Malcolm Marshall vs Viv Richards: Who's the greater cricketer?

[Black_Warrior]

tbf Warne isn't rated as highly on CW as he is by the general punditry

No.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No.

What do you mean no? Smali's right... Most of the general public views Warne as the clear greatest spinner ever and the greatest component of that Aussie side, while CW places him alongside (maybe even below) Murali and inferior to McGrath when it comes to Australia.

 

[smash84]

To be frank, I think Marshall is getting more highly rated as times passes, he seems to feature is most all-time XIs nowadays, and many are now appreciating him for his standout record. I recall around 15 years ago there seemed to have been a consensus around Lillee, but not as much anymore. Years after his retirement and death, more are beginning to appreciate his all round bowling ability.

Perhaps he was not as lauded when he hit his stripes in the 80s as Lillee was when he began in the 70s. When Marshall started, there were already many fast bowlers around, whereas Lillee began after a somewhat barren period.

While Marshall wasnt given the same high accolades when he was playing, perhaps because he was merely continuing the WI success that was there when he started. But in more quieter moments and interviews, players who faced him admit he was the best. Off the top of my head, I can recall Thomson, Allan Border, Viv Richards, Geoff Boycott, Martin Crowe, Wasim Akram, Ian Healy, Graham Gooch who gave him top marks.

I think a lot of "appreciation" of Marshall has been because latter generations are looking at stats and making decisions rather than actually see things how they were when they played out and in given contexts.

yeah but look at people who gave top marks to Lillee. Imran, Hadlee, Miandad, Viv, Thomson, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, and pretty much everybody who played him in WSC including Barry Richards. That's just the top of my head. Quite sure there are many others.

 

[subshakerz]

I think a lot of "appreciation" of Marshall has been because latter generations are looking at stats and making decisions rather than actually see things how they were when they played out and in given contexts.

yeah but look at people who gave top marks to Lillee. Imran, Hadlee, Miandad, Viv, Thomson, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, and pretty much everybody who played him in WSC including Barry Richards. That's just the top of my head. Quite sure there are many others.

Imran ranked Holding as the best bowler of his generation. Viv and Thomson ranked Maco as the best.

The Chappell brothers and Barry Richards never faced Maco in tests or WSC so I wouldnt expect them to rank him better.

 

[smash84]

Imran ranked Holding as the best bowler of his generation. Viv and Thomson ranked Maco as the best.

The Chappell brothers and Barry Richards never faced Maco in tests or WSC so I wouldnt expect them to rank him better.

Lillee always featured in Imran's lists as one of the top bowlers. According to him Holding was the most natural fast bowler but had a tendency for injuries. In both his books Imran and All Round View he mentions that.

Here's a bit of Imran on Lillee

The bowler who really stands out is Dennis Lillee, and I had the the great fortune to play against him when he was at his best, in 1976-7, on my first trip to Australia.

The first Test was played on a very slow pitch at Adelaide, and I was immediately impressed by Lillee, who kept on bowling long spells even though he was getting nothing out of the wicket. Early on he lost his opening partner, Jeff Thomson, who injured himself in the field, and from then on, he had to carry the attack. When he realized that there was no alternative but for him to keep on bowling, he cut his run up and started varying his pace: he would try anything to take wickets. In the second innings of that match, he bowled nearly fifty eight ball overs, taking 5 for 163. I thought very highly of his single-minded attitude, he was always attacking, and trying to think of ways to get the batsman out.

The next test was played at Melbourne. By the end of the first day, I felt depressed in that I had bowled really badly on a helpful pitch. Conditions were excellent for swing bowling, and there was some moisture and movement off the seam as well, yet I had sprayed the ball all over the place. Australia eventually scored 517 for 8, with Greg Chappell and Gary Cosier making centuries, and I ended up taking no wickets for 115 from 22 unimpressive overs. Lillee sensed my dejection and came over to speak to me afterwards. To my surprise he sympathized with me: he realized that whereas I had bowled at Adelaide on an unhelpful pitch, this time, I had got excited at seeing the ball move about and had tried to do too much. It's a mistake that many young fast bowlers make, and it was encouraging that someone like Lillee should come over and discuss the problem. After this we became good friends, and I began to bowl better as well: in the final test at Sydney I took 12 wickets and we won the match.

