Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 94
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: Ambrose or Mcgrath?

  1. #46
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,006
    Quote Originally Posted by akilana View Post
    Get used this kind of rubbish
    And besides your snide comments, how do you contribute to this forum.

    Not saying Hadlee was a poor bowler, not by any means. Just feel McGrath has the better record and was the better bowler.
    Aus. XI
    Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2


    W.I. XI
    Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4

    S.A. XI
    Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Waite+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

    Eng. XI
    Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3

  2. #47
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,392
    There's no way in hell I'm reading all that but I'm pretty sure I know what it says and we've had this debate many times before. I cbf so I'm going to condense this.

    -There is minimal difference in bowling quality between any of the names you wrote up there. I don't care what CW or cricinfo eleven you've listed, the decade of vs threads on here has only reinforced my impression no one can say for certain the exact rankings of the top 10-15 bowlers.
    -Some of the greatest bowlers ever can bat pretty well. Lower order batting almost always plays a role in real life cricket, so when picking teams for imaginary cricket if I can't separate two players on their primary skill I look at the batting/bowling and fielding. Warne easily makes my side because he can hold a bat and he can field at slip.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  3. #48
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    Warne easily makes my side because he can hold a bat and he can field at slip.
    I've always found it strange that this is such a sociably acceptable reason to include Warne over Murali even though he'd bat 9 or 10 and yet if people bring it up to justify Hadlee's inclusion over McGrath it's somehow ideologically reprehensible, despite the fact that the Hadlee-McGrath batting gap is much, much larger than the Warne-Murali batting gap.

    Just to clarify, I'm not intending to make this a Warne/Murali bowling debate and this is in no way actually aimed at people who think Warne is better than Murali on bowling alone as the double standard then no longer applies.
    smalishah84 and hendrix like this.
    ~ Cribbage ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009

  4. #49
    International Captain ankitj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hyderabad India
    Posts
    5,986
    Kyear has come around on some cricketers, but his posts on Hadlee continue to buy piss annoying. Hadlee has as complete a record as any. He did it with a very little support and for so long. He also had an insane period of sub 20 average period. What else must he do, I wonder.
    smalishah84 likes this.


  5. #50
    International Captain wellAlbidarned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    away from the palms
    Posts
    6,344
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    What else must he do, I wonder.
    be 5 inches taller/15kph quicker and not be from nz
    Exit pursuing a beer

  6. #51
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    There's no way in hell I'm reading all that but I'm pretty sure I know what it says and we've had this debate many times before. I cbf so I'm going to condense this.

    -There is minimal difference in bowling quality between any of the names you wrote up there. I don't care what CW or cricinfo eleven you've listed, the decade of vs threads on here has only reinforced my impression no one can say for certain the exact rankings of the top 10-15 bowlers.
    -Some of the greatest bowlers ever can bat pretty well. Lower order batting almost always plays a role in real life cricket, so when picking teams for imaginary cricket if I can't separate two players on their primary skill I look at the batting/bowling and fielding. Warne easily makes my side because he can hold a bat and he can field at slip.
    Good that you can comment on something you haven't read. There are 3 lines on Hadlee and they are in relation to that if you are selecting an AT XI, why would you not include who you believe is the best bowler to play the game. When you have Imran, Marshall and Warne then surely you can include who you believe to be the best bowler at # 11. You are not going to exclude Bradman or who ever you rate as the second best batsman or even Hobbs because the can't bowl or field in the slips. Should be an equal criteria for selection, and yes a compromise of some selection based on secondary skills, but not at every position and not in my opinion neccecary at No.11 or your top 4 batsmen.

  7. #52
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,006
    Quote Originally Posted by 8ankitj View Post
    Kyear has come around on some cricketers, but his posts on Hadlee continue to buy piss annoying. Hadlee has as complete a record as any. He did it with a very little support and for so long. He also had an insane period of sub 20 average period. What else must he do, I wonder.
    My opinion has come around on many cricketers including Hadlee and Pollock, I believe Hadlee is an amazing fast bowler, not top 5, but up there. I believe though that McGrath is the clear number 2 fast bowler and bowler to have played the game and I wouldn't exclude him from my team considering he is batting at No. 11 and not his primary responsibility to bat.
    So it's nothing to do with a disrespect for Hadlee, he was an ATG bowler, McGrath was just better IMHO and that is an opinion shared by many. There are some who think McGrath is the best period. If he is the best he should make the team.
    If I were to select a reserve opener, middle order bat, pacer, keeper and spinner for my first team to form a squad it would be Gavaskar (just over Barry Richards), Lara, Knott, Muralitharan and Hadlee (just over Lillee even though lillee's pace would be useful). So I don't think I under rate Hadlee.

