, I mean the best 1-2 years of a player's career - for instance, as long as McGrath's peak was, he was really at his best in 2000.

    More importantly, what kind of stats do you think Waqar could have had? Total wickets, wickets per match, Bowling Average, Strike Rate and Economy Rate? I sincerely doubt his Economy Rate could have been superior to McGrath - his best Economy Rate in a year (and when I say peak, I mean 1-2 years) was 1990 when it was 2.63 (although his peak Strike Rate, in 1993, is simply sensational - 29.5 - this might well be the lowest Strike Rate of all-time for a one-year period in the modern era). On the other hand, McGrath spent 10 years with a lower Economy Rate than that.
    Here you go:
    1990: 49 wickets @ 17.04
    1991: 7 wickets @ 18.14
    1992: 13 wickets @ 22.87
    1993: 55 wickets @ 15.24
    1994: 42 wickets @ 21.29
    Total: 166 wickets @ 18.02

    More importantly, one had to see him bowl to get an idea how good he bowled. I clearly remember in those 5 years he had most of the wickets either clean bowled or plumb LBW in front of the wicket. I also remember he was a victim of quite a few missed chances by his teammates throughout his career as a bowler (so was Akram, too). Give me a bowler like Waqar 1990-94 in my team, and as a captain I would be anticipating a wicket every ball. Every time he turned at the top of his run-up there were adrenaline flowing all over in the stands and in front of the television sets. He could get you a wicket in the 2nd over with his fierce out- and in-swing, in the 20th over with his sheer pace and banana inswinging yorkers, and in the 30th over onwards with his lethal reverse swing. You could count on him to wash off the tails in no time. It's not a big deal that the best of batsmen feared him, the big deal is that they feared him always regardless of the match condition, pitch condition and ball condition. And his pace was not the main thing for which they feared him, though he was as fast as anybody in the world then.

    Well, if Waqar was not so injury-prone, if he wasn't a victim of the craziness of PCB and politics by...errr...a few of his teammates, if he had the 'mentality' (pardon me for using this word, I know this is not an appropriate word, but I couldn't find a better one...probably 'mcgrath-ish or tendulkar-ish mental stamina' would have been better) to continue to be at the top for as many years as he could and if Pakistan played as many tests as Australia then he would easily end up with more than 600 wickets @ 19 or so (chucked in some imaginary numbers only because you asked). And would surely be successful in all conditions and against all kinds of batsmen. You can easily gauge the no. of 5-fors and wickets per match he would have grossed then. As per strike rate and economy rate goes, as a statistician I regard those 2 stats as the 2 most useless in test match bowling. Still, you could easily gauge his SR in that case (given where it stands in reality). His ER wouldn't have been as good as McGrath's. Had he achieved all these his career spanning across the 90s and the early 2000s (yes, I quoted those figures keeping the quality of pitches and batsmen in mind), he would clearly have been the best fast bowler in history in my book...better than all of Hadlee, Marshall, Barnes, McGrath, Imran, Ambrose, Garner, Akram, Lillee, Lohmann, Holding, Trueman...and by a comfortable margin.

    Disclaimer: I don't consider Waqar to be one among the best 10 fast bowlers of all-time.
    Last edited by weldone; 25-08-2010 at 01:56 PM.

  15. #105
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    19,733
    Quote Originally Posted by GameGod View Post
    Do you think he ever showed this level of ability (which would make him the greatest pace bowler of all-time)? If so, which year was it in? When I'm talking about peak, I mean the best 1-2 years of a player's career - for instance, as long as McGrath's peak was, he was really at his best in 2000.

    More importantly, what kind of stats do you think Waqar could have had? Total wickets, wickets per match, Bowling Average, Strike Rate and Economy Rate? I sincerely doubt his Economy Rate could have been superior to McGrath - his best Economy Rate in a year (and when I say peak, I mean 1-2 years) was 1990 when it was 2.63 (although his peak Strike Rate, in 1993, is simply sensational - 29.5 - this might well be the lowest Strike Rate of all-time for a one-year period in the modern era). On the other hand, McGrath spent 10 years with a lower Economy Rate than that.
    Economy rate isn't particularly relevant when you take your wickets as quickly as Waqar (or Steyn.)

    It's a complete fallacy that a bowler with an economy rate of 2.1 and a SR of 60 is cheaper than a bowler with an economy rate of 3 and a SR of 42.

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Mystery Draft 3 - Global Premier League
    By Athlai in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 712
    Last Post: 19-04-2010, 02:06 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-03-2010, 09:30 AM
  3. Amazing Waqar Younis
    By Sanz in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 12-01-2010, 06:06 AM
  4. Mystery Draft V.2 (1989-2009)
    By Mupariwa_Magic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 492
    Last Post: 21-11-2009, 01:00 PM
  5. Northern Hemisphere Vs Southern
    By taitmachine in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-02-2008, 08:34 PM

Posting Permissions

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