I don't think that Lillee was as much of a natural athlete as some of the other great fast bowlers of my time, like Thomson, Holding or Marshall. He has a much stronger physique than the others, but he was not as loose limbed, and he had to work to keep fit. When I first saw him on television in 1972, his action was that of a real tearaway fast bowlerr - it was obvious that he was putting immense strain on his body. Not surprisingly, he soon went down with an injury, which turned out to be a stress fracture in his back. This threatened to end his career, but he fought back, remodelled his action and, through sheer guts and determination became an even greater bowler. I can probably appreciate the problems he faced better than most, because of suffering a similar stress injury later in my career. Lillee's greatest asset was that he would rise to the occasion, especially in front of those huge crowds at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, getting life out of the dreadful pitches they had there at the time. His determination showed through against Pakistan at Sydney in 1972-3, when there was obviously something wrong with his back: he insisted on bowling, and backed up by the inexperienced Max Walker, bowled Pakistan out when we looked like winning. Most other bowlers in this situation would have given up, and his refusal to do so makes Lillee number one in my book.

On a side note I had no idea about that.

 

[Black_Warrior]

What do you mean no? Smali's right... Most of the general public views Warne as the clear greatest spinner ever and the greatest component of that Aussie side, while CW places him alongside (maybe even below) Murali and inferior to McGrath when it comes to Australia.

Both the general public and most on CW rate Warne as an all time great spinner. Inferior to McGrath or not that's a different conversation and brings the spin vs pace factor and CW is more divided on that.
But solely on his own skills and record, Warne is considered the very best by most here.

 

[smash84]

Both the general public and most on CW rate Warne as an all time great spinner. Inferior to McGrath or not that's a different conversation and brings the spin vs pace factor and CW is more divided on that.
But solely on his own skills and record, Warne is considered the very best by most here.

I don't agree with you. Most people choose Warne over Murali because of Warne's batting and fielding. Also add to it that most people found him more enjoyable to watch. Not because he was a better bowler than Murali. Secondly Warne would lose any poll on bowling if he comes up against McGrath on CW. Try it

 

[Black_Warrior]

That's exactly what I said. Warne vs McGrath has more to do with the spin vs pace factor than Warne's skills. CW is more divided on that. It doesn't just come up between Warne and Mcgrath but Murali vs Marshall too recently. It is part of a larger conversation and there isn't really a clear answer on pace vs spin so we are bound to be divided on that.

 

[smash84]

That's exactly what I said. Warne vs McGrath has more to do with the spin vs pace factor than Warne's skills. CW is more divided on that. It doesn't just come up between Warne and Mcgrath but Murali vs Marshall too recently. It is part of a larger conversation and there isn't really a clear answer on pace vs spin so we are bound to be divided on that.

But that still doesn't mean that my original point wasn't spot on. CW does rate Warne lower than the general public.

 

[Slifer]

Most people here rate Warne as one of the top two greatest spinners ever. At worst he follows Murali. I don't see how he's underrated here.

 

[subshakerz]

Lillee always featured in Imran's lists as one of the top bowlers. According to him Holding was the most natural fast bowler but had a tendency for injuries. In both his books Imran and All Round View he mentions that.

Imran rated Holding as the best bowler of his time, and rated both Lillee and Marshall among the best but not the top.

On Holding:

"I never saw any fast bowlers at his level. Like Viv Richards, he was a genius."

“Michael Holding was the best but he did not last very long and was at his peak for about five years but I never saw any other fast bowler of his calibre.”

"On his day, no one could beat Michael Holding. He was out and out the most devastating fast bowler ever. When he was on song, I can say he was the best fast bowler ever seen."

 

[smash84]

Imran rated Holding as the best bowler of his time, and rated both Lillee and Marshall among the best but not the top.