  8. #53
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,638
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    Good that you can comment on something you haven't read. There are 3 lines on Hadlee and they are in relation to that if you are selecting an AT XI, why would you not include who you believe is the best bowler to play the game. When you have Imran, Marshall and Warne then surely you can include who you believe to be the best bowler at # 11. You are not going to exclude Bradman or who ever you rate as the second best batsman or even Hobbs because the can't bowl or field in the slips. Should be an equal criteria for selection, and yes a compromise of some selection based on secondary skills, but not at every position and not in my opinion neccecary at No.11 or your top 4 batsmen.
    But that is what PEWS pointed out earlier. You include Warne in your AT XI because you find it difficult to separate Murali and Warne in terms of bowling and hence defer to Warne's superior batting and slip fielding. It might be argued that the difference in bowling quality that between Warne and Murali is greater than there is between McGrath and Hadlee. While the difference in batting ability of Hadlee and McGrath is huge. Why then not pick Hadlee. You just seem to be using different criteria for different players then. Seems like an exercise to get in favorites rather than a genuine attempt to come up with an AT XI
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  9. #54
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,006
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post
    But that is what PEWS pointed out earlier. You include Warne in your AT XI because you find it difficult to separate Murali and Warne in terms of bowling and hence defer to Warne's superior batting and slip fielding. It might be argued that the difference in bowling quality that between Warne and Murali is greater than there is between McGrath and Hadlee. While the difference in batting ability of Hadlee and McGrath is huge. Why then not pick Hadlee. You just seem to be using different criteria for different players then. Seems like an exercise to get in favorites rather than a genuine attempt to come up with an AT XI
    I genuinely belive the difference in bowling difference between Murali and Warne is minimal at best and Warne may be the better bowler outside of the Sub Continent, hence the difference for choosing Warne over Murali comes down to his slip catching and batting (in that order). McGrath is for me clearly ahead of Hadlee as a bowler and hence no need for a tie breaker. I will select the better bowler. And Pidgeon is not a favorite of mine or Warne. Just simply the best fits for the team for myself and many others. What I am saying is not controversial in anyway.

    Additionall if Hadlee makes the team it's at the expense of Imran, not McGrath or Marshall. And Imran brings more to the table with his reverse swing and effectiveness in the sub continent. Out side of the SC though Paddles may make it over Imran. In no scenario though does their respective batting stats come into the decision.
    Last edited by kyear2; 29-09-2013 at 09:17 AM.

  10. #55
    International Regular OverratedSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Chennai, India
    Posts
    3,777
    Quote Originally Posted by kyear2 View Post
    My opinion has come around on many cricketers including Hadlee and Pollock, I believe Hadlee is an amazing fast bowler, not top 5, but up there. I believe though that McGrath is the clear number 2 fast bowler and bowler to have played the game and I wouldn't exclude him from my team considering he is batting at No. 11 and not his primary responsibility to bat.
    So it's nothing to do with a disrespect for Hadlee, he was an ATG bowler, McGrath was just better IMHO and that is an opinion shared by many. There are some who think McGrath is the best period. If he is the best he should make the team.
    If I were to select a reserve opener, middle order bat, pacer, keeper and spinner for my first team to form a squad it would be Gavaskar (just over Barry Richards), Lara, Knott, Muralitharan and Hadlee (just over Lillee even though lillee's pace would be useful). So I don't think I under rate Hadlee.
    Look this is not about disrespecting any cricketer. It's about backing up your opinions with reasons, otherwise it's just BS. You said that he believes McGrath is a better bowler than Hadlee... No problem with having that opinion... You also said you believe that Hadlee relied more on assistance from the pitch than McGrath did... No problems with having that opinion either. But you didn't say WHY... Without stating any reasons for stating that Hadlee was a bowler more reliant on assistance from pitches, other than "I believe so" the claim is completely empty and baseless, don't you think
    Last edited by OverratedSanity; 29-09-2013 at 10:53 AM.
    ankitj likes this.
    Proud member of the Indian STFU: Sane Tendulkar Fanboy Union.
    Our motto: Sachin WAG, Don>>>Sachin

