The better CRICKETER Wasim or McGrath

[smash84]

This thread has been inspired by another poll which asked the better bowler of the two.

However if we tweak the question a little bit it becomes somewhat more difficult to answer.

Who do you think was the better cricketer overall given that Wasim was a handy bat and a good fielder. McGrath of course the ultimate bowling machine.

So who would you like to have in your team and why?

 

[Cevno]

Wasim ,if you include their batting too.

Because a Left handed fast bowler would give my team something different too as their have been very few great left arm bowlers in history.

 

[smash84]

yes but a left handed fast bowler isn't better than a right arm fast bowler. Just gives you variety. The right hander gets you wickets cheaper and more often

 

[benchmark00]

Moot point, because you wouldn't need Wasim's batting in an All Time XI, but you'd be more likely to need McGrath's bowling.

 

[Cevno]

yes but a left handed fast bowler isn't better than a right arm fast bowler. Just gives you variety. The right hander gets you wickets cheaper and more often

But you said who would you take in your team.

Because if i was picking a 11 then finding more right handed bowlers similar to Mcgrath's quality is easier than finding a left handed bowlers of similar quality to Wasim.

 

[Noble One]

I would expect to win more games with McGrath in my team than Wasim.

Simple criteria, but I needed to dumb it down as both are brilliant cricketers.

 

[Uppercut]

Moot point, because you wouldn't need Wasim's batting in an All Time XI, but you'd be more likely to need McGrath's bowling.

Who said anything about an All Time XI...?

 

[vcs]

In general, I would say "Top 5 All-Time Specialist" > "Merely ATG all-rounder". However, that is from the point of view of picking an All-Time XI. For a run-of-the-mill side, one would probably take Wasim over McGrath, just as one might take Kallis over Richards in that scenario.

Went for McGrath though.

 

[weldone]

The point about left-arm fast bowler is not irrelevant at all. It adds almost as much variety to the attack as does the addition of a spin bowler, for instance.

However, this is a very close call. Can go either way, McGrath is slightly ahead as a bowler, though Wasim adds variety to the bowling. Wasim is the better batsman too. This is almost like comparing Warne to Donald for me. While I personally rate Donald slightly ahead as a bowler alone, Warne's batting and fielding makes him a better cricketer for me. Plus Warne's addition means more variety to the bowling attack.

So, I shall go with Wasim here, but just by an inch.

 

[benchmark00]

Who said anything about an All Time XI...?

I knew someone would say this, and I knew it'd be either you or Richard or some other such person, but - because, shock horror, cricket is not played in a vacuum and not played on cricinfo and is a team sport it becomes relevant.

 

[Uppercut]

You just spouted some totally irrelevant truisms that I never denied, then tied them to the notion of an All-Time XI.

 

[Howe_zat]

Er... so why is it a problem to ask why you went straight to the All-time XI? The thread doesn't specify which team.

 

[Jarquis]

Moot point, because you wouldn't need Wasim's batting in an All Time XI, but you'd be more likely to need McGrath's bowling.

Ok, so I'll make the point that Prince EWS often does. If we were picking an AT XI it'd be to take on a team of comparable strength or what have you so why wouldn't you need Wasim's batting?

 

[Uppercut]

Or to make the better point PEWS often does, it wasn't Wasim's place to become the player that would do the most for a theoretical World XI- his job was to become the player that would do the most for Pakistan. So we should judge him on how well he did that.

 

[benchmark00]

You just spouted some totally irrelevant truisms that I never denied, then tied them to the notion of an All-Time XI.

Er... so why is it a problem to ask why you went straight to the All-time XI? The thread doesn't specify which team.

Because I have absolutely no desire, nor see the point of doing so, to rate player x vs player z in total isolation considering a game of cricket is played between 11 vs 11, never ever has there been a 1v1 contest televised on television or for a trophy of any merit. I choose to deal in relevancies, not something that would never ever be relevant.

Ok, so I'll make the point that Prince EWS often does. If we were picking an AT XI it'd be to take on a team of comparable strength or what have you so why wouldn't you need Wasim's batting?

Because ATXI 1 would have the 6 or so best batsmen ever assembled, and would be batting against a bowling line up consisting of probably the 5th-8th best bowlers, whilst their batsmen (presumable 7-12th best of all time) would be up against the 1st-4th best bowlers of all time. Having someone who averages around low 20's (just a guess, cbf looking up Wasim's stats) in at 8 would have minimal effect given the obvious strength of numbers 1-7.

 

[Uppercut]

But why an All Time XI? Why not just Pakistan and Australia respectively?

 

[weldone]

So, now we not only have a theoretical All-Time XI, but also a theoretical match-up between a First All-Time XI and a Second All-Time XI.

 

[benchmark00]

But why an All Time XI? Why not just Pakistan and Australia respectively?

Errr because the OP said which would I want in my team...

If I'm creating a team It's unlikely I'll have every one of the XI which played for Australia during McGrath's time....

 

[benchmark00]

So, now we not only have a theoretical All-Time XI, but also a theoretical match-up between a First All-Time XI and a Second All-Time XI.

How else would an all time XI play a team close to it's ability like marcuss suggested??

 

[Jarquis]

Because ATXI 1 would have the 6 or so best batsmen ever assembled, and would be batting against a bowling line up consisting of probably the 5th-8th best bowlers, whilst their batsmen (presumable 7-12th best of all time) would be up against the 1st-4th best bowlers of all time. Having someone who averages around low 20's (just a guess, cbf looking up Wasim's stats) in at 8 would have minimal effect given the obvious strength of numbers 1-7.

Who said that the AT XI would be picked to play against the AT 2ndXI though?
I think the metaphor Prince EWS uses would be if they were to play against a team of hypothetical aliens who had a batsman just as great as Bradman etc. Bowlers better than Marshall. Surely the extra runs matter then?