On Holding:

"I never saw any fast bowlers at his level. Like Viv Richards, he was a genius."

“Michael Holding was the best but he did not last very long and was at his peak for about five years but I never saw any other fast bowler of his calibre.”

"On his day, no one could beat Michael Holding. He was out and out the most devastating fast bowler ever. When he was on song, I can say he was the best fast bowler ever seen."

That's what I meant when I said he rates Holding as the most natural fast bowler that he ever saw but he also acknowledged that he was injury prone as mentioned above. But as an overall package he rated Lillee the best. Read previous page from his autobiography.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Most people here rate Warne as one of the top two greatest spinners ever. At worst he follows Murali. I don't see how he's underrated here.

Exactly my point.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No one even said he's underrated

 

[watson]

Richards transcends cricket in a way that Marshall never can.

So you can argue all you like about the relative their stats and skills, but the term 'great' always encompasses more than those things.

Richards

A symbol of West Indian supremacy

By David Frith (1986)


In the pre-war Depression years, Don Bradman stood for the powers of endurance of the ordinary bloke. His triumphs brought pride and inspiration to masses of struggling Australians in town and bush. Through The Don they saw that life's difficulties were at least not totally universal. Spasmodically they too tasted success on a giant scale, if only vicariously. 'Our Don' took his admirers out of themselves, made their existences less wretched, gave them a kind of hope.

For ten years now Viv Richards has done something similar for the black man.

He has not been alone in this. Clive Lloyd gathered together one of the most powerful cricket teams of all time, with wonderful opening batsmen like Gordon Greenidge and Desmond Haynes, himself and Richards and the solid, phlegmatic Gomes to make runs, and Dujon to keep wickets and add artistry to the middle-order batting; and, most significantly, a brigade of ferocious fast bowlers to keep the opposition in an almost permanent state of submission. They came tumbling out of the pavilion, large and loose and eager: Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Wayne Daniel, Colin Croft, Joel Garner, Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh, with keen youngsters queuing up to replace them. For Viv Richards to stand towering above all these as the symbol of West Indian supremacy emphasizes the impact he has had on international cricket since the mid-1970s.....

A symbol of West Indian supremacy | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Burgey]

Viv had more of an impact on the game and certainly the image of West Indies cricket, but as players I look at it this way. Would you rather,

1.) Bowl at Viv
2.) Face up with a substandard helmet/no helmet and a twig for a bat to Marshall.

Neither is a particularly enticing thought.

A mate of mine faced Marshall when he played Grade for Waverley in the 80s. They had the first female umpire to officiate in first grade, and this mate of mine was playing and missing at every ball by about a foot. Marshall started getting the ****s because he was such a competitor, even playing at that level. Eventually my mate nicked one, but being Australian, didn't walk and was given not out. This displeased Malcolm, who at that time was rated as the fastest bowler in the world, and he informed my mate of his displeasure in no uncertain terms, culminating with the phrase "Next ball, man. Hand to head".

So this mate of mine stands there, turning very pale, as Marshall storms back to his long run. He faces up, and maintains that as Marshall was running in he began crouching in anticipation of impending doom, to the point where by the time the ball was let go his head was at about stump height. Marshall didn't bowl him a beamer, however, it was according to my mate by far the fastest bouncer he had ever faced.

Think he was eventually castled for about 30 odd. Said after the game he and MM shared a drink and he was a fantastic bloke.

 

[smash84]

I think social here has faced Marshall in the nets

 

[Fuller Pilch]

It could be argued that Viv was behind Miandad and Border as batsman of the 80s

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

although he was magnificent in the mid to late 70s
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Marshall, on the other hand, was fantastic in the 80s but was he better than Hadlee and Imran?

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Ikki]

Had to go for Viv. While MM has the stats I don't think he had as much of the acclaim as Viv. There's a good case that many pundits would put Viv in the top 5 greatest players ever whereas Marshall tends to be more than a few places down. That for me is the tie-breaker. Some things stats can capture but some it can't and when you hear of the reverence ex-players and pundits have for Viv it's hard not to rate him ahead.