  11. #56
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,006
    Quote Originally Posted by OverratedSanity View Post
    Look this is not about disrespecting any cricketer. It's about backing up your opinions with reasons, otherwise it's just BS. You said that he believes McGrath is a better bowler than Hadlee... No problem with having that opinion... You also said you believe that Hadlee relied more on assistance from the pitch than McGrath did... No problems with having that opinion either. But you didn't say WHY... Without stating any reasons for stating that Hadlee was a bowler more reliant on assistance from pitches, other than "I believe so" the claim is completely empty and baseless, don't you think
    I made a post of more that 30 lines, yet the fixation is on two of them that included Hadlee. If the entire post was read it explains why I rate McGrath higher than anyone bar Marshall and why I like the attacks that were mentioned.

    The peer and historical consensus was that the best bowler of the '70's was Lillee, the best bowler of the '80's was Marshall the 90's was more split with Ambrose and McGrath getting the nod for many along with Warne and Murali. For the 2000's, the first part of the decade up until his retirement McGrath was clearly the number one fast bowler in the world, all over the world. He has the most wickets of any fast bowler in history and maintained his consistency and dominance for 14 years in a gradually changing environment where at one point he stood alone as the only great fast bowler in operation.
    Even on CW in conversations of who is the best fast bowlers almost every one places McGrath over Hadlee, there are too many different threads and posts to mention, the last one being Top 10 Batsmen and Bowlers of All Time where even Flem states that he thinks McGrath is the best ever. Any arguments on CW or most places as to who is the best revolves around Lillee, Marshall, McGrath and rarely sometimes Ambrose and Trueman. Hadlee is hardly ever seriously included in that discussion and the perception is that he excelled on helpful surfaces and didn't have a plan B on placid tracks. He played all but 13 of his matches in N.Z, Australia and England, yes where most bowlers excelled.

    When one looks at some of the other teams selected by journalists, bloggers and historians I have never seen Hadlee make any, McGrath only makes some, and time may or may not change that but as far as I am concerned McGrath and Tendulkar because of the volume of their numbers and the consistency of their careers and the fact that they succeeded everywhere over those years and the way the played the game they have earned to be included in any ATG XI, even though I personally prefer Lara for at least a couple reasons over SRT.

    Finally everyone on this forum has opinions that are and aren't substantiated, and mine has been repeatedly, yet I am continuously asked to justify my own opinions, and contrary to Alikina and sometimes Smali comments, I don't state them as facts I state them as my opinion. Which I am allowed to have and express on a cricket forum.

    Geoff Armstrong
    Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Barnes

    Cricinfo
    Hutton, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Akram, Warne, Lillee

    Geoffrey Boycott
    Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Headley, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Marshall, Warne, Lillee, Barnes

    Bleacher
    Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Miller, Imran, Warne, Marshall, Barnes

    Benaud
    Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Imran, Gilchrist, Warne, Lillee, Barnes

    CricketWeb
    Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, McGrath

    Christopher Martin-Jenkins
    Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Warne, Barnes, McGrath

    Harsh Thakor
    Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Warne, Akram, Marshall, Lillee

    The Roar
    Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Warne, Marshall, Lillee, McGrath

  12. #57
    International Captain hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    6,598
    There are mitigating circumstances to McGrath's dominance in the early 2000s - an ATG team, relatively weak opposition (really only SA, and perhaps India in India and the obligatory occasional Pakistan glimmer were that difficult opposition at that time).

    For me Marshall seperates himself from the pack but I don't see that for McGrath, Hadlee and Ambrose - the next best of the modern players.

    That said, I agree with most of your rationale and do like your team. If you think McGrath is clearly better than Hadlee or Ambrose then yes, you can make the case that he should be included.
    Last edited by hendrix; 29-09-2013 at 02:15 PM.
    kyear2 likes this.

  13. #58
    International Vice-Captain Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,598
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    There are mitigating circumstances to McGrath's dominance in the early 2000s - an ATG team, relatively weak opposition (really only SA, and perhaps India in India and the obligatory occasional Pakistan glimmer were that difficult opposition at that time).

    For me Marshall seperates himself from the pack but I don't see that for McGrath, Hadlee and Ambrose - the next best of the modern players.

    That said, I agree with most of your rationale and do like your team. If you think McGrath is clearly better than Hadlee or Ambrose then yes, you can make the case that he should be included.
    How does Marshall separate himself from the pack while McGrath doesn't? That doesn't really make sense to me. Especially considering the criteria you've used to separate them:

    - Played in an ATG team? So did Marshall. And I still don't believe that playing in a great team makes you a better bowler or a lesser bowler.

    - Relatively weak opposition? McGrath bowled against the greatest Indian batting line up in India's history. He bowled against a fairly strong SA. Marshall bowled against Australian and English basket case teams in the 80s. India had Gavaskar and Vengsarker and nothing else. NZ had Crowe and no one else.


    I'd actually argue that McGrath separated himself from his peers further than Marshall did. Marshall's fast bowling teammates (Garner & Holding) are a lot closer to Marshall in terms of stats than Gillespie/Lee/Kaspa are to McGrath.
    Last edited by Monk; 29-09-2013 at 10:28 PM.

  14. #59
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,392
    McGrath bowled in an era of relative roady mcroads where a batting average of 50 was the new 40.

  15. #60
    International Captain ankitj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hyderabad India
    Posts
    5,986
    Kyear - how do you say Hadlee relied on pitch assistance? His bowling average and strike rate in subcontinent are better than Marshall and McGrath. See this story: Stats analysis: Richard Hadlee | Specials | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo. You would argue that it is because of the exceptional 12.29 average in SL, but he also averages about the same as his overall average in India. Only in Pakistan he has a poor average but that's because he played only one series there in 1976, which was before 1978 at which time he developed into a champion bowler. Even against India, he played one series in 1976 where he averages 35 or so. In the other series he played in India in 80's, he averaged a ridiculous 14.xx. So how exactly do you make your argument?

    It's interesting that you gloss over Lillee's record in Pakistan. If the silly small sample size of Lillee's salvages him, then take out Hadlee's 3 matches in Pakistan too which is the only dark spot in his record.

    It is actually quite surprising that Hadlee doesn't get the same amount of praise from "experts" as Lillee and Marshall do. Hadlee's record is just extra ordinary for following reasons:


    • Stats. Just great, anyway you look at it. Did it against everyone and all over the world.
    • Tremendous impact that he had on NZ cricket. Last time when I looked at series by series performances, IIRC Hadlee was the leading wicket taker on either side in 8 out of the 9 NZ test series victories against strong oppositions (excluding SL). And this includes at least one series against each of the 5 main oppositions.
    • Longevity. He played for 17 years, and till he was 39. He was mighty effective till the very end. In this respect, one can argue that he outdid Marshall comfortably. Marshall played for 13 years, and only till he was 33.


    With a resume like this, I don't see how he can be put in anything but the top bracket. For mine, the second best fast bowler after Marshall (don't know what Barnes classifies as so keeping him out) just ahead of Ambrose and McGrath.
    Last edited by ankitj; 30-09-2013 at 11:34 PM.
    smalishah84 and honestbharani like this.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Ambrose v McGrath - revisited 2013
    By Lillian Thomson in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-05-2013, 02:28 PM
  2. Ambrose v McGrath
    By iamdavid in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: 09-05-2013, 01:12 AM
  3. Ambrose Vs Mcgrath?
    By laksh_01 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 263
    Last Post: 09-07-2011, 11:23 PM
  4. Who is better McGrath or Ambrose
    By aussie in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 12-08-2005, 01:12 PM
  5. McGrath/Ambrose/Walsh
    By membersstand in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 27-04-2005, 04:04 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
  •